FiNETIK – Asia and Latin America – Market News Network

Asia and Latin America News Network focusing on Financial Markets, Energy, Environment, Commodity and Risk, Trading and Data Management

Kroll LATAM Risk Report August 2010: Money Laundring, Mobile Banking, Mexican Security, Brazilian Litigations

MONEY LAUNDERING  Banks on High Alert

Throughout much of Latin America and the Caribbean, banks and other financial institutions are getting tougher on money laundering. For the bad guys, the game of cat-and-mouse continues, as they jump from one country to another, looking for the weakest link in the chain. GO TO FULL STORY

BANKING & TELECOM  Mexico The Regulator as Hero

Mexico’s unheralded decision to design rules for mobile banking is a major milestone on the road to including millions of unbanked and underserved Latin Americans in the financial system and the formal economy. GO TO FULL STORY

Mexico Corporate Security

An annual survey conducted by Kroll and the American Chamber reveals a higher sense of insecurity among business executives at multinational and Mexican corporations. The safety of employees and executives remains the top concern for corporate heads of security. GO TO FULL STORY

CORPORATE LAW Challenging Sham Litigation  in Brazil

A Brazilian regulatory agency takes on Germany’s Siemens for alleged anti-competitive practices in a case that is likely to set an important precedent for regulators and the courts in protecting free market competition.  GO TO FULL STORY

Source: KROLL, 06.08.2010

Filed under: Brazil, Central America, Chile, Colombia, Latin America, Mexico, News, Peru, Risk Management, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Alternative Assets in Latin America: Expert Panel Discusses June 15, 2010

Please join Alternative Latin Investor and Focus Point Press June 15th for a round table webinar of industry experts discussing alternative assets in Latin America.  http://www.alternativelatininvestor.com/Webinar/AlternativesAssetsInLatAm.pdf
Our Panel:

Brigitte Posch
PIMCO Executive Vice President and Portfolio Manager in its emerging markets group. Prior to joining PIMCO in 2008, she was a managing director and head of Latin American securitization and trading at Deutsche Bank.

Will Landers
CFA, Managing Director, Senior Portfolio Manager, is the portfolio manager for the BlackRock Latin America Fund, the BGF Latin America Fund, the BSF Latin American Opportunities Fund and the BlackRock Latin American Investment Trust PLC.

Andrew Cummings
Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Explorador Capital Management, LLC.

Eric Saucedo
Partner at Tricap Partners & Co., an investment banking firm focused on early-stage and middle market growth companies.

Topics:

-How alternative investment vehicles are faring in this recovery phase of the crisis
-What strategies performed the better than others
-What regions, sectors and vehicles are looking good for the coming year
-New players to the region who we should keep an eye on
-Growth of regulation in the alternative space
-Where new capital to Latin America is coming from
-Participation of both, foreign and domestic institutional investors
-How LatAm stacks up against other emerging markets
-The effect of Chavez on investor confidence in LatAm investments
-How sustainable is Brazil
-Countries to watch

Date: Tuesday, June 15
Time: 1pm EST
Price: 89.00USD
Register at http://www.regonline.com/Checkin.asp?EventId=866305

For more information please see,
http://www.alternativelatininvestor.com/Webinar/AlternativesAssetsInLatAm.pdf

Filed under: Argentina, Banking, Brazil, Central America, Chile, Colombia, FiNETIK Events, Latin America, Mexico, News, Peru, Services, Venezuela, Wealth Management , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jim Rogers’ Crystal Ball on Latin America and China

The legendary investment guru and long-time commodities booster shares his views on the global economy, the commodity bull market and how Mexico, Brazil, Colombia and other Latin American economies will hold up in 2010 and beyond.

Ian McCluskey, Miami, Kroll – Tendencias January 2010

Alabama-raised Jim Rogers is perhaps best known as co-founder, with George Soros, of the Quantum Fund, which made him a wealthy man by his mid-30’s. But that was 30 years ago. Since then, he has circumnavigated the globe on a motorcycle and in a souped-up yellow Mercedes, written several best-selling books, and made countless millions more investing and dishing out advice in his customary blunt, yet southern gentlemanly manner.

A regular face on financial news networks and at investment summits the world over, Rogers – his timing impeccable — pulled up stakes in Manhattan in late 2007, selling his Riverside Drive mansion for a record $15 million just as the real estate market began to sour. He now makes his home in Singapore, while running his business out of a law office in downtown Miami. Rogers spoke with Kroll Tendencias in late December during a brief stopover.

Like other soothsayers, Rogers is bullish on much of South America. He foresees a great future for Colombia, but is not smitten by Brazil’s long-term prospects. Rogers, whose Rogers’ International Commodities Index (RICI) provides a compass for investment funds worldwide, predicts that the commodity bull market has another 10 years or so to run its course. He expects gold to hit $2,000 an ounce and oil to reach $200 a barrel sometime this decade.

Here are some excerpts from our conversation.

The Global Economy At least in the first half of 2010, he global economy will be better than in 2008 or 2009, but I would worry about 2011 and 2012, because governments are printing and spending so much money. We’re still in an ongoing economic problem that started in 2000 or 2001. We’ll see it get better for a little while, but over the next couple of years, things will not be better than they were in 2007, and perhaps never will be, in some countries.

