Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Added 50 GAL at $31.79/Bought 50 RDS/A at $68.93/Bought 50 PNTA at $24.7/Sold 50 of 230 SANPRB at $20.77/Added 50 FMER at $15.09

Big Picture Synopsis

Stocks:
Stable Vix Pattern:
Short Term: Neutral to Slightly Bullish
Intermediate and Long Term: Bullish


Bonds:

Short Term: Neutral to Slightly Bearish
Intermediate Term: Bearish
Long Term: Extremely Bearish


***********

Byron Wien is still looking for a 200 point decline in the S & P 500 during the first half of 2013.  Some of the reasons given by him include the increase in the payroll tax and other taxes at the beginning of the year, and the ongoing budget battles.

Doug Kass has turned negative on the market. He is in Byron Wien's camp. Kass believes that we face an earnings cliff ahead in light of tax and fiscal policy, and there will be continued weakness in Europe.

The payroll tax increase, which is simply a return to the pre-existing level two years ago, may be a short term negative on GDP growth in the current quarter. I suspect that Kass and Wein are over estimating the tax increase drag on GDP growth after the 2013 first quarter.

Reduced federal spending will be a longer term drag on GDP growth. After all, the economy has been juiced by the federal government borrowing and spending over a trillion dollars per year for several years now. Given the extraordinary amount of fiscal and monetary stimulus, and the less than robust GDP growth so far, there is certainly reason for concern.

The January retail sales were above expectations. Reuters noted that there was little effect traceable to the payroll tax increase.

The International Council of Shopping Centers reported that same store sales for retailers, excluding drugstores, rose 5.1% in January Y-O-Y.

************

BNY Mellon issued a report, summarized in a Barrons.com blog, that offered a bleak assessment for bond returns in the coming decade. BNY estimates an annual total return of just 1.25% for the Barclay's Aggregate Bond Index;  -.25% for long dated treasuries and 1.75% for investment grade bonds. All of those returns would be lower than the current expected annual inflation rate.

*************

Gas Fired Turbines as the New Base Load

I discussed recently an emerging trend where utilities would start using gas fired turbines to meet  baseload generating requirements, previously fulfilled by coal and nuclear units. Item # 4 Bought 50 FCG at $15.84 As noted in that post, I am calling this emerging transition as a super cycle for natural gas usage. Using gas turbines to meet baseload demand will burn up a lot of natural gas. 

Last week, Duke Energy announced that it would be permanently closing its Crystal River nuclear plant in Florida. The company is reviewing alternatives to replacing the power produced by that nuclear plant with a "state-of-the-art natural gas-fueled plant". Crystal River Nuclear Plant to be retired 

Duke also noted that it expects to retire two older coal fired plants, mostly likely between 2015-2018, due to EPA's new emissions regulations. 

Duke recently put into service a 620MW combined cycle natural gas generating facility, a process described in this brochure from Duke: Buck-Combined-Cycle-Brochure-.pdf Two other gas fired large stations (H.F. Lee and Dan River) went into commercial operation late in 2012 as part of Duke's plan to retire 7GW of coal capacity. Smart Energy

***********
Spurt of New Non-Cumulative Equity Preferred Stock Offerings:

This article at SeekingAlpha discusses several recent non-cumulative equity preferred stock offerings primarily by banks. An equity preferred stock sits below all debt in the capital structure and is senior only to common stock Seeking Alpha I left some comments to that article.

A non-cumulative preferred stock simply means that the dividend can be eliminated and is gone forever, just like an eliminated common stock dividend. These equity preferred stocks do not have maturity dates. If interest rates rise, the value will likely go down, and the investor does not have the option to hold until maturity.

The issuer does have the option to call after a future date, usually five years or so after the IPO. That option protects the issuer from a rise in rates by giving it an option to call the security at its par value and to refinance at a lower rate.

It is conceivable, though not very likely, that an issuer would be able to refinance at a lower rate on or after the call option date. The most likely candidate would be a preferred stock with greater than a 6% coupon, rated now as junk, when the issuer's credit rating for such issues improves to investment grade (e.g. BBB from BB) and interest rates are about the same or lower than now.

The call may occur if there was a law change impacting the use of non-cumulative preferred stocks as Tier 1 equity, similar to what happened with trust preferred securities, but I seriously doubt that will happen.

Several financial institutions are taking advantage of the current abnormally low interest rate environment to issue non-cumulative equity preferred stocks with coupons less than 6%.

Anyone investing in these securities has to recognize their disadvantages and likely volatility. The price for equity preferred stocks can become volatile, with a downside bias, when the market is under stress, or investors develop concerns, rational or irrational, about the financial health or viability of the issuer and/or the continuation of the dividend.

The downside risk for an equity preferred stock issued by a leveraged financial institution is zero. I would anticipate that such securities would become worthless in a bankruptcy. The upside is not much based on their current yields and risk. Sill, a number of individuals may want to nibble in this area just to produce income taxed at qualified dividends rates.

Equity and Mortgage REIT preferred stocks do not pay qualified dividends.

*******************

1. Bought 50 RDS-A at $68.93 (see Disclaimer): I bought these shares in a satellite taxable account:

2013 Bought 50 RDS-A at $68.93
In this particular account, I am simply trying to generate some income until I am able to earn more than 3% in a savings account and short term certificates of deposit. I originally only had an online savings account used to buy certificates of deposit.

Back in late 2008, when it became apparent that the FED was embarking on a long term Jihad Against the Saving Class, I used funds remaining in the online savings account to buy longer term CDs with yields over 4%. I noted some of that activity in my blog. (first paragraph: Stocks, Bonds & Politics: Trust Certificates PJL and XFL: Verizon Bond) As those CDs came due, I elected to open a brokerage account with the same company, rather than to roll them over, and to buy dividend paying stocks until savings rates returned to something resembling normal levels.

I will just highlight some issues relating to this well known company. Some of the positives and negatives are summarized in this recent Seeking Alpha article. The author is more upbeat about the long term future than the analyst community.

Security Description: Royal Dutch Shell PLC ADS Cl A (RDS.A) is a large vertically integrated energy company with worldwide operations.

Royal Dutch Shell profile page at Reuters

Royal Dutch Shell key developments page at Reuters.

RDS-A is an ADS and each RDS-A share represents two ordinary shares. The "A" series have a Dutch source of dividend income and will be subject to a 15% withholding tax for payments made in cash. The "B" series have a U.K. source.

2011 SEC Filed Annual Report

At the closing price of $67.33 on 2/11/13, and using other financial data as of 12/31/12, price to book is 1.13 and price to sales is .44. RDS-A Key Statistics

Prior Trades: None since starting this blog in October 2008.

Last Earnings Report: Rather than typing the results, I just took a snapshot from the press release:

Form 6-K

Net capital investment in the 2012 4th quarter was $10.9B and $29.8B for the full year. Net capital investments would be total capital investments less the proceeds from divestments.

Capex is expected to be $33B in 2013 with about $18B going to develop new projects.

Rationale (1) Large Financially Stable Company with a Decent Dividend: As I have become older, dividends have become more important with each passing year. Except for stocks bought in my Lottery Ticket basket strategy, virtually all of my individual security positions pay dividends.

RDS recently declared a quarterly dividend of $.86 per ADS share that went ex dividend today  (2/13/13): Royal Dutch Shell plc - Form 6-K The company states in that announcement that joining the "Scrip Dividend Programme" will offer a tax advantage in several countries since dividends paid out in shares will not be subject to the Dutch 15% withholding tax. This is considered by the company to be the dividend for the 2012 4th quarter.

As stated in its 4th quarter earnings release, RDS expects the 2013 first quarter dividend to be $.90 per ADS.

While the dividend yield is good, there is not much dividend growth over the past several years: 2009: $3.12 per share; 2010: $3.36 per share; 2011: $3.36 per share; and 2012: $3.44 per share.

(2) Reasonable Valuation: The stock is trading at less than 10 times earnings, but that has been normal for the past several years, except for 2009 according to the Morningstar and S & P data.

