Danger signs are building as the ‘grumpy rally' gathers steam
Marks doesn't look at prices and valuations to determine whether we are in trouble territory, he looks for the 'psychological excess that characterises bubbles'.
Ahead of the GFC, it was the unmistakable sign of carefree investors oblivious to any risk.
'When other people become carefree, we worry,' he said.
Could it be that Trump's instability has stopped investors from making this leap?
In any case, you don't have to look too hard for what others regard as red flags, as global markets rebounded despite the assured economic impact of the uncertainty.
The valuation of stocks is getting stretched to breaking point again despite the World Bank warning of the certainty of global growth slowing to its lowest levels since the 1960s due to the upheaval of 'a substantial rise in trade barriers and the pervasive effects of an uncertain global policy environment'.
Prominent billionaire and US investor Jeffrey Gundlach compared the current investment environment to the lead-up to the dot-com bust in 2000, and the global financial crisis in 2008 and says a 'reckoning is coming' for the United States' unsustainable debt, too, if the US passes Trump's signature tax bill.
'We have a tremendous paradigm shift where money is not coming into the United States, and gold is suddenly the flight to quality asset,' Gundlach told Bloomberg. We are now in an environment where gold is 'no longer for lunatic survivalists', he added.
This week, one of Australia's most eminent market gurus, Gerard Minack, also appeared at the Morgan Stanley conference and made a strong argument for why US exceptionalism is coming to an end.
The big issue for Minack is the exuberance around AI – which has driven the Magnificent Seven tech stocks to an extraordinarily dominant position over global sharemarkets. Each of these seven stocks, on average, is now worth more than the entire ASX 200.
'I think US exceptionalism is going to peak this year,' he told a standing room audience.
Like Gundelach, he thinks the US faces a day of reckoning over its government's need for the rest of the world to fund its multi-trillion dollar deficits, despite Trump trying to 'piss them off'.
But it is AI stocks that, he thinks, will bring things to a head for investors.
Quite simply, they don't have the magic qualities that drove digital platforms like Meta's Facebook to such extraordinary valuations.
'I think the moment it's going to roll over is when investors start to say, show me the money. Where are the returns on these AI investments?'
Loading
The issue is not whether AI will be transformative or not, it's about what money these companies can make offering the AI services that have driven the recent frenzy.
For the likes of Meta, Google's Alphabet, Apple, Amazon and Microsoft, their businesses have three key features: Large upfront costs which new entrants would find hard to match; low marginal costs of servicing additional users; and lastly, the network effect – the more users they have, the more useful they are.
It makes them the top dog in a 'winner takes all' market, and they generate returns to match.
According to Minack, what we've seen from AI to date suggests it has none of these qualities.
DeepSeek came from nowhere to rattle the US giants. Each new user and their use of AI is costly in computing and energy use, and there is zero network effect.
'My sense is that the business of providing AI services will be much lower margin than what's in current share prices. So ultimately, this is going to fade, I suspect, in the next year or two,' Minack says.
But even a renowned market bear like Minack is not calling a top – not when the Magnificent Seven could double in price and just match the price to earnings valuations of the dot-com era.
If the post-Liberation Day investment market has taught us anything, it's that anything is possible – for a while at least.
As for Australia, Minack's stagnation nation tag is a swipe at both the government and a business scene that survives on too little investment due to three issues.
Our market is built on oligopolies that don't need to invest to compete; high immigration also ensures there's enough labour to stifle labour-saving investment; and Australia's franked dividend policy adds further pressure for cash pay-outs to investors, rather than investment.