Commodity Prices If the world economy gets better, commodity prices will go up because of shortages and, if the economy does not get better, commodities will still go up because governments are printing so much money. Will commodities go up in 2010?  I have no idea. If there is some big surprise – if the U.K. goes bankrupt, if America invades Iran — everything will go down for a while. But whatever happens, I expect commodities to be among the best places to be in 2010.

Crises on the Horizon I don’t foresee any critical events that will impact commodities in 2010. I would expect there to be a currency crisis or semi-crisis in the next year or two. I don’t think many people expect it, except me.

Bubbles in the Making Some emerging markets may be over-priced, but that does not mean a bubble. That’s just being expensive. Every market gets over-priced one time or another in any given year. The only bubble I see developing anywhere in the world is in the U.S. bond market, the long-term government bond market. I cannot conceive of lending to the U.S. government for 30 years in U.S. dollars at 3, 4, 5 or even 6% interest. It’s just mind-boggling to me.

Outlook for Latin America I am much more optimistic about most of Latin America, especially South America, than I am about North America, with the exception of Canada. I am more optimistic about parts of Latin America than I am about much of Europe. And that’s partly because of all the natural resources. South America is a commodity story.

Gushing over Colombia It looks like there will be real peace in Colombia and, if so, that would be one of the phenomenal opportunities of our time, because they have it all. Colombia’s been at war for, what, 30 years, 40 years? Any time you can get to a country shortly after a war ends, there are usually enormous opportunities because everything is so cheap. There’s not much energy, not much capital, not much optimism, still a lot of malaise. I’ve seen it happen over and over again. And Colombia has natural resources – coal, oil, agriculture – and, of course, it could become a tourist destination again. Terrific country. (Note: Last summer, after Sri Lanka declared an end to its long-running civil war, Rogers paid a visit to look around. “I didn’t buy anything yet,” he says.)

Not Sold on Brazil Whenever commodities have done well, Brazil has done extremely well. People get excited about Brazil, they start talking about the new Brazil, but then the bear market comes back to commodities, and the same old thing happens – [Brazil] prints money, inflation, military problems, military coups – and I suspect that will happen again, perhaps in 20 years or so. Right now, of course, things are great. Brazil’s economy is commodity-based and commodities are going through the roof. Do not get me wrong; I’m just suggesting that I have heard this story before about the great new Brazil.

Brazil’s President Lula The country is run by a socialist, but nobody really wants to be a socialist any more, and the ones that do want to be rich socialists. [Lula] came in in 2002 just as the bull market was gathering steam, so he looks like a genius.

More Attractive South America
Chile is doing well, even Uruguay. I’m still optimistic about Peru, too. It’s got a lot of natural resources and a reasonably good government. It, too, had a long war. Look around South America and, other than Venezuela and perhaps Ecuador, there are better things happening than before. But, again, whenever there’s a boom in commodities, if you’re a commodity country, you look better, you feel better. There’s nothing like having lots of money in the bank, lots of income, to make countries feel better and more attractive.

Waiting for the Other Shoe to Drop in Argentina (Note: In a November 2000 article in AmericaEconomia magazine, Rogers famously announced that, after driving around Argentina for several weeks, he was liquidating his remaining investments in the country and encouraged everyone else to do the same.)  The good on the horizon in Argentina is that things have gotten so much worse over the last seven years or so, that we are getting closer to a bottom. I’m not putting a single peso back into Argentina and have not done so since the [the 2001 debt default] because their governments – I don’t know how they do it – it’s astonishing how bad they can be. I’m still waiting for the other shoe to drop — another default, another debt crisis or whatever it might be. Argentina is a great agricultural nation, but they tell their farmers “You can’t export your stuff.” What they desperately need is foreign exchange and yet they say “We’re not going to earn any foreign exchange.” It’s stupefying how hopeless they can be at times.

Wary about Mexico Mexico has some huge problems. Forty percent of its income comes from oil but the oil is depleting at a very rapid rate. And of the country’s 100 million people, they are mainly young people.  I suspect you’ll see serious problems in Mexico over the next decade because young people get agitated pretty easily. If the government faces serious economic problems because they don’t have any money any more, Mexico could boil over.

China’s LatAm Connection China sees huge shortages of raw materials developing. The Chinese are not just going to Latin America. They are all over Central Asia, Africa. They are buying up everything in sight, because they know what’s coming. They are going where the commodities are and are willing to pay proper prices. And, in most countries the Chinese don’t tell the locals what to do. They say “Here’s your money, now let’s develop those mines, or grow those cops.” Most countries seem to be welcoming the Chinese with open arms.

Commodities Trading in China (Note: China’s Dalian Commodities Exchange recently invited Rogers to become its first foreign advisor.)  The main problem with doing anything with the Chinese as far as exchanges are concerned, is that their currency is blocked. You cannot trade the currency. It’s illegal for me to buy and sell commodities in China because I am not Chinese. Even if a foreigner could invest on the commodities exchange in China, the currency is still blocked. Not many people are going to take their money to China if they can’t get it out. Some companies, like Cargill, have licenses to trade but there aren’t many. If and when China does open up to foreign investors, I suspect China would become the largest commodities trading exchange in Asia, perhaps even in the world.