For 2012, Shell earned $8.04 per share per ADS share, excluding items, up from $7.94 per share in 2011. Basic CCS earnings were $8.64 in 2012 and $9.22 in 2011 (CCS=Current cost of supplies adjustment for downstream operations)(CCS for 2010=$6.08 per share-Form 6-K)

(3) Hard to See Much Downside at the Current Price: The stock has slid some since my purchase, but I would not expect it to go below $60 per share other than for a brief period.

(4) The Large Bets on North American Natural Gas Plays May Prove Worthwhile Long Term (See risk section under (2) below: This point is related to my super cycle in natural gas demand thesis, explained in more detail in Item # 4 Bought 50 FCG at $15.84 (under Rationale section in that Item)

(5) Shell is a Leader in Liquified Natural Gas: Countries without plentiful natural gas will be supplied by liquified natural gas transported by ships rather than pipelines. Natural gas is stripped of its impurities, including water, and then cooled to -162°C which turns the gas into liquid and shrinks its volume by 600 times. Turning natural gas into liquid - watch the animation - Shell Global

Shell has also developed a process to liquify natural gas at sea that will enable the shipment from the production site without having to build pipelines to shore and LNG processing plants on land. Floating liquefied natural gas (FLNG) - Shell Global

Given the extreme level of pollution already present in China and other countries, I doubt that building hundreds of coal plants to meet future power needs will be a desirable option. Those who are bullish on American coal companies are clinging to that hope. Instead, I would anticipate for fewer coal plants will be constructed in China than currently anticipated, replaced with more gas fired and solar power generation.

Risks: (1) Hard to See Much Upside Near Term: For the past two years, the stock has been stuck in a narrow channel mostly between $60 to $70, with some brief spurts above $70. RDS-A Interactive Chart

(2) Shell's North American Production Has a Lot of Natural Gas: Shell has placed large bets on dry gas shale plays. This is a negative now given relatively low natural gas prices. I suspect that increasing use of natural gas to fuel baseload electric generation, running 24/7, will improve pricing over time, but I am not predicting the timing of the crossover point, where that demand starts to tilt price in favor of the suppliers. It would make a big difference to have an average price in the $6 to $9 range rather than $2.5 to $3.7 for example.

(3) S & P Downgrade To Sell: After the 4th quarter earnings report, S & P downgraded Shell to two stars, a sell rating, noting that production growth has been difficult and that aggressive capex will result in negative free cash flow until 2015, but would then ramp up to double-digit free cash flow growth as production ramps up and capex declines. I am not sure how S & P is defining free cash flow in that assessment. In 2012, operating cash flow was at $46.1B; and free cash flow was at  $13.5B.

(4) Shell Spends a Lot of Money on Capex on Increasingly Risky Projects: While this is understood as being necessary, the trend has been that the prospects are more risky and the returns on capital will be less. It is not like sticking a drill down in the ground and hitting a gusher like Spindletop anymore. An example is the approximately $4.5B spent so far in Alaska's Arctic waters. One of the drill ships grounded off the Kodiak Island on 12/31/12. And, after I purchased the shares, Shell reported that it was sending two of its offshore rigs from those waters to Asia for repairs and upgrades. NYT

2. Bought 50 PNTA at $24.70 (see Disclaimer):


Security Description: PennantPark Investment Corp. 6.25% Senior Notes due 2025 (PNTA) is a new exchange traded baby bond issued by the Business Development Corporation PennantPark Investment.

This is a senior unsecured note that makes quarterly interest payments at 6.25% on a $25 par value. The note matures on 2/21/25. The notes may be redeemed at PennantPark's option at par value plus accrued interest on or after 2/1/16. Final Prospectus Supplement I would not be concerned about this note being redeemed by the company given its low coupon and my future forecast for bond prices. The risk is not that the company will exercise its option to redeem, but that interest rates will rise and the price of this bond will fall significantly at some point prior to maturity.

In the prospectus, the note is described as PennantPark's "direct senior unsecured obligations and rank pari passu with future unsecured unsubordinated indebtedness by PennantPark Investment Corporation.

PennantPark Investment profile page at Reuters

PennantPark Investment  key developments page

2012 Annual Report for the F/Y ending 9/30/12 Form 10-K

Prior Trades: PNTA is a new exchange traded bond. This is my initial purchase, and most probably my last given the low coupon. I do own 50 shares of the common PNNT bought in the ROTH IRA.  Item # 6 Bought 50 PNNT at $10.2-ROTH IRA I may buy more of the common which has a higher yield than the senior bond which is typical for BDC securities.

Recent Earnings Release: As of 12/31/12, the company reported net assets of $688.5B and a net asset value per share of $10.38. The yield on its debt investments was reported at 13.3%. Net investment income for the quarter was $18.2M or 28 cents per share. The company paid out 28 cents per share in dividends to the common shareholders. SEC Filed Press Release

So, I have just highlighted one of the risks for bond owners. The income is flying out the door every quarter to the common shareholders.

Out of the total investments of $1.064B, the company had $411M of subordinated debt and $127.9M in preferred and equity investments. That highlights another risk. Only $291.7M was invested in senior secured loans. As of 12/31/12, the company estimated that it had $10M in unrealized appreciation on its investments.

As of 12/31/12, the company owed $211.5M under its credit facility with a weighted average interest cost of 3%, exclusive of a .5% fee for undrawn commitments. The company has also borrowed money from the SBA, fully drawn at $150M with a weighted average interest cost of 4.04% with upfront fees.

The senior unsecured notes were issued in January 2013 with net proceeds to PNNT of $65.2M. The proceeds are going to be used to repay indebtedness under the credit facility, to invest in new or existing portfolio companies and for general corporate purposes. This debt would be subordinate to the SBA loan and the borrowings under the credit facility, see page S-2 of the Prospectus.

Roughly speaking, the debt is less than 50% of the current estimated value of PNNT's investments.

Earnings Call Transcript - Seeking Alpha

Rationale: (1) My Key and Most Basic Strategy is to Generate Income: I own a very large number of securities that throw off dividend and interest income. I use that income to buy more of the same. This purchase plays a very small role in that overall strategy.

The yield at a total cost of $24.7 is about 6.32% with the YTM a smidgen higher due to the small discount to par value.

Risks: Interest Rate and Credit Risks: The interest rate risk is mitigated by the 13 year term. I have the option to hold this security until maturity in the event rates start to rise. If that option is exercised due to a rise in rates and a decline in this bond's value, I will nonetheless lose the opportunity to earn more on a similarly rated bond or even this bond bought at a lower price. Opportunity losses are important and need to be kept in mind when making bond investments. I limited myself to just 50 shares given these risks.

I view the credit risk over a 13 year period to be the greater risk. This company invests in higher risk borrowers and has a large exposure to subordinated debt and equity securities that face a greater likelihood of being wiped out in the event of a borrower's bankruptcy. The average yield as of 12/31/12 was over 13% which is a red light flashing on the risk issue.

Still, with over 50% equity a lot will have to go wrong for the bond owners to lose their principal. A more likely result would be an elimination of the common dividend and/or PNNT's acquisition by another BDC in the event of large scale losses in the investment portfolio. The risk of loss is nonetheless present.

3. Added 50 FMER at $15.09 (REGIONAL BANK BASKET STRATEGY)(see Disclaimer):


Security Description: FirstMerit (FMER) is a bank holding company headquartered in Akron, Ohio, with 196 branches in Ohio, Western Pennsylvania, and the Chicago metropolitan area.

FirstMerit is in the process of acquiring Citizens Republic in a stock exchange. Each Citizen's share would be exchanged for 1.37 FMER shares. FirstMerit Corporation

FMER recently sold 4 million equity preferred stock shares, with a $25 par value and a 5.875% coupon. Prospectus FMER intends to use those proceeds, along with the sale of subordinated notes, to repay Citizens' TARP preferred stock issued to the government. Citizens issued $300M in cumulative preferred stock to the government (page 114, Form 10-K) The subordinated notes have a principal amount of $250M, mature in 2023, and make quarterly interest payments at 4.35% per annum. Prospectus This is a link to FMER's presentation, filed with the SEC, made to the fixed income investors.

