Credit deflation and the reflation cycle to come (part 8)

[Pip321]

10 hours ago, sancho panza said:

as @DurhamBorn suggests ,poss consider a nice range of equities.Maybe DB could add a few to the lsit below.As ever,thanks for rpviding this wodnerful bastion of free speech.I've learned so mcuh down here .mor than I ever did at school.

obviously dyor etc but maybe(at todays prices or thereabouts).I've specifically focused on where I think tehre's value in the amrekt and related the purchase size to percevied value hence eg BAts holding 2x size IMPs,If IMPs were lower on a value basis,Id skew towards them instead.

Baccy              

10% BATs

5% IMPs =15%

oil

10% BP

4% Shell

3% Harbour=17%

EMs

10% SEDY

3% IBZL

3% BRLA

3% TEI=19%

Potash

2% Nutrien

2% Yara

2% Incitec Pivot

2% K&S=8%

Telecoms

BT 2%

Orange 3%

Proximus 2%

AT&T 2%

Telefonica 5%

Vod 5%=19%

Goldies/Extractive

Newmont 5%

Sibanye 3%

Barrick 3%

Ecora(royalty streamer) 2%

Fres 2%=15%

 

All in all thats 93%.Some of these have very decent ,sustaianble divis.there's risk but then terhe's risk sat in sterling getting 5% interest while CPI runs at 5% and the real rate of inflation runs at 7%.

jsut soem ideas

If I can be of any help PM me.

 

Ambo goes to a lot of 'frequent fliers'.In fact NHS does.

Huge amounts of moeny are utterly wasted by the top down management style that's motivated by politcal posturing rather than patient care/societal health otucomes.

Take the coof.Senior manamgenet loved the theatre of it.People who in a free market would sink into anonymity were able to tell 98% of the population what they could do and when,that they had to mask their smiles etc.Cue power trip.Then we find out it had the fatality rate of flu and that the dance videos were jsut some sort of bizarre cult display because clincians had no patients because errrrr....it wasnt a global pandemic by any traditiaonl measure.

eg 2 we have laods of diversity coodrinators etc, there are huge queues to see GPs.It's about priorities.

I could go on.It's rather pointless.

(1600x12)/550,000=3.49% gross yield.

you had a good deal there given you offloaded the upkeep to the LL

I sued to think I'd buy one day but unless pour gross yield moves north of 7.5% then I dont think we will.Rather keep  BATs/BP/Shell shares yielding 9%/10%

Where’s your commods? Surely a cheeky bit of Rio, Glencore or BHP into the mix?

Or would you wait for a big tumble first….because I do see in the past they really can tumble. 😉

[Axeman123]

5 hours ago, GTM said:

But the way to solve inadequate retirement incomes is:

“We should also offer people more flexibility over their pension pots, as other countries do, in order to help them with difficult circumstances. These reforms will improve families’ financial resilience during their working lives and into retirement too.”

Ah, a lot of word salad to suggest letting the state steal people's pension pots while they are working as well as when they retire.

Imagine if potential emergency working-age SIPP withdrawals are counted for means testing in future. Hypothetically an evil govt might also include going private to avoid NHS waiting lists as a qualifying grounds for emergency withdrawals too.

[Lightscribe]

The old codger is trying to get replaced at this point. 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25874531/joe-biden-tweet-super-bowl/amp/

[ThoughtCriminal]

I've had an interesting update on the Romanian bounce back loan anecdote I shared on here a year or so back.

So the Romanian who supplied labour asked us how to get a bounce back loan, so we sniggeringly helped him apply whilst telling him he'd never be successful (I was still naive enough to think the state had probity) but we'd help him for the shits and giggles. To our amazement he got the 50k, bought a luxury apartment on the Black Sea and fucked off back to Romania, never to be seen again. Or so we thought.

He just phoned my business partner up asking if we needed any labour. My business partner met up with him out of curiosity and turns out he moved back here six months ago. Unbeknownst to us he had three other companies, got the bounce back loans for them after we showed him how to do it and owns four apartments there, not one. Now this was a man with holes in his trainers, filthy tracksuit bottoms, looked like a tramp basically. He now wears three piece suits and drives a range rover.

He's operating a new labour supply company in his own name, all details the same and has had no contact about paying his loans back. He's taken over from a Slovakian we knew who was making a grand a day hiring out eastern Europeans, he's had a stroke apparently: "Too many cigarettes, very bad". 