Hugo Chavez’ Perennial Threat to Stop Selling Oil to the U.S. and Sell Instead to China Chavez could conceivably do it, but oil is oil. It’s not like we’re talking about Picassos. Even if Chavez told the U.S. “We’re not going to sell you oil any more,” who cares? We’ll buy it somewhere else. There would be a temporary dislocation in the market. Some refineries would suffer, some ships would suffer, but it would all be re-jiggered. Chavez has to sell his oil somewhere; he can’t simply stop selling. So that oil is still in the market. If he sells it to China instead of America, those who were selling to China would now sell to the America. Oil’s a fungible product.

The author: Ian McCluskey ( imccluskey@kroll.com ) is Editor of Kroll Tendencias, a monthly online thought leadership platform that focuses on business trends and business challenges in Latin America and the Caribbean. Articles are produced by Kroll consultants and other thought leaders in the region.

Source: Kroll – Tendencias January 2010

Filed under: Argentina, Asia, Brazil, Central America, Chile, China, Colombia, Latin America, Mexico, Peru, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

China Latin America: The decade of the Panda?

Before China can deliver on its promise of massive investments in Latin America, Chinese companies need to overcome their fear of Latin American volatility and political risk.  And Latin America needs to prepare more cross-border suitors to bridge the cultural divide.

John Price, Shanghai -  Kroll Tendencias, January 2010

When President Hu Jintao toured Latin American capitals in November 2004, he predicted that trade and investment flows between China and Latin America would both surpass $100 billion within a decade.  His forecasts turned out to be too conservative on trade but naively ambitious regarding the flow of Chinese investment to Latin America.  Two-way trade topped $140 billion in 2008 but, according to Shanghai’s SinoLatin Capital Analysis, accumulated Chinese investment in the region at the end of 2008 stood at a meager $12 billion, considerably less than the foreign direct investment into Latin America from the U.S. state of Michigan.

What the booming trade figures underscore is the growing dependency between China and resource-rich Latin America and the compelling logic of partnership.  The disappointing investment flow levels, on the other hand, reflect the many challenges in bringing together two utterly different cultural, political, business and legal systems, in spite of the economic imperative to do so.   The missing actor, whose absence has prevented the marriage of the Latin American suitor and the Chinese bride, is the proverbial marriage broker — the bi-cultural professional class of bankers, lawyers, and consultants that can construct and maintain cross-border investments.

It takes time to develop effective marriage brokers in global business, but progress is being made.  As his company’s name would suggest, Erik Bethel, principal of private equity firm Sino-Latin Capital in Shanghai, is one such cross-border broker.  Bethel recognizes the potential of Latin America to Chinese investors and is gambling his professional career on that promise.  Born in Miami to Cuban parents, educated in the Ivy League of U.S. colleges, Bethel honed his investment banking skills in Latin America, then decided to pursue the China dream and moved to Shanghai seven years ago.  At that time, Shanghai was still a would-be financial center, littered with cranes and covered in construction dust.

Since then Shanghai as boomed as a financial hub and Bethel has learned Mandarin.  More importantly, after searching high and low, Bethel has identified some of the elusive cast of dealmakers among China’s state-owned enterprises (SOEs), whom he must woo into investing in Latin America. “Unlike the traditional global financial centers of Wall Street or the City of London where big investors walk with the swagger of pseudo-celebrities,” Bethel explains, “the guy writing the check in China is likely to be a humble bureaucrat working diligently behind a non-descript desk.  He doesn’t frequent fancy clubs or high profile conferences.  Finding him is half the battle.”

Bethel and other pioneers like him may be the key to China making good on Hu Jintao’s investment forecast.  “My job,” says Bethel, “is to find that SOE investor, who by and large has a rudimentary, if not distorted, perception of Latin America, educate him on the opportunities and realities of doing business in the region, and hopefully convince him to get on a plane and go kick the tires on the great potential that exists for Chinese companies.  I realize that this is both a frightening and exciting prospect for someone, who may never have left China other than to go to Hong Kong, and who speaks only a smattering of English and no Spanish or Portuguese, but the opportunities are just too great to ignore.  Not to put too fine a point on it, but without someone like us undertaking this great effort, how on earth is Chinese money ever going to find its way to Latin America?”

Indeed, the challenge of bringing together Chinese capital and Latin American resources requires many more foot soldiers like Bethel in China.  From the Chinese investor’s perspective, Latin America still seems more distant and exotic than the many investment opportunities at home or within China’s continental sphere.  Nothing less than a full-press educational and public relations effort is needed inside China by all those with an interest in attracting Chinese capital to Latin America, be they diplomats, multi-latinas or the professional service firms bent on catching the wave of investment.

China, the new source of global investment capital

While many Chinese investors have yet to discover Latin America, no one now doubts the tectonic shift of capital flow coming out of China.  For the last 15 years, China has absorbed more direct investment than it exported as the global Fortune 1000 bet their futures on the Middle Kingdom.  When the year-end numbers are in, however, 2009 is expected to mark the first year of positive net outflow of investment capital for China, with over $100 billion in the form of direct foreign investment overseas.