Citizens has 219 branches, primary in Michigan and Wisconsin, with 85% of its revenues originating from Michigan. (Map at page 4: Citizens Investor Presentation). It is the 58th largest U.S. bank holding company ranked by assets.

The merger is discussed in this Seeking Alpha article.

Prior Trades:  I am close to break-even on my FMER position.

Bought 50 FMER at 16.96 (May 2011)-Sold 50 FMER at $17.3 (March 2012); Added 50 FMER at 16.18 (May 2011); Bought 30 FMER at $11.35 (August 2011); Added 50 FMER at $15.2 (Sept 2012)


Last Earnings Report:

FMER
SEC Filed Press Release
2012 4th Quarter vs. 2011 4th Quarter
Net Income: $38.2M, up from $30.5M
E.P.S.:  $.35 (estimate $.33), up from $.28
Net Interest Margin= 3.58%/3.85%
Efficiency Ratio= 62.65%
NPA Ratio= .57%
Coverage Ratio for non-covered loans= 269.69%
Charge offs to average loans= .34%
Tangible Equity to Tangible Assets= 8.16%
Return on Average Assets= 1.03%
Return on Average Common Equity= 9.3%
Quarterly Dividend Per share= $.16

Given the importance of Citizens to FMER's future, I wanted to summarize briefly some data points from Citizens' last earnings report.

Citizens Republic
SEC Filed Press Release
Earnings Call Transcript - Seeking Alpha
2012 4th Quarter vs. 2011 4th Quarter
Net Income= $17M, up from $12.3M
E.P.S.= $.42 vs. $.31
Net Interest Margin=3.5%
Efficiency Ratio= 66.65%
NPL Ratio= 1.12%
Coverage Ratio=187.15%
NPA Ratio= .71%
Tier 1 Common Equity Ratio=9.24%
Tier 1 Capital Ratio=15.67%
Total Capital Ratio= 16.93%
Tangible Equity to Tangible Assets= 11.3%
Return on Average Assets=.96%

Citizens did not fare well during the recent Near Depression, but it appears that it has righted the ship.

The bank deferred both its dividends payable to the government and the interest payable on its trust preferred security, Citizens Funding Trust I 7.5% Enhanced Trust Pfd. Secs (CTZ.PA). The bank mentioned in January that the bank is in the "midst of paying our accrued trust preferred dividends".  FMER, as noted above, is repaying Citizen's TARP obligation.

There was a 1 for 10 stock split in 2011. Adjusted for that split, the shares hit a high of over $350 in November 2004. CRBC Interactive Chart  Without even looking at the historical earnings data, I know from this chart that the owners of this bank suffered greatly. When I looked at the results, the word awful does not do it justice. The bank lost $43.2 per share in 2008 and $27.11 in 2009. Form 10-K I assume those figures have been adjusted for the 1 for 10 reverse split.

Rational: (1) FMER is a Well Capitalized Bank with a Good Dividend: FMER did participate in TARP, FORM 8-K, but quickly repaid the government in April 2009. FORM 8-K It has been over the years a competently managed bank. The current quarterly dividend is 16 cents per share which results in a 4.24% dividend yield at a total cost of $15.09.

(2) Citizens Acquisition Appears to be A Good One to Me: The market has not reacted positively to this merger. In my gut, I am more optimistic. The merger will significantly expand the size of FMER at an overall favorable price including the baggage that comes with Citizens. FMER expands into Michigan and Wisconsin with the acquisition of 219 branches, some of which are in northern Ohio.

Risks: (1) Most of the Risks are Typical for Regional Banks: The main risk for the near term applicable to all regional banks is net interest margin compression caused by the Federal Reserve's monetary policy. The banks have generally already received most of the benefits relating to lower rates paid to depositors, as higher yielding certificates of deposit mature. Higher yielding investments are being lost to repayments. This is the same type of problem that I face as an individual investor who buys bonds and is similar to the one currently negatively impacting Mortgage REITs.

One typical recession is just the increased in bad loans that are inevitable during recessions. The key for me is that NPLs remain below 2% of total loans during a garden variety recession (or 3% for really nasty recessions), which indicates relatively good management. NPAs are now .71% for FMER.

(2) Integration Risk: FirstMerit also has integration risks associated with the Citizens' acquisition. This is a very large acquisition for FMER.

(3) Citizens' Baggage: I mentioned above that Citizens comes with a lot of baggage. The recent capital raises by FMER, represented by the subordinated note and equity preferred stock sales, were done to raise capital in order to pay off Citizen's TARP obligations.

Future Buys and Sells: I am more likely to sell my highest cost FMER shares remaining, bought first at $16.18, rather than to buy more, unless the price drops below $14 again. If that happens, I may add another 50 shares. I am reinvesting the dividend to buy more shares. My average cost is $14.96 for almost 189 shares.

4. Sold 50 of 230 SANPRB at $20.77 (see Disclaimer): I sold my highest cost shares held in the main taxable account:



The trade resulted in a long term capital gain of $124.58:

2013 50 Shares SANPRB +$124.58
Security Description: Santander Finance Preferred S.A. Unipersonal Floating Rate Gtd. Pfd. Series 6, (SAN.PB) is an equity preferred stock that pays non-cumulative qualified dividends at the greater of 4% or .52% above the 3 month LIBOR rate on a $25 par value. www.sec.gov There is no maturity date. The issuer is Santander Finance with Banco Santander providing a guarantee as provided in the prospectus. The security may be redeemed, at the option of the issuer, on or after March 5, 2017 at the $25 par value plus accrued dividends.

The symbol was changed last year from STDPRB to SANPRB.

Prior Trades: I still own SANPRB shares in two Vanguard brokerage accounts.

I own 50 shares bought last October in the Roth IRA at $16.93:

Snapshot 2/12/13

I also own 130 in a Vanguard taxable account, one of my satellite taxable accounts:

 Snapshot 2/12/13
My prior realized gains from 2010 and 2011 were as follows (symbol was then STDPRB)

2010 STDPRB 100 Shares $265.01
2011 STDPRB 100 Shares (50 Share lots)  +$143.16
2011 STDPRB 50 Shares +$37.03
Total Realized Gains 2010-To Date: $569.78 plus dividends

Bought 100 STDPRB at $15.3; Sold 100 STDPRB at 18.11; Added to STDPRB at 18.6; Added 50 STDPRD at $18.54; Bought 50 STDPRB @ 17.96; Sold 50 STDPRB at $19.64 in the Roth IRA;     Sold 50 STDPRB at 20.2; Sold 50 STDPRD at 20.34; Bought: STDPRB at $13; Added 50 STDPRB at $15.44; Bought 50 SANPRB at $16.93-Roth IRA

Rationale: (1) Solely Profit Taking: This security can be volatile. As shown in the trade links above, I bought 50 shares in an IRA at $16.93 last October. I bought 30 shares in August 2011at $13, when there was a severe downdraft in all equity preferred stocks and European hybrids. Whenever there is some significant negative news about Spain, Santander's home market, this security has a tendency to decline.

Equity preferred floaters have interested me for several years since they combine in one security some deflation/low inflation and problematic inflation protection.

The deflation/low inflation protection is provided by the minimum coupon. And, that protection is provided in times such as the present and the past four years when the Federal Reserve and other central banks have kept interest rates artificially low; when the market rates, based on actual and anticipated inflation, would be higher. The inflation protection component is the LIBOR float provision.

Risks (1) I have discussed the risks inherent in equity preferred stocks throughout this blog. A general discussion can be found in a 2009 Gateway Post on this subject: Stocks, Bonds & Politics: Advantages and Disadvantages of Equity Preferred Floating Rate Securities.

They can be quite volatile in price. The volatility is frequently due to fear. The fear in this case is losing all your money, the kind of fear that can feed on itself and consume the investor; or losing the dividend which is not cumulative and can be eliminated, provided the common dividend is eliminated first (typical stopper clause). After all, the dividend is reason for buying these securities.