He told my business partner there's a three storey "training centre" in London where they're churning out CSCS cards, demolition operative, asbestos awareness, face fit etc, basically any certs you need. For £750 he can get any card you require within 24 hours, no English required as you're not actually sitting the exam. As he put it "The authorities know but pretend. We know they know, but we pretend. Everyone pretend, yes?". We knew this stuff was going on, but not on an industrial scale like this.

I might see if he'll do me a deal on a week in one of his apartments, maybe throw an 18 year old hooker in with it. Might as well get something out of it. 

[Royston]

12 hours ago, Funn3r said:

I was having drinks with ultranormie woke friends a couple of nights ago.  Surprised to hear them criticise Joe Biden as being too old for the job, declining facilities, they should find someone else, etc. I find it hard to listen to them but I am fairly sure that quite recently in previous drinkies they thought he was great; years of experience, in control, a steady choice against bad orange man. 

Then I remembered that they are first class MSM repeater stations and it all became clear.

I'm still not getting into the rip-off betting again this time.

You do realise you can actually choose who to have as friends?

[Cattle Prod]

21 hours ago, marceau said:

The guy is correct... up to a point. All of these numbers are agreed fictions that serve the interests of the participants. 1 + 1 does not need to equal 2 if it no longer serves those interests.

He is also right that pretending that there is some mathematical rule that has been broken (debt/GDP, deficit, maxed-out credit card etc) is fallacious. A bad faith argument used as cover for ideological or power schemes. Few making these arguments would apply them to corporate balance sheets, yet they do so for national structures which are even less constrained by the legalisms of numbers.

As you spotted, he is an accountant; in appearance, behaviour and spirit. The problem with arguing against a fat speccy twat on accounting issues is that it plays to their strengths, and that it drains energy/attention from more substantial  issues. It is classic political bait, and people never seem to tire of getting hooked.

What are the more substantial issues? Nobody with a brain put accountants in charge of anything; not social affairs, not businesses, and certainly not nations. True to type, he gets the accounting identities correct, but completely misses the point. This single sentence dooms the entire thing:

This is 100% correct. But it is also very telling that out of the pages and pages of factoids he spews out, the thousands and thousands of words, the only substantial point merits just 17 of them.

The reality is what post after post on here very effectively covers - what we can actually do as a nation is fucked. In terms of the British state, it is fucked permanently. It doesn't matter what legal, economic, procedural or policy changes Uk gov makes; it cannot make multi-cult work, it cannot make multi-racial work, it cannot undo the endless self-inflicted shithole-ification of its cities, no matter how productive they used to be.

In their gross stupidity they created an anti-national nation, there's no way back from it. The remedies to these problems lie outside the British state's identifying boundaries. To implement them would be to dissolve the entire construct. It can't be done, it won't be done. The next 25 years is the story of how this plays out. 'Number' will continue to go up (credit cycles allowing), but it will become increasingly meaningless in the real world.

The fat dork is just a waste of time.

Excellent post, Marceau. And if you don't mind me adding:

So said an actual genius.

We have to stop putting "professors" etc on pedestals, if people only know how easy it is to breeze through academia, without actually practicing anything. As my wife say in early covid times after I junked "Prof" Fergusons models and relaxed (I noticed he was making assumptions such as people mix widely in Brownian motion, rather than clustering as we do in the real world, thats all nothing fancy) "Do you think you know more than an Imperial College Professor now?" 

"Yes, clearly".

It's a strange thing. The world used to admire the tinkerers, the experimenters, the practicioners, the doers. Now there is a kind of virtual reality where any old tool can badge themselves with a PhD, drift through academia (by being political, not brilliant) and spout off about any manner of things. They are invariably charlatans, don't trust any 'expert' who hasn't risked anything personally. In my business, the best brains are in industry and the academics and professors I have to interact with are second rate (with honourable exceptions) because the industry pays more, and screens out the charlatans at first interview. I suspect the same goes for mose industries, though as Marceau points out, accountants should be perhaps in a class all of their own. I always wondered what kind of person could possibly be attracted to that work. 

[Democorruptcy]

8 hours ago, sancho panza said:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/feb/12/more-than-11-million-britons-have-less-than-1000-in-savings

More than 11 million Britons have less than £1,000 in savings

More than 11 million working-age people in Britain don’t have basic “rainy day” savings of at least £1,000, according to a report that warns that the poorest households are struggling to build up financial resilience amid the cost of living crisis.