China’s sudden emergence as the new FDI source on the world stage is explained in large part by its export-driven economic growth model. In order to maintain an undervalued currency and, with it, full employment — a political imperative — China must export $250 billion of capital each year to balance its excess trade and tourism surpluses.  For several years now, the easy solution was for the Central Bank of China to buy U.S. Treasury bills, thus helping to stoke the engine of U.S. consumerism (and Chinese exports) with record low U.S. interest rates.  That formula looks less attractive thanks to undisciplined U.S. monetary and fiscal management which represses U.S. interest rates and weakens the dollar, as the prospect of much higher U.S. inflation looms ahead.

The one-trick pony model of exporting to the over-indebted U.S. middle class is now passé.  China must look to other markets for its exports and simultaneously speed the rise of its internal consumer base. Middle income emerging markets like most of Latin America, South and North Africa, SouthEast Asia and Central Asia are in many ways more natural markets than the U.S. for China’s portfolio of mass-produced consumer goods.  Building bridges both politically and commercially in those markets requires outbound Chinese direct foreign investment. 

Garrigues, Spain’s largest commercial law firm, whose transactional practice follows closely the global flows of capital, set up an office in China in 2005, when Spanish firms had caught the China bug and were pouring in capital.  Francisco Soler Caballero, head of the Shanghai office, explains, however, that the firm’s business, like the international capital flows, has reversed course.  “We came to China to help Spanish companies enter the Chinese market,” says Soler. “We continue to help Spanish companies expand in China but the economic crisis in Spain has curbed the appetite of Spanish companies for costly Chinese acquisitions. Today, we find more cross-border opportunities with Chinese companies who want to expand abroad.  Having helped countless Spanish companies enter Latin America, we are now doing the same for Chinese SOEs.  It is a welcome but unpredicted turn of events for our China practice.”

Internally, China has all it needs to develop its economy save one important element, natural resources.  There is a growing sense of concern among Chinese economic planners that medium-term growth is threatened by an uncertain supply of raw materials, which presently China must import from foreign controlled firms.  When Japan and South Korea reached a similar impasse during their rise to developed-nation status, they chose to negotiate long-term supply contracts with oil, gas and mineral producers, carefully selecting downturn years to lock in attractive pricing over 10-30 years.  With their strengthening currencies and relatively low commodity prices, such a strategy made sense for Japan and Korea in the late 80s and 90s. Given China’s obsession with maintaining its cheap currency, its resulting excess liquidity and the likelihood of continued elevated pricing with commodities, it makes far more sense for China to venture out and buy operational control of its raw material supply.  

In 2008, China had 19.6 billion barrels of proven oil reserves and 2.3 trillion cubic meters of proven natural gas reserves (14th and 16th largest reserves in the world, respectively).  But given China’s vast energy demands, China still had to import 55% of its crude oil consumption in 2008, according to the China National Information Center.

By 2020, Chinese natural gas production is expected to fall short of consumption by 50-100 billion cubic meters, which explains why PetroChina went on a recent shopping trip to Australia in search of gas production assets.

Even more dramatic are China’s shortages of metals and minerals. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, Chinese reserves of copper, manganese, and nickel are 5.4%, 8%, and 2.5% of the world’s total, while China accounts for 27%, 48% and 22% of the world’s total consumption of these metals.

Even in the politically sensitive terrain of food supply where China spends billions subsidizing its agricultural base, the country cannot avoid a reliance on imports.  Soybean is a good example.  China currently imports over 60% of its annual 50 million tons of consumption.  In terms of forestry, China is one of the largest importers of wood pulp and industrial round wood (7.4 million tons and 38.6 million tons in 2007, respectively) not only to satisfy the domestic market but also the export-driven demand of its paper and furniture industries.

Chinas Risk Adversity

Latin America has the good fortune of having many of the top producers of the resources that China so badly needs.  And there is clearly no shortage of capital in China.

New suburban homes in the Pudong district of Shanghai are sold before they are built, at a cost of $3-$5 million for a 3,000 square foot, two-floor home in a gated community.  China’s own economic stimulus package includes vast, and some say, opulent infrastructure projects.  The 30 kilometers of high speed rail track from central Pudong to Shanghai’s airport carries its passengers up to 430 km/hr for a total of 8 minutes at a construction cost of almost $2 billion.  If Chinese money can find its way into such questionable investments, why can’t Latin America attract more Yuan to its compelling array of resource companies and infrastructure opportunities?

The small and nascent talent pool of service professionals that can bridge the regions may be the most important reason for the disconnect thus far, but equally important are Latin America’s lingering perception problems.

Predictability, which the Chinese value above all else, is not a traditional Latin American virtue.  Chinese investors are disheartened by Latin America’s history of volatility.  Rather than seeing currency fluctuation as an opportunity like many savvy Latin American investors do, the Chinese loath the uncertainty that it adds to their forecasts.  Many Latin American economies have made tremendous strides to curb currency volatility and build international reserves through floating currency regimes and fiscal discipline.  Chinese investors need to be enlightened about this change and to become better versed in the science of currency hedging.  They also need to learn how to navigate and mitigate the legal and political risks of doing business in Latin America.

At home, large Chinese SOEs can rely on the rule of law or their own political power to manipulate the rule of law to ensure legal and regulatory certainty.  When the same companies look abroad, they tend to prefer one of three models; a sound legal environment, like Australia, Canada, the U.S. or Europe, where their investments are defendable through the courts; or small, undemocratic economies like the Sudan and Burma, where they can exercise political influence to their liking; or satellite economies like Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan where they enjoy political sway and legal protections.