'From a shareholder perspective, it's the lowest tax profits in the world. So get rid of franking credits and just lower the statutory rate and hopefully blunt that incentive for those massive payout ratios. And then look at industry reform. We do have quite cosseted sectors that lack competition,' he says.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
3 hours ago
- The Age
Australia's luxury success story is running out of cash and Trump is to blame
As sales grew, so did its pile of cash in the bank. This sales model also means it holds no inventory, and only needs to ensure the logistics of moving the goods from supplier to customer, taking care of any taxes and duties and customer support. But the stock's 90 per cent plunge since last October, from a high of $2.75 to a low of 25¢ last week, indicates just how much Cettire investors – and management – were blindsided by the impact of the EU tariff threats on its business. In early April, Cettire's ASX announcement expressed caution over the tariff threat given that 41 per cent of its business relied on selling EU-based luxury goods to the US. Cettire noted at the time that its average order value remained under the $US800 ($1234) de minis exemption, which means it can ship goods to the US exempt from these duties anyway. The potential threat is that Trump has already introduced a tariff on these low-value parcels, which come under the de minis threshhold, from China. If he replicates this for low-value parcels from the EU, it would provide further disaster for Cettire. Loading But this is not a problem for now. So no one was prepared for the bombshell update just three weeks later which sent the share price plummeting. Cettire said it made an operating loss for the March quarter as the 'primary impact' of US tariff developments softening underlying demand across all geographies. Worryingly, it said this included items not subject to duties. Cettire said its focus remained on delivering profitability for the June quarter. But things got worse. Weeks before the end of June the company was forced to issue another profit downgrade due to a further softening of demand in its established markets such as the US. Topping it all off was its cash levels plunging more than $30 million in three months to just $45 million by the date of the June 13 announcement. RBC Capital cited this deteriorating balance sheet as a key concern given the accelerating losses. RBC analysts noted that Cettire had $101 million in cash on its balance sheet at the end of December. They estimate that $85 million of this was working capital, i.e. temporary cash that would have to be paid back to the retailer's luxury suppliers to cover outstanding debts. Loading According to RBC, Cettire may have had as little as $16 million at the end of 2024 which may now have been eaten away by operating losses and capital expenditure. 'This suggests to us there may already be limited/no surplus cash on hand beyond what is required to meet Cettire's obligations to suppliers,' RBC said. RBC and Bell Potter flagged the risk of a capital raise – with shares trading at record lows – as a real risk. Cettire's deteriorating financial health feeds into the debate over whether the controversial retailer's changing fortunes stemmed from cyclical trends impacting the industry or deeper structural issues. This includes the luxury brands tightening control of their retail sales channel and squeezing out players such as Cettire. It's not the only controversy that has dogged the group. Cettire has faced allegations that it may not have been paying the proper duties on goods it ships, and also collected duties it did not pass on to the relevant authorities. Cettire has denied this. E&P retail analyst Julian Mulcahy is not so glum about its funding despite forecasting that cash will decline again in June as sales are seasonally lower. 'While cash ex-working capital is currently negative, we believe the company has enough funding to ride out the cycle,' he says.
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Australia's luxury success story is running out of cash and Trump is to blame
As sales grew, so did its pile of cash in the bank. This sales model also means it holds no inventory, and only needs to ensure the logistics of moving the goods from supplier to customer, taking care of any taxes and duties and customer support. But the stock's 90 per cent plunge since last October, from a high of $2.75 to a low of 25¢ last week, indicates just how much Cettire investors – and management – were blindsided by the impact of the EU tariff threats on its business. In early April, Cettire's ASX announcement expressed caution over the tariff threat given that 41 per cent of its business relied on selling EU-based luxury goods to the US. Cettire noted at the time that its average order value remained under the $US800 ($1234) de minis exemption, which means it can ship goods to the US exempt from these duties anyway. The potential threat is that Trump has already introduced a tariff on these low-value parcels, which come under the de minis threshhold, from China. If he replicates this for low-value parcels from the EU, it would provide further disaster for Cettire. Loading But this is not a problem for now. So no one was prepared for the bombshell update just three weeks later which sent the share price plummeting. Cettire said it made an operating loss for the March quarter as the 'primary impact' of US tariff developments softening underlying demand across all geographies. Worryingly, it said this included items not subject to duties. Cettire said its focus remained on delivering profitability for the June quarter. But things got worse. Weeks before the end of June the company was forced to issue another profit downgrade due to a further softening of demand in its established markets such as the US. Topping it all off was its cash levels plunging more than $30 million in three months to just $45 million by the date of the June 13 announcement. RBC Capital cited this deteriorating balance sheet as a key concern given the accelerating losses. RBC analysts noted that Cettire had $101 million in cash on its balance sheet at the end of December. They estimate that $85 million of this was working capital, i.e. temporary cash that would have to be paid back to the retailer's luxury suppliers to cover outstanding debts. Loading According to RBC, Cettire may have had as little as $16 million at the end of 2024 which may now have been eaten away by operating losses and capital expenditure. 'This suggests to us there may already be limited/no surplus cash on hand beyond what is required to meet Cettire's obligations to suppliers,' RBC said. RBC and Bell Potter flagged the risk of a capital raise – with shares trading at record lows – as a real risk. Cettire's deteriorating financial health feeds into the debate over whether the controversial retailer's changing fortunes stemmed from cyclical trends impacting the industry or deeper structural issues. This includes the luxury brands tightening control of their retail sales channel and squeezing out players such as Cettire. It's not the only controversy that has dogged the group. Cettire has faced allegations that it may not have been paying the proper duties on goods it ships, and also collected duties it did not pass on to the relevant authorities. Cettire has denied this. E&P retail analyst Julian Mulcahy is not so glum about its funding despite forecasting that cash will decline again in June as sales are seasonally lower. 'While cash ex-working capital is currently negative, we believe the company has enough funding to ride out the cycle,' he says.