The Resolution Foundation said people across Britain faced a “triple savings challenge” of insufficient savings, an inability to cope financially with major life events such as family breakdown, and inadequate retirement incomes.

 

It said 11.2 million people lived in households that had savings of less than £1,000, accounting for about one in three working-age households. As many as half lived in the poorest third of households in Britain.

In a report with the abrdn Financial Fairness Trust, the foundation estimated that the UK had a £74bn shortfall of funds saved for emergencies and for retirement compared with a country in which every family had at least three months of income kept in precautionary savings.

More journo begging for the BoE to cut rates.

[Calcutta]

25 minutes ago, ThoughtCriminal said:

I've had an interesting update on the Romanian bounce back loan anecdote I shared on here a year or so back.

So the Romanian who supplied labour asked us how to get a bounce back loan, so we sniggeringly helped him apply whilst telling him he'd never be successful (I was still naive enough to think the state had probity) but we'd help him for the shits and giggles. To our amazement he got the 50k, bought a luxury apartment on the Black Sea and fucked off back to Romania, never to be seen again. Or so we thought.

He just phoned my business partner up asking if we needed any labour. My business partner met up with him out of curiosity and turns out he moved back here six months ago. Unbeknownst to us he had three other companies, got the bounce back loans for them after we showed him how to do it and owns four apartments there, not one. Now this was a man with holes in his trainers, filthy tracksuit bottoms, looked like a tramp basically. He now wears three piece suits and drives a range rover.

He's operating a new labour supply company in his own name, all details the same and has had no contact about paying his loans back. He's taken over from a Slovakian we knew who was making a grand a day hiring out eastern Europeans, he's had a stroke apparently: "Too many cigarettes, very bad". 

He told my business partner there's a three storey "training centre" in London where they're churning out CSCS cards, demolition operative, asbestos awareness, face fit etc, basically any certs you need. For £750 he can get any card you require within 24 hours, no English required as you're not actually sitting the exam. As he put it "The authorities know but pretend. We know they know, but we pretend. Everyone pretend, yes?". We knew this stuff was going on, but not on an industrial scale like this.

I might see if he'll do me a deal on a week in one of his apartments, maybe throw an 18 year old hooker in with it. Might as well get something out of it. 

Top lad. 

[Democorruptcy]

10 hours ago, wherebee said:

That's obscene.  Almost 50% of his income on tax, even with (presumably) good accountant advice.

Add on top of that council tax, VAT, etc, and he's deffo hitting 65% taxation, if not more.

It's more of a worry if you were pleb earning that much but I wouldn't worry too much about him. It's what he doesn't have to declare where the big money will be. The first consultancy after leaving office, will quickly wipe that tax bill out

[sleepwello'nights]

2 hours ago, Pip321 said:

 

I guess the yield should be the yield on todays price regardless…..same as working out a divi. The reason is because that yield today can be turned into capital (and the place sold) at todays price. However what’s my investment worth today to me…if I sell for £250k I will only get £200k due to CGT. So realistically the value to me is £200k and only £250k if I pass to my kids. 

 

Why should it?

I have some investments with Vanguard, including a residual holding in index linked gilts. The performance in Vanguard shows that they are currently worth less than I paid. I went through the purchases and sales I had made and on my figures the cost of them is less than their current market price. 

As far as I'm concerned my current holding in index linked gilts is valued at more than my cost, in fact my cost is negative, they have cost me nothing. I've checked and double checked the numbers, Vanguard's calculation is based on average values at the times transactions took place. They can play with the numbers as much as they like, my simple mind is happy using a first in first out basis. A notional loss based on a sophisticated calculation assuming an opportunity cost based on current market price doesn't represent my reality.

[AlfredTheLittle]

25 minutes ago, Democorruptcy said:

It's more of a worry if you were pleb earning that much but I wouldn't worry too much about him. It's what he doesn't have to declare where the big money will be. The first consultancy after leaving office, will quickly wipe that tax bill out

Is this Jeremy Hunt? He's already a millionaire, he sold his share in a business for £14million in 2017 and certainly didn't pay 40% tax on that  https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-hunt-net-worth-chancellor-salary-explained-business-1976744

[Democorruptcy]

5 minutes ago, AlfredTheLittle said:

Is this Jeremy Hunt? He's already a millionaire, he sold his share in a business for £14million in 2017 and certainly didn't pay 40% tax on that  https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-hunt-net-worth-chancellor-salary-explained-business-1976744

Yes that's what I meant by it's what he doesn't declare where the big money will be. What's he done with all his dosh? It's not gone into ISA's at only £20k a year.