The perception in China of Latin America is that the region offers neither the protections of a transparent legal system nor the ability to exercise unperturbed political influence.  Some of the largest mergers and acquisitions to date in the region have been via the purchase of foreign-listed companies, such as Corriente Resources (copper mining) and EnCana (oil and gas), both Canadian companies with significant investments in Latin America.  In this respect, it is the legal community that must lead the effort to illustrate the defendable legal rights of foreign investors in Latin America’s more advanced economies and differentiate those from the list of countries in the region where legal risk remains a serious obstacle.

Related to legal risk is the acute Chinese sensibility to political risk.  Latin America’s political dynamic is frankly too fluid and complex for most Chinese investors to grasp.  The need to campaign from the left and govern from the right, which is Latin America’s political hallmark, can prove both alarming and confounding to Chinese investors.  The relatively decentralized governance of most Latin American countries adds another source of anxiety to Chinese investors, who must get used to idea that in Latin America they are as vulnerable to the vagaries of local politics and local political players like labor unions, NGOs, and indigenous advocates, as they are to the whims of the executive branches or national legislatures.  China learned this lesson when Chinese copper giant Zijin faced violent labor conflict with its Rio Blanco mine investment in Peru.

When it comes to political risk, the Chinese need to alter their thinking, not just to deal with Latin America, but with most countries in which they wish to invest.  China’s lack of understanding of political risk cost them dearly in the U.S. when in 2005 the China National Offshore Oil Company (CNOOC) was denied by the U.S. government in its bid to purchase Unocal, subsequently gobbled up by Chevron.  China miscalculated again when telecom equipment maker Huawei was turned down in its quest of 3Com.

Perhaps Latin America’s most difficult image problem is that of physical insecurity. In a country like China where physical violence toward the business class is unheard of, where guns cannot be owned by its citizens, Latin America is the wild west by comparison.

It is one thing for a company to visit Latin America to sell goods or buy raw materials.  In either case, the risk of physical violence intruding on the negotiations is minimal.  But in the case of Chinese foreign investment, which typically relies on securing Chinese managerial control through the transfer of dozens, if not hundreds of employees from China to the foreign operation, the risk is considerably greater.  The internationally readied managerial labor pool in China is very thin, such that sending people to an “unsafe” environment is not an easy internal sell for many Chinese firms.  Overcoming the security hurdle requires a dual effort.  Latin Americans need to more openly address their security shortcomings when presenting their countries, regions and companies as investment destinations.  Meanwhile, Chinese investors need to embrace security risk by better understanding it and learning how to mitigate such risks through preventive measures and insurance products.

In November 2008, the economic imperative of Chinese natural resource investment in Latin America received a boost from China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs when it published in its Latin American regional policy paper a centerpiece mandate titled “Go Outward” (走出去).  In China, government directives still matter because it is the government controlled SOEs (typically 70% government, 30% private ownership) that naturally lead the charge of outbound foreign direct investment.  These vast oligarchy-like enterprises have the capital (or privileged access to it) and the need to invest in their supply base.

High-level policy embracement of a “Buy Latin America” strategy was slow in developing in part because China always considered it an untouchable zone of influence of the U.S.  That fear has evidently subsided or been usurped by the sheer economic imperative of securing natural resource supplies.  The recent push by the government has prompted a new sense of urgency to invest in Latin American resource companies and resource related infrastructure projects.

The onus now lies upon vested interests to build the bridges that will bind this vital, though still awkward, partnership.  Latin Americans, with the help of service professionals, especially investment bankers, private equity funds, law firms, risk consultants and insurance firms, must step up their efforts to educate their future Chinese partners on how to evaluate, navigate the opportunities and mitigate the risks of investing in  Latin America.

Source: Kroll- Tendencias January 2010

Filed under: Argentina, Brazil, Central America, Chile, China, Colombia, Energy & Environment, Latin America, Library, Mexico, News, Peru, Risk Management, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Latin America Exchanges: Colombia Stocks Lead

Colombia leads Latin American stocks in growth the past decade and last year, but Brazil remains the volume champion.

Colombia’s benchmark IGBC stock index grew by 927.9 percent the past decade. That was more than any other Latin American stock index and compares with a 9.3 percent decline in the Dow Jones Index in the same period, according to Economatica.

Colombia’s stock transactions also were the best performer in Latin America last year, according to a separate analysis from Economatica. The average value of transactions in Colombia fell by 2.3 percent in 2008, which was lower than all other countries in the region and compares with the total Latin America decline of a 13.5 percent.

Brazil’s Ibovespa index, which has been among the global leaders in recent years, grew by 301.3 percent in the ten year period.

Last year, Brazil’s exchanges posted an average of $2.4 billion in stock transactions, a decline of 13.6 percent compared with 2008, according to Economatica.

Brazilian companies — led by oil giant Petrobras, mining giant Vale and banking giant ItauUnibanco – dominated stock transactions in Latin America last year. Nine of the ten most traded stocks were from Brazilian companies. The other one was from Mexico-based America Movil, Latin America’s largest wireless operator.