Sydney Morning Herald
8 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Baby brain: Why MAGA's pro-natalist plans are ill-conceived
America's politicians have babies on the brain. In February, President Donald Trump told officials to make IVF cheaper. Even without its procreator-in-chief, Elon Musk, the White House is thought to be working on a bigger package of pro-natalist policies. Vice-President J.D. Vance is keen. Mr Trump says he favours a $US5000 (about $7700) handout for new parents. In Britain, meanwhile, Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK, a MAGA-ish opposition party, has proposed tax breaks and benefits to encourage women to have more children. Politicians have long feared the fiscal consequences of an ageing population, with too few young workers supporting legions of pensioners. Governments in places with very low birth rates, such as Japan and South Korea, have spent billions trying to reverse the decline, with little success. The new pro-natalist policies of the transatlantic right differ from older ones in that they are more targeted at working-class women, whose fertility rate has fallen the most. That might make them a bit more effective. But not at a reasonable cost, or without creating perverse incentives. Previous attempts to deliver a baby boom have either failed or been eye-wateringly expensive, relative to the number of extra births they deliver. Hungary's prime minister, Viktor Orban, started a big pro-natal push in 2011, and has since given parents everything from tax breaks and cash handouts to free child care. These policies cost a staggering 5.5 per cent of the country's GDP annually – more than almost any government will spend on an ageing population in any year between now and 2050. In February, mothers of two were promised a lifelong exemption from income tax. Hungary's fertility rate rose to 1.6 children per woman in 2018, from 1.2 in 2011, making it a poster child for populist pro-natalists everywhere. However, it has since dipped, suggesting handouts encouraged some mums not to have more babies, but to have the same number sooner. Other countries, including Japan, Norway and Poland, have tried tax breaks, handouts, maternity leave, subsidised child care and even state-sponsored dating, to little effect. Such policies mostly soften the blow to the finances and career prospects of professional women from having children, without persuading them to have more. Like Mr Orban, both Mr Farage and Mr Vance see pro-natalism as a way to boost the native population over the immigrants they so dislike. However, they would not spend as lavishly as Hungary, and they would focus the cash more narrowly on poorer parents. Mr Farage would scrap a cap on benefits, which stops families claiming benefits for more than two children, and boost the threshold below which earnings are exempt from income tax for one half of a married couple. Mr Trump's handouts would be a bigger relief for poor households than rich ones. Underpinning these policies is an assumption that poorer women are more likely to respond to incentives to have more children. Indeed, their fertility rates do seem more elastic than those of professional women. Whereas the fertility rates of older, college-educated women have remained fairly steady over the past six decades, most of the collapse in fertility in America and Britain since 1980 stems from younger and poorer women having fewer children, particularly from unplanned pregnancies. Loading In 1994, the average age of a first-time American mother without a university degree was 20. Today, about two-thirds of women without degrees in their 20s have never given birth. Mr Trump's and Mr Farage's policies might therefore lead to more babies being born than the approaches of places like Norway, which focus on offering child care, a benefit that professional women tend to take up.