It has to be kept in mind that those issued by leveraged financial institutions will go to zero in the event of a bankruptcy which actually happened to an equity preferred floater issued by Lehman. During the financial crisis, I was able to buy equity preferred stocks issued by banks in the single digits. The downside risk is substantial.

Of the ones that I have owned, none of them have failed to pay their quarterly dividends. When the banks get around to blowing themselves up again, I would not be surprising to see several of them eliminate both their common and equity preferred dividends to preserve capital.

5. Added 50 GAL at $31.79 (see Disclaimer): I bought these shares in a taxable account.




My prior buy was 50 shares in a ROTH IRA. Item # 4 Pared Trade Roth IRA: Bought 50 GAL at $31.89 and Sold 50 IYLD at $26.58 Since I recently discussed that purchase, I have nothing to add to that discussion.

SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF (GAL)

GAL - SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF | State Street Global Advisors (SSgA)

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Paired Trade Roth IRA: Sold 120 GDO at $20.73-Bought 100 GSPRD at $21.38/Sold 3 Harland Clarke 9.5% Senior Bonds Maturing in 2015 at 98/Sold 81+ AMAT at $12.86/Bought 100 NBB at $20.85-Regular IRA/ Pared Trade Toronto Exchange: Sold 500 XTR at C$12.5 & Bought 200 XDV at C$22.21/Sold 100 NRBAY at $11.265

Big Picture Synopsis

Stocks:

Stable Vix Pattern
Short Term: Neutral to Slightly Bullish (worried about Congress)
Intermediate and Long Term: Bullish

Bonds:
Short Term: Neutral to Slightly Bearish
Intermediate Term: Bearish
Long Term: Extremely Bearish

BONDS:

Both BAC and WFC have recently warned investors about bonds. 'Severe' Danger-CNBC WFC apparently advised clients to shift 5% of their bond positions into stocks.

Given the current abnormally low rates, it will not take much of a decline in a bond price to wipe out the value of an entire year of interest payments.

The ETF for the 20+ year treasury bond, TLT, closed at an adjusted price of $120.91 on 12/31/12 and closed at $115.99 yesterday. That 4% decline is more than an investor will receive in dividends for 2013.

As I noted in my last weekly post, the bond market may anticipate the end of QE long before the Fed actually makes an announcement. Recent positive economic news may be the culprit behind the recent rise in yields for two simple reasons. An improving economy will make it less likely that the FED will continue its bond fixing practices into 2014. And the prospect for inflation rises as the labor market and the economy improves coincident with the FED engaged in massive money printing unparalleled in history. Only time will tell whether the bond market has entered a long term secular bear market.

From my perspective, most bonds and bond funds are no longer worth the risk given their low yields. I have no positions in U.S. treasuries for example just for that reason.

The interest rate risk will be concentrated more in bond funds than in individual bonds since the investor has the option of holding an individual bond to maturity. Bond funds that invest in zero coupon treasury bonds would likely be the worst bond investment in a rising rate environment, followed by leveraged bond funds with long durations and high quality bonds.

Of course, the individual bond carries far more credit risk than the diversified bond fund.

There is also opportunity risk related to owning individual bonds when interest rates rise. Sure, you have the option to hold until maturity to avoid a loss in those circumstances, but you have lost the ability to earn more on the funds tied up in a low yielding bond. The risk of lost opportunity diminishes as the term shortens and the investor uses a ladder approach with maturities constantly rolling over.

I would also argue that credit risk increases with time for most issuers. With the passage of time, more things can and often will go wrong. So the investor may holding that 15 year bond until maturity only to find out that the company went under before maturity.

Most of my individual bonds mature prior to 2020.

I will occasionally add a small position in a longer term bond (e.g. 50 of KWN), but will pare that position with a floater.

As discussed below, I recently added 100 of the leveraged bond CEF NBB in the Roth IRA, but I entered a GTC limit order to sell 100 of a similar fund NBD in a taxable account. In that kind of trade, I am simply transferring a position to the ROTH where the dividend payments are tax free and consequently produce a larger after tax yield compared to holding the security in a taxable account.

********
Another Trust Preferred (TP)-NPBCO-Being Redeemed:

The trust preferred form of bond ownership is rapidly becoming an endangered species, a relic from the past. The impetus for its extinction is the Dodd-Frank law that requires banks with more than $15B in assets, as of 12/31/09, to phase out the use of TPs as Tier 1 equity capital starting on 1/1/13 and continuing for five years thereafter.

Another rule, presently under consideration by the Federal Reserve, would require their phase out as Tier 1 equity capital over a longer period for the smaller banks. (see discussion at Item # 1 SUSQ Redemption of TPs). I am not following the status of that particular rule change. ( see Harvard Law School: Federal Reserve Proposes Revised Bank Capital Rules)

National Penn Bancshares announced yesterday that it will redeem its 7.875% TP on 3/7/13 at its $25 par value plus $.36 per share in accrued interest. This security closed yesterday at $25.84 and I would anticipate a downdraft in price today. NPB Capital Trust II 7.85% Cum. Trust Pfd. Secs., NPBCO

I no longer own any TPs. All of mine have been called or sold in anticipation of being called at par value. I sold out of NPBCO last year. Sold 50 NPBCO at $26.17 and Bought 100 HTGZ at $24.6-ROTH IRA

*********************

Relevance of Energy to More Manufacturing Jobs in the U.S.:

Another positive force for the U.S. economy is the movement toward energy independence and relatively low cost and abundant natural gas. 

A recent Barrons' article focused on the long term implications for American industry and jobs. 

Here are some factoids from that article:

(1) U.S. production of petroleum and natural gas jumped to a twenty year high at 15 million barrels of oil-equivalent per day, while imports declined to 8 million barrels which was a 25 year low.

(2) By 2025, U.S. will be a net energy exporter. The U.S. is anticipated to become the largest energy producer by 2020. 

(3) The range of natural gas costs in the U.S. has been between $3 to $5 per million BTUs for several years now. The cost is expected to remain in that range due to increased production. Natural gas costs almost $12 per BTU in Europe and $16 in Japan.  

(4) To buy land for a new factory in Tennessee, the average square foot cost would range between $1.3 to $4.65. The average cost in China is $10.22, and considerably more in the coastal cities. 

(5) Labor costs are rising 15% to 20% per year in China. 

(6) And this fact was very interesting. A graduate of the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology has a 16% higher starting salary than a graduate from Yale.

A similar article was published in the WSJ last Friday.

********

One of the scariest charts, prepared by Credit Suisse, shows that Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and interest payments on the national debt will consume 100% of federal revenue by 2025 (Exhibit 22 at page 17: csfb.com)

Those three programs are virtually untouchable in today's political arena.

*************
Jobs Report:

Last Friday, the Labor Department estimated that the U.S. economy added 157,000 jobs in January. Private employers added 166,000 jobs, while governments shed 9,000. The government made substantial revisions in November, revised to +247,000 from +161,000, and in December where the change was increased to +196,000 from +155,000. Importantly, the average hourly earnings for private nonfarm employees rose by 4 cents per hour. Employment Situation Summary The U-6 number was unchanged at 14.4%. Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization The unemployment rate ticked up to 7.9% from 7.8%.

Liz Ann Sonders stated that housing related activity could start producing 700,000-750,000 jobs. Daily Ticker

***********
ISM Manufacturing:

ISM reported that its manufacturing index rose to 53.1% in January, up from 50.2 in December. The median forecast was for a smaller rise to 50.7. The new orders component rose to 53.3 from 49.7. Employment increased to 54 from 51.9.

Prior to that release, the Chicago ISM's business barometer was reported at 55.6 in January, the highest level since April 2012.

***********
ISM Services:

ISM reported that its services index declined to 55.2% in January from 55.7% in December. The new orders fell 3.9% to 54.4, while employment rose 2.2% to 57.5.

*******
Car Sales: 

GM reported that it sold 194,699 cars and trucks during January, up 16% over January 2012.  All four brands had double digit increases.

Ford announced that it sold 166,501 vehicles in January, a 22% increase.