Mexico’s IPC index grew by 350.5 percent in the ten year period. Last year, Mexico’s stock transactions averaged $440.1 million, a 13.9 percent decline.

The Caracas Stock Index (IBC) grew by 916.5 percent in the ten year period, but last year stocks traded in Venezuela saw their average daily value drop by 29.5 percent. That was the second-worst result in Latin America.

The worst performer last year was Argentina, where the value of average daily transactions fell by 54.5 percent. During the previous decade, the country’s Merval index increased 321.3 percent.
The Lima Stock Index (IGBVL) was among the leading growth winners in the past decade, with an increase of 671.8 percent. Last year, the average value of Peruvian stocks fell by 21 percent.
Chile’s IPSA index grew by 218.8 percent in the past decade. Last year, Chile’s daily average stock transactions fell by 3.6 percent, which was the second-best performance in Latin America, according to Economatica data.

Source: Latin Business Cronicle, 07.01.2010

The study took into account currency fluctuations in the main Latin American markets between December 31, 1999 and December 31, 2009, Efe reported.

The stock exchange with the greater profitability in the decade was Colombia’s, with a 927.9 percent increase, followed by Venezuela (916.5 percent), Peru (671.8 percent), Mexico (350.5 percent), Argentina (321.6 percent), Brazil (301.3 percent) and Chile (218.8 percent).

Source: El Universal, 07.01.2010

Filed under: Argentina, BM&FBOVESPA, BMV - Mexico, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Exchanges, Latin America, Mexico, News, Peru, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Energy: Don’t Believe Long-Term Oil Forecasts

On 4 October 2009, The Wall Street Journal ran an article World Need for Oil Expected to Ease (subscription might be required), where the author, Spencer Swartz, wrote:

The International Energy Agency next week will make a “substantial” downward revision to its long-term forecast for global oil demand, a person familiar with the matter said, marking the second year running the group has slashed its view of the world’s thirst for oil.

If demand pessimists are correct, future increases in the price of crude could be damped as weaker consumption stretches world oil supply by billions of barrels. Various analyst estimates maintain that the roughly 2% a year average growth rate in world oil consumption seen earlier this decade — the biggest reason for crude prices hitting a record $147 a barrel last year — may turn out to be an anomaly and that annual growth in the neighborhood of 0.5% to 1% is more the norm.

The reality is that no one knows what the long term future holds. The IEA itself struggles with the Bull versus Bear oil outlook. Ask yourself, how many pundits foresaw the mess we are in now and anticipated the dramatic easing of oil demand?

Sure, one can gather relevant information and make a reasonable guess as to oil demand next year and the year after that. But after five years, the potential paths of demand growth become unwieldy. How will economic growth be sustained over the next five years? Will the OECD countries lag emerging countries? Will China and the rest of Asia power ahead and create substantial demand? If Asian countries do power ahead and create many millions of middle class citizens, will they demand their own vehicles and tickets on jet planes to see the world? Will Brazil and other South American countries enjoy strong economic growth? Will the Middle East be stable over this period? Will Iraq resume its full production capabilities? As you see, one can begin asking any number of questions that are impossible to answer with an accuracy or certainty and that might have a major bearing on demand or supply or both.

What do we know? We know that for a long time, oil prices were usually within $20-$30 real per barrel. Now those prices are laughable. No reasonable person expects the world to return to those prices any time soon. Many major oil fields around the world are in decline. Oil companies are searching in more remote and sometimes more unfriendly regions of the world to develop further existing fields and to discover new fields. And, the rise of oil prices has given new prominence to some national oil companies. A sample list, though incomplete, of companies include: Gazprom OAO (OGZPY.PK), Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A., and Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. – Petrobras (PBR).

If we were to accept the 1% annual growth of oil demand mentioned in the WSJ quote for a long duration, what would that mean or imply? A child born tomorrow will see by her seventieth birthday a doubling of daily world oil production from about 85 million barrels per day to 170 million barrels per day. Moreover, during her seventy years, the world will have produced more during that time than the total cumulative amount prior to her birth. Call me a skeptic, but I am unable to see where we would find that much additional oil to produce at such high rates for such a sustained period.

To be clear, neither the article nor the IEA is suggesting that we endure a 1% growth forever. Rather, I wanted to use this seemingly small innocuous number of only 1% growth to draw attention to its implication. If the long term growth were 2%, then in 35 years the daily world oil production would double to 170 million barrels per day and the oil produced during those 35 years would exceed the prior total cumulative amount of oil produced.

I recommend two excellent sources of information to learn more about oil, oil demand, oil prices and various policy initiatives:

  • Statistical Review of World Energy from BP p.l.c. (BP). I found the link to the Adobe pdf document toward to the bottom on its homepage.
  • Monthly Oil Market Report from the International Energy Agency. The link is to the webpage that hosts the document that is released two weeks after the initial release date. Subscribers receive immediate access through a different link.

Both documents are extremely helpful. I find the BP document provides concise information and historical context. The IEA document provides the agency’s latest thinking and forecasts.