[Yadda yadda yadda]

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/visualizing-rise-us-top-global-crude-oil-producer

Are the numbers in this article accurate?

USA producing 11.9 million barrels per day or 4,345 million barrels per year. Yet reserves are stated as 55,251. If correct there will surely be a very rapid reduction in US production starting soon. Russian reserves will last longer but are not great. If Saudi reserves are exaggerated then oil is going to be scarce next decade.

[Chewing Grass]

4 minutes ago, Yadda yadda yadda said:

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/visualizing-rise-us-top-global-crude-oil-producer

Are the numbers in this article accurate?

USA producing 11.9 million barrels per day or 4,345 million barrels per year. Yet reserves are stated as 55,251. If correct there will surely be a very rapid reduction in US production starting soon. Russian reserves will last longer but are not great. If Saudi reserves are exaggerated then oil is going to be scarce next decade.

Probably what is behind the Climate Terror, can't have the plebs panicking or the land of Saud going mad-max just yet.

[Pip321]

28 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

Why should it?

I have some investments with Vanguard, including a residual holding in index linked gilts. The performance in Vanguard shows that they are currently worth less than I paid. I went through the purchases and sales I had made and on my figures the cost of them is less than their current market price. 

As far as I'm concerned my current holding in index linked gilts is valued at more than my cost, in fact my cost is negative, they have cost me nothing. I've checked and double checked the numbers, Vanguard's calculation is based on average values at the times transactions took place. They can play with the numbers as much as they like, my simple mind is happy using a first in first out basis. A notional loss based on a sophisticated calculation assuming an opportunity cost based on current market price doesn't represent my reality.

Yep, vey individual circumstances apply to each of us and we therefore apply it as works for us....that is what I was saying with my bungalow example. 

My error though I wrote 'should' but I meant 'should' in terms of 'could' ie one of many options 🤣

[Democorruptcy]

I've no idea why but I've bought some woof woof at 62p.

[Yadda yadda yadda]

3 minutes ago, Chewing Grass said:

Probably what is behind the Climate Terror, can't have the plebs panicking or the land of Saud going mad-max just yet.

Always seemed the most plausible main reason. However, people respond best when leaders lead by example. If you want me to cut usage then the leaders need to slash their usage down to my levels. As they continue to greedily traverse the globe then do not expect many to heed their warnings. Working against the market by releasing emergency reserves, as the US did, is particularly dumb in this context.

[Yadda yadda yadda]

56 minutes ago, Democorruptcy said:

I've no idea why but I've bought some woof woof at 62p.

Lol. That price is almost too good to be true. If you're a buyer...

Edited February 12 by Yadda yadda yadda

[Pip321]

4 minutes ago, Democorruptcy said:

I've no idea why but I've bought some woof woof at 62p.

I bought some more Glencore for 383 on Friday.....like you, no idea why 😂

[Harley]

56 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

Why should it?

I have some investments with Vanguard, including a residual holding in index linked gilts. The performance in Vanguard shows that they are currently worth less than I paid. I went through the purchases and sales I had made and on my figures the cost of them is less than their current market price. 

As far as I'm concerned my current holding in index linked gilts is valued at more than my cost, in fact my cost is negative, they have cost me nothing. I've checked and double checked the numbers, Vanguard's calculation is based on average values at the times transactions took place. They can play with the numbers as much as they like, my simple mind is happy using a first in first out basis. A notional loss based on a sophisticated calculation assuming an opportunity cost based on current market price doesn't represent my reality.

I thought about this a while back and changed my spreadsheet to support the more onerous task of recording yields based on bought prices versus current income (using average price per instrument)v current yield).  Seems the correct approach to me.

Edited February 12 by Harley

[Democorruptcy]

22 minutes ago, Pip321 said:

I bought some more Glencore for 383 on Friday.....like you, no idea why 😂

I've bought another one even worse than that. I feel like I need to go out and buy some dog food now.