Chrysler reported an increase of 16% compared to January 2012, with 117,731 in sales.

MarketWatch

Yesterday, Toyota raised its forecast for full year earnings by 10%, with the new number being a five year high for the company. Bloomberg

********

China PMI Services:

China's official PMI for services rose to 56.2% in January. The service sector generated about 44% of China's GDP in 2011.

************

Home Prices:

CoreLogic reported yesterday that home prices rose 8.3% Y-O-Y in December, the largest gain since May 2006.  Home Price Index (HPI) by CoreLogic; Reuters.

*********
Dell Buyout:

I would agree with Andrew Bary who  stated that Michael Dell "is trying to steal his company from public shareholders" by offering just $13.65 per share in cash. That price values the company at around 8 times estimated forward earnings. The institutional shareholders just need to vote no.

**************


1. Sold 3 Harland Clarke 9.5% Senior Bonds at 98 (Junk Bond Ladder Strategy)(see Disclaimer): Effective in October 2012, I am no longer updating posts relating to the junk bond ladder strategy. That would include these posts for example. Junk Bond Ladder Strategy; Personal Risk Ratings For Junk Bonds I am gradually winding down the positions in this basket and expect to break-even on the bonds.

Sold 3 Harland Clarke Bonds at 98
The adjusted price shown in this snapshot reflects the commission cost.

I made a small profit on these bonds. For most of my ownership period, I had an unrealized loss.  Bought 1 Harland Clarke Senior Bond Maturing 2015 at 98.875; ADDED 2 Harland Clarke 9.5% Senior Bonds Maturing on 5/15/2015 at 91.375

FINRA Information: FINRA

Prospectus: www.sec.gov

SEC Filings For HC:  Harland Clarke Filings

10-Q for 2012 Third Quarter: HCHC-2012.9.30-10Q

My main reason for selling these bonds is that I did not want to assume the credit risk when I had the opportunity to harvest several interest payments and was able to exit the position at a small profit.  I am not concerned about interest rate risk for this bond maturing in 2015.

2. Bought 100 NBB at $20.85-Regular IRA (see Disclaimer):


Security Description: The Nuveen Build America Bond Fund (NBB) is a closed end bond fund that invests in taxable municipal bonds. Of course, I would never buy a tax free municipal bond in a retirement account and have only owned such funds in a taxable account. The taxable municipal bonds will have a higher yield than the tax free ones. In an IRA, the taxable municipal bond becomes in effect a tax free one.

NBB invests in Build America Bonds: NBB - Nuveen Build America Bond Fund As noted at the sponsor's website, this fund has a contingent term provision. If there are no new issuances of BABs or similar U.S. treasury subsidized taxable municipal bonds for any 24 month period ending on or before 12/31/2014, the fund will terminate on 6/30/20. The fund may without shareholder approval extend that deadline for 6 months.

Both of the Nuveen Build America Bond Closed-End Funds (NBB and NBD) will implement that contingent term provision as expected. There were no Build America Bonds issued after 2010. Consequently, no new BABs were issued in 2011 and 2012, a continuous 24 month period. The fund may liquidate earlier than 6/30/20.

Both NBB and NBD have become term bond funds. That would normally lessen interest rate risk provided the bond fund owned bonds maturing in 2020 or earlier, which is not the case with either NBB or NBD, both of which own long term bonds (see risk section below)

I also own 200 shares of NBD, with 100 held in the ROTH IRA:


After buying 100 more of NBB in the ROTH, I entered a AON GTC limit order to sell 100 NBD held in a taxable account slightly above the current market price.

{I can use All or None orders on 100 share lots at several brokers including Fidelity and Ameritrade. I have to go to 101 shares or more at Vanguard  and 200 shares at Schwab.}

Given my negative views about bonds and particularly bond funds, I am likely to hold this security for less than one year and hopefully exit this position at a small profit after collecting several monthly dividend payments.

The fund does use leverage which will give it a higher yield than the two ETFs that invest in BABs: PowerShares Build America Bond Portfolio (BAB) and SPDR Nuveen Barclays Build American Bond ETF (BABS)  Leverage is of course a two way street. Leveraged bond funds have been working in recent years given their low short term borrowing costs and the rally in bonds. Short term borrowing costs are likely to remain low for as long as the Fed continues ZIRP. Through 12/31/12, the annual interest cost for NBB's short term borrowings was .99%. NBB Fund Data

The credit quality of the portfolio is weighted in "A" or higher:





NBB - Nuveen Build America Bond Fund

NBB page at the CEFA
Morningstar page for NBB

When I bought these shares, the price had declined by 18 cents per share when I believed the bonds owned by the fund were rising slightly based on the trading of the Build America Bonds ETFs.

Prices at Time of Purchase:
NBB: 20.85 -0.18 (-0.87%)
NBD: 21.54 +0.07 (+0.33%) (similar CEF from same sponsor)
BAB: 29.93 +0.05 (+0.16%) (ETF)
BABS: 60.88 +0.13 (+0.21%) (ETF)

Data as of 1/29/13 (day before purchase)
Net Asset Value Per Share=$22.16
Market Price Per Share=$21.03
Discount -5.1

Data as of 2/4/13
Net Asset Value Per Share=$22.34
Market Price $21.08
Discount=-5.64

I was correct in drawing the conclusion that the NBB net asset value per share would increase. The shares declined 21 cents with the NAV per share moving up two cents.

Data as of 1/30/13 (day of purchase)
Net Asset Value Per Share=$22.18
Market Price=$20.82
Discount= -6.13

In this week's Barron's Roundtable Part 3, Bill Gross recommended another leveraged BABs CEF, the BlackRock Build American Bond Trust (BBN), which closed last Friday at a -5.1% discount to its net asset value per share. Gross mentioned that the discount was -2, but the discount has expanded some since his statement due primarily to a decline in market price. (BBN page at the CEFA; $23.02 on 1/14/13 to 22.01 on 2/1/13,  BBN Interactive Chart)

Prior Trades: My last purchase was in the Roth IRA. Item # 1 Bought 50 NBB at $20.73-ROTH IRA (June 2012). I still own those shares.

I included in that post snapshots of three prior trades that resulted in a total profit of $184.16.  Sold 100 NBB at $20.13-ROTH IRA November 2011; Added 50 NBB at $19.55 in the ROTH IRA September 2011; Sold 100 NBB at $20.07 November 2011; Bought Back 50 NBB @18.4 in IRA December 2010; Sold 50 NBB @ 19.24 in the Regular IRA December 2010; Bought 50 NBB @ 19 November 2010; Bought 50 NBB at 19.67 June 2010.

Rationale: (1) It is all about generating tax free income in the retirement account. I would not be buying this security with money market yields at 3% or higher. Since the yield on the money market account is likely to hug zero for at least another year, and probably two, I have to take chances to generate some income. This fund does hold high quality paper and generates over a 6% yield at my cost. Importantly, it also pays monthly dividends.

The last two monthly dividends have been $.111 per share. NBB Distributions Assuming a continuation of that rate, which may change at anytime, the yield at a total cost of $20.85 would be about 6.39%.

Risks: (1) Interest Rate Risk Is Huge: The average maturity in years is 27.9 as of 12/31/12. While there will be of course more yield with long maturity, the interest rate risk inherent in those bonds is substantial. That risk may become significant if the 2020 liquidation date proves to be an untimely one for selling the long bonds owned by the fund. Conversely, the term date could be beneficial assuming the bonds have retained their current values or even increased some by the liquidation date.

In either event, I am not likely to be holding this fund for more than a year, or two at the most.  I may liquidate 100 shares of NBD before summer.

I am in a trading mode for bond funds. In the event that I still own a leveraged bond fund when rates start to rise, I will cap my loss at 10% below my purchase price.  

Quote: Nuveen Build America Bond Fund (NBB)


3. Sold 81+ AMAT at $12.86 (see Disclaimer):


While I have never lost money investing in AMAT, I have never made much either. I just got bored holding this one. I made just $54.22 on the shares:

2013 AMAT 81+ Shares +$54.22

Bought 50 AMAT at $12.45 (June 2011); Added 30 AMAT at $10.99 (May 2012). Maybe, after a hiatus from reading AMAT's lackluster earnings reports, and a decline in price to below my last purchase price, I may try again.