As the world struggles to find new sources of oil, there will be dramatic changes. I have already discussed some questions we should ask ourselves as we contemplate future oil demand growth. Of course, many more questions need to be considered. And I have indicated that some national oil companies have gained strength and prominence with higher oil demand and prices. As investors, we should also think about what long term oil demand growth means for oil sands companies such as Suncor Energy, Inc. (SU) and Canadian Oil Sands Trust (COSWF.PK), and for large multinationals such as ConocoPhillips Company (COP), Chevron Corporation (CVX), and Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM).

As demand continues to rise, I am curious what will happen. Will scientific breakthroughs help? How will the world cope with the environmental consequences? How will people adapt to possibly much higher prices? How will countries and regions change because of either having or lacking domestic oil supplies? If the world does experience higher prices, what are the implications for global world trade? And do higher prices imply that people will travel less and have less of an understanding of other regions? These questions are just a small sample of what investors should begin considering.

A few years ago, Professor Bartlett gave a compelling lecture, captured in a series of YouTube videos, to some students at the University of Colorado. In his lecture, he discussed oil demand growth. The lecture starts a bit slow; however, when you reach the latter part of the third video, you’ll see how the prior information is relevant to his discussion on oil. In other words, because they are important, don’t skip the initial video segments and jump to the third. I urge you to watch the complete video series.

And after you’ve watched the videos, ask yourself, “What time is it?” This question will make sense once you’ve seen the videos.

When I initially saw the WSJ article, I was drawn by the long term forecasts. My personal bias is that most longer term things in life are difficult, if not impossible, to forecast with any reasonable degree of accuracy. Then as I read the article, I saw the 1% growth number, which by itself seems very innocuous. But if you think about what 1% growth means over a long and sustained period, you quickly realize there are going to be changes. Moreover, the world has already witnessed a significant shift in oil prices over the last decade. We are no longer in our prior historical norm of $20-$30 per barrel. Some might argue that we are now in unchartered territory. As part of that possible unchartered territory, I wanted you to think about some larger questions. The questions mentioned in this article are just off the top of my head without much thought. I am sure you can think of many more. And last, I wanted to draw your attention to Professor Bartlett’s excellent lecture. His lecture will make you think about oil demand (and others) growth differently. I hope this article causes you to further your own research.

Source: Seeking Alpha, 08.11.2009

Filed under: Brazil, China, Energy & Environment, Mexico, News, Risk Management, Venezuela, Vietnam , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mexico the 2nd largest exporter of high technology to the U.S.

Mexico October 30, 2009. Mexico was the country with largest exports of high technology products to the U.S. during the first half of 2009, overtaken by China only.

According to the TechAmerica Foundation report, an association of worldwide innovative companies, Mexico has become the second most important supplier country for the United States.

Only in the early months of this year, the U.S. imported goods from Mexico for an amount exceeding $51.1 billion dollars, almost half of what China sells to the country.

Other U.S. suppliers were the European Union, with $34.4 billion dollars, Japan with $30.3 billion dollars, and Malaysia with 22.5 billion dollars.

In counterpart, the main markets for U.S. technology products were, in that order, the 1.European Union, 2.Canada and 3.Mexico. The market purchased goods worth $27.7 billion dollars during the first half of this year.

TechAmerica Foundation report notes that the fastest growing markets for U.S. exports are Brazil, Colombia, Belgium, Costa Rica , Venezuela, Argentina and Chile, in that order.

Source:E-Mid, 30.10.2009

Filed under: Argentina, Asia, Brazil, Central America, Chile, China, Colombia, Latin America, Mexico, News, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , ,

Latin America’s Pending Fire Sale

With multinational firms beating a retreat, local exporters under siege and plenty of overleveraged multi-latinas, private equity groups are licking their lips at the prospect of acquiring Latin American assets at fire-sale prices. Let the bidding begin.

John Price, Miami original article here

ImageExperienced Latin American investors understand that today’s financial crisis will present discounted buying opportunities to those with the authority and boldness to quickly negotiate an acquisition and the cash to pay for it. Six years of rapid growth in the region invited a lot of new players into the market, overcrowding supply in several sectors. Tight credit, faltering demand and falling prices put to the test the viability of many players, particularly recent entrants who may have overpaid to compete in the region. As a result, several sectors are overdue for some consolidation.

Different from the M&A dynamic of an expanding Latin America, acquisition opportunities present themselves very quickly in a down market, triggered this time around by exiting multinationals or over-indebted multi-latinas. After building a significant presence in Argentina, Brazil and Chile, Ryder Logistics, for example, was poised to enter the Colombian market in 2008 when global trade flows slowed and then collapsed, sparking a retreat by the company to its core NAFTA market position. Ryder’s exit from South America was swift and muted.

The financial need to focus on core and profitable markets is a strong motive for global firms to exit from Latin America, especially if they are recent arrivals still nursing a developing investment. Another motive may be the need to raise cash to repair a damaged balance sheet. RBS has been ordered by its new majority shareholder, the British Treasury, to shed assets, so it plans to sell operations of its subsidiary, ABN AMRO, in Argentina, Venezuela, Chile and Colombia. Retreating multinationals are the first and possibly the most attractively priced acquisition opportunities presented in the region.