[Axeman123]

22 minutes ago, Harley said:

I thought about this a while back and changed my spreadsheet to support the more onerous task of recording yields based on bought prices versus current income (using average price per instrument)v current yield).  Seems the correct approach to me.

Surely every day you choose not to sell an asset the price paid resets to the new opportunity cost?

Taking an extreme hypothetical if I bought Harley Ltd shares @ 50p a fair while back which are now paying a 20p dividend I may be pleased as punch with my "40%" yield, but if the share price is now 500p that "40%" is really 4%. It seems a pointless metric to track it in the way you describe, the only purpose seemingly to flatter historic good buys at the expense of feeding poor information into decision making.

Each to their own of course etc. I can understand tracking it for certain shares with a special emotional attachment (eg DB with BATS) or as a bit of fun etc, but I would never want it near any serious analysis.

Edited February 12 by Axeman123
an not and

[Axeman123]

1 hour ago, sleepwello'nights said:

I have some investments with Vanguard, including a residual holding in index linked gilts. The performance in Vanguard shows that they are currently worth less than I paid. I went through the purchases and sales I had made and on my figures the cost of them is less than their current market price. 

Their figures will be calculated as per HMRC methodology for CGT purposes AIUI, so that they aren't giving users confusing information that they may use to incorrectly fill out a tax return.

1 hour ago, sleepwello'nights said:

As far as I'm concerned my current holding in index linked gilts is valued at more than my cost, in fact my cost is negative, they have cost me nothing. I've checked and double checked the numbers, Vanguard's calculation is based on average values at the times transactions took place. They can play with the numbers as much as they like, my simple mind is happy using a first in first out basis. A notional loss based on a sophisticated calculation assuming an opportunity cost based on current market price doesn't represent my reality.

Your own internal "management accounting" methodology is a personal matter.

[marceau]

2 hours ago, Cattle Prod said:

Excellent post, Marceau. And if you don't mind me adding:

So said an actual genius.

We have to stop putting "professors" etc on pedestals, if people only know how easy it is to breeze through academia, without actually practicing anything. As my wife say in early covid times after I junked "Prof" Fergusons models and relaxed (I noticed he was making assumptions such as people mix widely in Brownian motion, rather than clustering as we do in the real world, thats all nothing fancy) "Do you think you know more than an Imperial College Professor now?" 

"Yes, clearly".

It's a strange thing. The world used to admire the tinkerers, the experimenters, the practicioners, the doers. Now there is a kind of virtual reality where any old tool can badge themselves with a PhD, drift through academia (by being political, not brilliant) and spout off about any manner of things. They are invariably charlatans, don't trust any 'expert' who hasn't risked anything personally. In my business, the best brains are in industry and the academics and professors I have to interact with are second rate (with honourable exceptions) because the industry pays more, and screens out the charlatans at first interview. I suspect the same goes for mose industries, though as Marceau points out, accountants should be perhaps in a class all of their own. I always wondered what kind of person could possibly be attracted to that work. 

Just like the value and 'realness' of numbers, the value and 'realness' of credentials is decaying as the system decays. It will get a lot worse going forward.

The problem is the nature of the people that lie underneath, and it's this I keep returning to on here. It doesn't matter how good the laws are, the systems are, the data or measurements are. If they are controlled by and implemented by crooks, subverters, incompetents, dupes and retards then the results will be dogshit. The outputs reflect the inputs, not the 'rules'. The focus for change should be on the things we can reach - and that's not the US or EU, it's not 'da Joos' or the WEF, it's not the migrant horde, unpleasant though they are. It's the human refuse that sits in our national power structures; that's where the fire should be constantly directed, in whatever (legal) form available. Everything else is just a distraction, and this system is very good at producing distractions.

I do my best to look forward and one thing is certain to me - there will be no corrective mechanism arising from numbers, data, failure rates, or even fatalites as long as you have shit people at the controls. I'm sure you've seen plenty of this in your industry, I certainly saw it in mine, as over the course of 30 years it went from stern capable men with horn-rimmed glasses, to bullshitters called 'Dave' who liked to 'work hard and play hard'. The results were exactly what you'd expect, 30 years of ever-increasing, ever more pathetic failure. They got real good at PR to cover it all up though.

I caught a brief glimse of real UK before the people of fake UK replaced it. Fake UK sucks at everything. Fuck fake UK. The people of fake UK have to go, that's all that matters.

Edited February 12 by marceau

[No One]