4. Paired Trade Roth IRA: Sold 120 of the Bond CEF GDO at $20.73 and Bought 100 GSPRD at 21.377 (see Disclaimer):

2013 Pared Trade Roth IRA

Security Descriptions: Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Dep. Shs Pfd. Series D (GS.PD) is an equity preferred stock issued by Goldman Sachs that pays non-cumulative qualified dividends at the greater of 4% or .67% above the 3 month LIBOR rate on a $25 par value. Prospectus

I recently discussed this security and have nothing to add: Item # 5 Bought 100 GSPRD at $21.18 (1/22/13 Post) I also discussed it when buying 50 shares back in December. Item # 1 Bought 50 GSPRD at $20.6 (12/26/12). I now own 250 GSPRD shares.

Western Asset Global Corp Defined Opportunity Fund (GDO) is a closed end bond fund.

GDO Data (Day Before Purchase 1/31/13)
Net Asset Value Per Share: $20.81
Closing Market Price: $20.63
Discount:  -.86

GDO Data (day of sale 2/1/13)
Net Asset VAlue Per Share= $20.83
Closing Market Price: GDO: $20.70 +0.07 (+0.34%)
Discount: -.62%
Discount at $20.73= .48%

Prior Trades: I no longer own any GDO. I have bought and sold this bond CEF several times. The shares sold on 2/1/13 were bought in 2010:

2013 Roth IRA 120 GDO +$340.33
My last GDO trade was a quick flip: Item # 2 Sold 100 GDO at $20.79 (12/26/12 Post)-Item # 2 Bought 100 Shares of GDO at $18.9 (11/21/12 Post).

A discussion and links to prior trades can be found in  Item # 2 GDO

Rationale: (1) Unlike GDO, which owns fixed coupon bonds, GSPRD is a floater which provides a measure of inflation protection.

I do give up some current yield.

I do not currently anticipate that GSPRD will pay more than its minimum 4% coupon prior to 2015. At a total cost of $21.38 and a 4% coupon, the current yield would be about 4.68%. The GDO current yield is around 2.2% higher at a total cost equal to my sales price. However, I expect GDO's dividend to trend down, as noted below, while GSPRD's current yield can not go lower than its current rate.

(2) Profit Taking On GDO: This is probably the most important consideration given my negative views about bond funds.

With GDO selling at near its net asset value per share, I decided to harvest a $340 profit, which is tax free in the Roth IRA, rather than to risk losing some or even all of it over time. I owned those shares for slightly over 2 years and received 25 monthly dividend payments.

(3) I expect the GDO dividends to trend down over time, as high yielding securities mature, while GSPRD's current dividend yield is the lowest possible yield. GDO has a 2024 liquidation data. Given that liquidation period, the fund has a relatively short weighted average maturity of 6.3 years. The dividend has already started to trend down slightly. When I first bought this CEF, the monthly distribution was 13 cents per share, which was then reduced to $.1275 in September 2011; to $.125 in September 2012; and to $.12 in December 2012 GDO Distributions

I do not currently anticipate that GSPRD will pay more than its minimum 4% coupon prior to 2015.  At a total cost of $21.38 and a 4% coupon, the current yield would be about 4.68%.

(4) I anticipate that there is more profit potential in GSPRD shares compared to GDO over the next few years. This is a future forecast, and no one can really predict the future. I am postulating that inflation will become problematic in a few years, and the Fed will consequently have no choice but to raise the federal funds rate. This will cause a rise in the 3 month LIBOR rate. When the 3 month Libor crosses 3.33% during the applicable computation period for GSPRD, the Libor float provision will be activated and this security will pay more than its minimum 4% coupon. If it appears that the rate rise will be significant, I would anticipate that GSPRD will rise closer to its $25 par value. It was selling at close to $26 in 2007.

And, depending on the circumstances then existing, GS may even elect to redeem the security at its par value, rather than to be tied to an open ended rise in the coupon due to the Libor float provision.

Risks: (1) Equity Preferred Stocks Issued by Leveraged Financial Institutions Can Be Volatile: Given the non-cumulative characteristic of the dividend, and the low priority of equity preferred stocks in the capital structure, they can be exceedingly volatile during times of stress. There was a day in August 2011 where there was a significant downdraft in equity preferred stocks and European hybrids, as noted in a contemporaneous post from that time. Item # 1 Fear and Enhanced Volatility in Certain Classes of Income Securities

Goldman Sachs had three equity preferred floaters outstanding during the Near Depression period. Each of them were crushed in price, falling below $10 per share for awhile. GS did not miss a quarterly dividend payment on any of them.

GS.PD Stock Chart
GS.PA Stock Chart
GS.PC Stock Chart

(2) Other disadvantages are discussed in the gateway post on these securities. Advantages and Disadvantages of Equity Preferred Floating Rate Securities I would highlight one of the risks. If GS filed for bankruptcy, its equity preferred stocks would likely become worthless.


Quote: Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Dep. Shs Pfd. Series D, GS.PD
Quote: Western Asset Global Corp Defined Opportunity Fund Inc., GDO


5. Pared Trade Toronto Exchange: Sold 500 of the Balanced ETF XTR at C$12.5 and Bought 200 of the Stock ETF XDV at C$22.21 (Canadian Dollar (CAD) Strategy)(see Disclaimer):

2013 Pared Trade Toronto Stock Exchange

Security Descriptions:
 
iShares Dow Jones Canada Select Dividend Index Fund (TOR: XDV) is a Canadian ETF that owns the 30 stocks that have the highest dividend yields in the Dow Jones Canada Total Stock Market Index.

Sponsor's Website: XDV Overview - iShares ETFs (expense ratio .55%)

XDV Holdings - iShares ETFs

I took this snapshot of the top 10 holdings as of 1/31/13:



Prior Trades: I bought 800 of XTR in three lots: Bought 200 XTR:CA at 11.9 CAD October 2011;  Bought 300 of the Canadian ETF XTR at $12.34 CADs March 2011; Bought 300 of the Canadian ETF XTR:CA at 12.27 CADs-Toronto Exchange November 2012 Using FIFO accounting, I sold the first two lots and still own the last 300 shares purchased in November 2012. Fidelity will also convert the CAD prices into USDs which will impact my overall profit or loss numbers on these foreign transactions. Since the Canadian dollar had fallen some recently, that decline negatively impacted my profit on the 500 shares, which is not a bad result since I end up with the same number of Canadian dollars either way:

2013 XTR 500 Shares +$38.3

As previously noted, XTR is a fund of funds weighted in bonds:



XTR Overview - iShares ETFs

Rationale: (1) Reducing Exposure to Bond Funds Without Significantly Reducing Income: There is not much difference in yield between these two ETFs which is not surprising given the abnormally low rates paid by bond funds now. And, unlike fixed coupon bonds, most of the stocks owned by XDV will at least be increasing their payouts over time.

I am keeping my significant exposure to two short term Canadian bond funds that use a ladder approach for individual bonds, keeping equal weights in 1 to 5 year maturities. There is far less interest rate risk associated with that kind of roll. I own 700 of the iShares 1-5 Year Laddered Government Bond Index Fund (TOR: CLF) and 300 of the iShares 1-5 Year Laddered Corporate Bond Index Fund (TOR: CBO). Both of those funds pay monthly dividends to me in CADs after a 15% Canadian withholding tax.

I also recently bought 200 of a floating rate Canadian bond fund. Bought 200 of the Canadian Bond ETF XFR at 20.13 CADs

Risks: (1) Currency Risk: I am a long term holder of Canadian dollars. Anyone buying a foreign security is subject to currency risk, irrespective of whether the U.S. investor buys ADRs using their USDs or ordinary shares purchased on a foreign stock exchange.

From my perspective, I simply want to diversify out of assets priced in USDs and want to add to my CADs over time, either by receiving dividends paid in Canadian dollars or generating profits on securities bought on the Toronto exchange with my CADs. Given that long term perspective, I do not view myself as being exposed to currency risk, except in the limited sense that my U.S. tax obligations can be positively or negatively impacted by the currency movement occurring from the date of purchase to the date of sale.  An investor with a shorter term focus can have their total returns significantly impacted by currency movements, both up and down.

There is also risks in owning a stock ETF, particularly one that owns a relatively small number of stocks which is the case for XDV.

(2) Concentration Risk in Financials: XDV owns a number of the large Canadian banks which performed admirably during the Near Depression. However, there are currently concerns about Canada's housing market and the debt levels of Canadian citizens who have borrowed money from the banks. That concern led Moody's recently to downgrade the ratings of the large Canadian banks. Moody's downgrades Canadian banks The ratings are still good, but those concerns are nonetheless worth noting. Six of the top ten holdings are large Canadian banks.

Quote: iShares Diversified Monthly Income Fund, XTR
Quote: iShares Dow Jones Canada Select Dividend Index Fund, XDV

6. Sold 100 NRBAY at $11.265 (see Disclaimer): Nordea Bank AB ADS (NRBAY) is a large European banking institution.  The stock spurted after the bank reported better than expected earnings for the 2012 4th quarter. MarketWatch I met my long term price target in a few months, so I decided to harvest the profit:

2013 NRBAY 100 Shares +$175.06

BOUGHT 100 of the ADR NRBAY at $9.36 (October 2012)

Quote: Nordea Bank AB ADS, NRBAY

I will discuss one purchase made yesterday in next week's post. This one is already long enough.


Politics and ETC:

1. How to Win A Presidential Election with Gerrymandered Congressional Districts: I would not be against eliminating the Electoral College system for presidential elections, and instead basing the outcome on the total vote cast.

The most anti-democratic proposal would be to award electoral votes based on who wins each congressional district.

In several battleground states controlled by the GOP at the state level, including Virginia Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, the republicans are starting to push allocating electoral votes by congressional district which would make it more likely that a republican would win the presidential election even after losing the popular vote. If every state had allocated electoral votes by congressional district, Romney would have won the last election with 276 electoral votes even though he lost the popular vote by approximately 5 million votes. CBS News

Basing electoral votes on congressional districts would further award the inherently anti-democratic process known as gerrymandering.

Most Americans understand that congressional districts are gerrymandered by the political parties. That process is unquestionably anti-democratic. The polarization in American politics is due in significant part to gerrymandering. Both political tribes are responsible.

In a republican controlled legislature, for example, swing and democratic precincts would be taken out of a GOP congressional district and swapped with strong GOP precincts in a Democrat's district.  Even where no party controls both branches of the state legislature, horse trading among the two political tribes can result in shoring up congressional districts held by incumbents.

The end result is a congressional district map that has nothing to do with geography and everything to do with voting patterns of every precinct. (see Slate Magazine; the most frequently gerrymandered district may be Maryland's third, was called by a federal judge a "broken winged pterodactyl, lying prostrate across the center of the state" New Republic; the ten contorted districts: MAPS

My congressional district (7th Tennessee) was drawn many years ago with only one thought in mind-to insure the election of an extreme right wing republican. The district started its winding path near the Kentucky border to catch Clarksville, a military town near the Ft. Campbell military base. It then swings through farmland, bypassing Nashville, and then picks up Brentwood, an affluent community likely to vote 80% republican. After picking up Brentwood, the district meanders down Franklin Road to pick up a few GOP precincts in Franklin, and then moves through farmland again for over two hundred miles, all the way to the outskirts of Memphis, reaching its final objective, a town known as Germantown, an affluent suburb of Memphis likely to vote 80% for a republican. In more populated areas, it would not be necessary to be so obvious but the result would be the same.

Democrat votes are concentrated in large cities. Even without gerrymandering, the Democrat candidate could easily win the presidential vote by several million and lose the election based on an electoral collage vote based on the winner of each congressional district.

2. Lindsay Graham's Brain Has Been Deep Fried: The republican senator keeps making statements that indicate to me that he has more than a few malfunctioning brain synapses. His most recent bizarre statement was that Hilary Clinton "got Away With Murder' in Benghazi. What really has Graham upset is that Hilary might become President in four years, and that would be more than most republicans could bear, particularly after 8 years of the beanpole.

3. Young Mamas Need Assault Weapons With Large Capacity Magazines Capable of Spraying over 30 bullets in a Few Seconds to Protect Their Youngins: The self described "conservative" Gayle Trotter told a congressional committee that young mothers needed assault weapons, a really 'scary looking weapon", to protect their babies when multiple criminals invade their home. Ms. Trotter is opposed to the Violence Against Women Act which in her view infringed on the rights of men.  I was captivated by her testimony. Ms. Trotter was not able to refer to a single person who used an assault weapon or large capacity magazines to defend themselves from criminals.

4. 53% of Americans Believe the Government Threatens Their Personal Freedoms: For the first time, a majority of Americans now believe that the government is a threat to their personal freedoms. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press If the person owns a gun, then the number jumps to 62%. Unsurprisingly, 76% of the "conservative" republicans hold this view.

Those folks will frequently be heard to argue that assault weapons are needed to keep the government from taking away their other rights. The most important right in their view is to own as many guns as  they can afford, including assault weapons equipped with large capacity magazine clips bought at gun shows with no background checks whatsoever.

The real threat to freedom is from the 53% who answered that question in the affirmative. I have noticed over the years that True Believers will frequently find ways to disparage or restrict freedoms that do not involve the ownership of guns. They are generally intolerant of diversity in any shape or form. Those folks are incapable of questioning their core beliefs and are easily swayed by cliches and talking points.

It is impossible to engage True Believers in a rational discussion on virtually any topic, since they are simply incapable of a rational discussion based on anything resembling reliable evidence rather than their own personal reality creations. The concept of the U.S. government taking away rights is just one of many such reality creations.

Maybe the government has taken away the right to eat contaminated meat or to sell unsafe drugs, or the right to pollute the air and water with impunity and the right to employ child labor in sweat shops.

How exactly has the federal government interfered with the rights to free speech, to practice religion, to petition the government for redress of grievances, to travel freely anywhere in this country, to change jobs, to choose your friends or enemies, to read anything, or to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures?

How exactly would the President take away those important freedoms? Send an order to the Joint Chiefs to do what exactly? It is the same idiotic mind set that was on display when a republican judge in Texas who argued that a civil war would erupt in the event Obama was elected? Why? Well, Obama planned to give away U.S. sovereignty to the United Nations. And, when those U.N. tanks rolled into Lubbock Texas, he and his fellow Texas patriots, armed with their assault weapons, could defend their freedoms just like the minuteman did at Lexington and Concord.  CNN.com

How would you argue with Sharon Angle, the former GOP candidate for Senate in Nevada, who mentioned that the people had "second Amendment remedies" to deal with the "tyrannical" U.S. government? Sharron Angle Floated '2nd Amendment Remedies' As 'Cure' For 'The Harry Reid Problems'

5. Guns in Households: I do not own a gun and have no plans to buy one. There are places in the U.S. where I would want to own a handgun to protect against home intruders. I understand why many would want to keep a gun in the house for such purposes.

However, it must be noted that a gun in the house is more likely to cause injury or death to a member of the household than to an intruder. Over the years, I have read a number of stories about an argument between a husband and wife escalating to the point where a gun comes into play.  A study in the Southern Medical Journal found that having a gun in the house was 12 times more likely to cause the death of a family member or a guest rather than an intruder. Guns in homes 

Sunday, February 3, 2013

Status of Citigroup Funding PPNs: MOU, MBC, MKN, MKZ

Some readers are interested in the Citigroup Funding "principal protected notes" that I currently own. Those notes are senior unsecured debt obligations of Citigroup Funding, a wholly owned subsidiary of Citigroup who guarantees the notes as provided in the prospectuses. 

Each of the notes will mature in 2014 at their $10 par value. All of the ones that I own trade on the stock exchange and are included by me in the category of Exchange Traded Bonds. 

I currently own the following Citigroup Fund PPNs:

Bought 100 MKN at $9.85
Bought 100 MKZ at $9.96
Bought 100 MKZ at $9.91 in the Roth IRA
Bought 100 MOU at $10.12
Bought 100 MBC at $9.84
Bought 100 MBC at $9.78
Bought 100 MTY at $10.03
Bought 100 MTY at $10.49
Bought 200 MOL at $9.95-Sold 100 MOL @ $10.3 November 2010
Added 100 MOL at $9.78

Item # 1 Principal Protected Notes
Item # 2 Principal Protected Notes


This notes are in no way "principal protected" in the event of a Citigroup bankruptcy. These notes are unsecured senior obligations and would be in the same undesirable position as any other senior unsecured note issued by Citigroup Funding and guaranteed by Citigroup in the event of a bankruptcy. In short, the owners of these PPNs would be screwed in that eventuality. Anyone buying a PPN needs to read the prospectus until there is full comprehension about this type of security. 

I am not interested in buying more of these notes or in selling what I now own. I am likely to hold all of them until maturity unless there is an unexpected and serious change in Citigroup's risk profile.  

I wanted to update the status of those notes whose current annual periods end before June 30th.

I recently updated the status of Citigroup 3.00% Principal Protected Notes linked to Russell 2000 Index (MOU). Since that one is near the end of its current annual period, I will start with where it stands now. 

1. MOU: I updated the status of this PPN in a 1/3/13 post and I will copy and edit some of that discussion: Stocks, Bonds & Politics: MOU Update 

Two of my senior unsecured notes issued by Citigroup Funding, and guaranteed by Citigroup, pay the greater of 3% on a $10 par value or up to a percentage increase in the Russell 2000. Of those two notes, MOU is closer to its annual end date than MBC.

MOU can pay up to 37%.

The relevant data points on MOU are as follows:

Starting Value as of 2/23/12=829.23
Maximum Level Violation Number=1,136.04  (829.23 x. 1.37)
End Date For Current Annual Coupon Period: 2/22/13

Pricing Supplement

The Russell 2000 closed last Friday at 911.20: RUT: 911.20 +9.11 (+1.01%) 

It would be reasonable to postulate that there will not be a maximum level violation caused by one close above the maximum level number of 1,136.04 on or before 2/22/13.

A Maximum Level Violation causes a reversion to the 3% minimum coupon irrespective of the percentage performance of the Russell 2000 between the Start and End Dates.

It is likely now that I will receive more than 3% during the current annual period, assuming the Russell 2000 does not close below 854.1 on 2/22/13, the point where any increase would be greater than 3%.  How much, if any, more is anyone's guess.

A close at 900 on 2/22/12 would result in a 8.5% coupon for example (900 minus starting value of 829.23=70.77 divided by 829.23=8.5%) A close at 1000, which is far fetched now, would result in a 20.59% annual interest coupon.

If the close on 2/22/13 was identical to the close on 2/1/13, which of course will not happen, the coupon would be about 9.88%.


As previously noted, I hit a pay day with a 27.93% coupon in the annual period ending in February 2011. (see snapshot at MBC & MOU). The last annual coupon was 3.7% (see snapshot at Item # 3 MOU)

This senior unsecured note matures in 2014 at its $10 par value. In addition to the current coupon period, there will be just one more before maturity.

As previously noted, given my cost in these securities and the current low interest rates, I am content to receive the minimum coupon.  Item # 1 Added 100 MOL at $9.78

FINRA Information: Citigroup Fixed Coupon Bond Maturing in 2014-Current YTM 1.68%


2. MBC: I own 200 of this PPN, with the position bought at less than its $10 par value. Like MOU, the coupon is tied to the performance of the Russell 2000.

MBC can pay up to 30%.

The current annual period ends on 5/21/13.

This is a summary of the relevant data points:

Starting Value of the Russell 2000: 764.64
Maximum Level=994.032 (764.94 x. 1.3)


While there has been no maximum level violation yet, this one is certainly moving closer to a close above the Maximum Level which would trigger the reversion back to its 3% minimum coupon.

If there was no Maximum Level Violation, defined to mean a single close above the Maximum Level for the current annual period, and the Russell 2000 closed at 911 on 5/21/13, this one will generate a nice coupon of 19.14%. (911-764.64 starting value=146.36 divided by 764.64=19.14%).

Assuming Citigroup survives to pay par value, the worst that can happen is a 3% coupon for each of the remaining annual periods, including the one ending in May 2013.

I am content to receive the minimum particularly since I have the opportunity at least to receive a lot more.

MBC has some potential for the current coupon period as long as the Russell 2000 Index can stay below 994 between now and 5/21/13, and there is not a significant correction by the closing date.

There was a Maximum Level Violation for MBC's annual coupon period ending in May 2011 which caused a reversion to the 3% annual coupon, so I received $60 in interest for my 200 shares for that period.

The May 2012 period also ended with a 3% coupon payment for a different reason, the Russell 2000 declined from that periods starting value. Item # 2  MBC-3% Coupon for Third Annual Coupon Period


3. MKN: This one matures on April 7, 2014. I own 100 MKN, with the shares bought at below its $10 par value. MKN's coupon is tied to the performance of the UBS Commodity Index: DJUBS Quote - Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index - Bloomberg; Chart - WSJ.com

The current annual period ends on 4/1/2013:

Starting Value on 3/30/12=141.902
Maximum Level=188.73 (rounded)(141.903 x. 1.33)

Prospectus: Pricing Supplement

Last Friday, this index closed at 142.89. Given the relatively short time left, I would view a Maximum Level Violation to be unlikely.

To generate more than a 3% coupon during the current annual coupon period, there must be NO Maximum Level Violation on or before 4/1/13 and a close above 146.16.  A close at 165, with No Maximum Level Violation, would produce about a 16.28% coupon.

MKN allows up to a 33% increase in the coupon with a 3% minimum. If the index closes one day during the annual period above 33% over the starting value, there will be a reversion to the 3% coupon, no matter what happens thereafter. Again, I call that reversion feature the "Maximum Level Violation".

I am more concerned that the index will not gain enough by 4/1/2013 to trigger an increase in the 3% minimum. 

I did receive a 18% coupon for the MKN annual period ending in March 2010:  Note ON MKN

2010 MKN Interest Payment on 100 Shares +$180.06 (incorrectly noted as a dividend)

The next coupon was even better at 25.56%: Item # 4 MKN Closes with a 25.56% Gain 

100 MKN SHARES 2011 Interest Payment


4. MKZ: Unlike MKN, which has done well so far, MKZ has been a dud, paying only its 3% minimum coupon during my ownership. I own 200 MKZ bought at below its par value. 

Like MKN, MKZ's coupon is tied to the UBS Commodity Index. This unsecured senior note matures on 7/11/2014 at its $10 par value. MKZ may pay up to 31%. 

Relevant Data Points:

Starting Value on 6/25/12: 130.56
Maximum Level: 171.033 (130.56 x. 1.31)
Closing Date: 6/24/13

Prospectus: Pricing Supplement

As noted above, the UBS Commodity index closed last Friday (2/1/13) at 142.89. 

This one has some potential to pay more than its 3% minimum but is also in danger of suffering the Maximum Level Violation given the current index level and the time remaining in the current annual period. 

MKZ suffered a Maximum Level Violation in its coupon period ending 6/23/11. MKZ Reversion to Its 3% Guarantee 

The 2012 period ended with a decline in the commodity index from the starting value which resulted in the 3% minimum coupon. Item # 1 MKZ Ends Annual Period-Paying 3% Minimum Coupon 

If there was a close at 143 on 6/24/13, with NO Maximum Level Violation, the coupon would be about  9.53%. A close at 160 with NO Maximum Level Violation would produce about a 22.55% coupon.

To generate more than 3% during the current annual period, there must be no close above 171.033 on or before 6/24/13 and a close above 134.4668. (1.03 x. starting value of 130.56).