The financial crisis hit Latin American markets anywhere from three to nine months after first striking in the U.S. It is only now that the need to consolidate in over-supplied sectors in Latin America is becoming evident. The first industries to feel the pain of falling demand are the region’s burgeoning commodity exporters. Junior mining companies in Peru and metal manufacturers in Argentina and Chile all share in common a rapid fall from grace as prices collapsed and their debt servicing costs skyrocketed thanks to scarce corporate credit. Cut off from capital markets, junior mining companies are busy flogging their new exploration properties in South America to the handful of cash-rich mining majors. But there are too many junior mining companies looking for too few majors, leaving many stranded and ready to sell to financial investors at discounted prices.

In Mexico, auto parts exporters have watched their U.S. customer demand collapse as two of three U.S. major car companies faced bankruptcy. The top 10 Mexican auto parts product category exports are anticipated to drop 50% from $53 billion in 2008 to $26 billion in 2009. The capital intensive industry cannot survive intact under the scenario of losing half of its revenue. During the last few years, many of Mexico’s auto parts exporters were able to borrow in dollars at historically competitive rates, assured of demand in the U.S. Now, with a devalued currency and rising corporate debt pricing, the Mexican auto parts sector is under attack from the revenue and cost sides of the ledger.

Across Latin America, trade with the U.S. will decline close to 40% in value and an estimated 10%-15% in volume. That will place enormous pressure on international cargo players, particularly air cargo in and out of South America, as well as cross-border trucking between the U.S. and Mexico. Latin American players in the space grew market share over the last six years, their expansion fuelled by access to cheap debt. They face the same margin squeeze as auto parts exporters with falling demand, weakened prices and growing finance costs.

After retreating multinationals and exporters under siege, the third source of distressed assets evolving from this crisis will be capital intensive service sector providers that took on too much debt too quickly in their effort to grow over the last six years. Retailing, consumer credit, construction, and tourism are all sectors that enjoyed spectacular growth and intra-regional investment in recent years.

Consumer credit grew by an average of over 20% per year between 2000 and 2007 (see Birth of a New Banking Model, Kroll Tendencias, April 2007). Construction grew on the heels of government spending while fiscal budgets in most countries expanded at 10%+ per year over the last five years. Latin American retailers like Pao de Açucar, Falabella and Soriana all fought back against the wave of foreign retailer investment and staked their claims, particularly in middle markets. Latin American hoteliers grew in multiple segments and now face falling demand from both international and domestic tourists. All of these industries were over built and face consolidation. The trigger point will be expiring debt contracts that force these over-leveraged players to shed non-core assets.

Due Diligence Is Key

All three areas of acquisition opportunity reward speed and boldness, the operational advantages of private equity and venture capital, as well as wealthy individuals in the region. The private equity sector raised record cash from 2006 to 2008 and is waiting patiently on the sidelines for the fire sale to commence. Strategic investors can join the party of buyers as well, but must take pre-emptive steps if they are to compete. They will need to line up funding from head office ahead of negotiations, much like a first time house buyer. Most importantly, strategic buyers need to identify targets with sufficient time to conduct reputational due diligence before engaging in negotiations, when financial and legal due diligence activities usually begin. In a time-compressed buying process, due diligence must be swift and pre-emptive.

Due diligence must also be thorough. Fire sales are fraught with risk because the seller is operating from a position of weakness and has every incentive to hide potential liabilities in the hope of pushing through a quick sale that preserves maximum value of its assets. Certainly, the ability to purchase discounted assets allures buyers, but the degree of liability can often overshadow the rewards. The most common liability of cash-strapped companies is the non-payment of taxes, particularly value added sales taxes, a form of tax evasion that is a criminal offense for business owners and board members in some Latin American jurisdictions. Other liabilities include unpaid worker wages, AML non-compliance, FCPA non-compliance, as well as internal fraud. Understanding these issues ahead of negotiation may be the key to purchasing at fair market value. Knowing the full extent of any liabilities may be vital to avoiding a regretful acquisition.

The Author: John Price ( // <![CDATA[// <![CDATA[
var prefix = 'ma' + 'il' + 'to';
var path = 'hr' + 'ef' + '=';
var addy48825 = 'jwprice' + '@';
addy48825 = addy48825 + 'kroll' + '.' + 'com';
document.write( '' );
document.write( addy48825 );
document.write( '' );
//\n
// -->]]>
jwprice@kroll.comjwprice@kroll.com// <![CDATA[// <![CDATA[
document.write( '' );
// ]]>This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it // <![CDATA[// <![CDATA[
document.write( '' );
// ]]>
) is Managing Director of Business Intelligence at Kroll Latin America and based in Miami.

Source: Kroll Tendencias Infoamericas, August 2009


(Note: This article first appeared in the Latin American PE VC Report, the official newsletter of the Latin American Venture Capital Assoc. (LAVCA). You can access the report at www.latinamericapevcreport.com .)

Filed under: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Latin America, Mexico, News, Peru, Services, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , ,

China and Latin America; the new conquistadors – Update 1

When Hugo Chávez first met Barack Obama at the Summit of the Americas in April, the Venezuelan leader could not resist pressing one of his favourite tracts into the US president’s hands. Eduardo Galeano’s Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent, a staple of student radical literature, tells the story of a continent that has long seen itself as the victim of foreign exploitation. Mr Chávez, though, may have given the book to the wrong leader. It should have been given to the Chinese.

China’s links to the region are deepening fast. Indeed, if the mooted $15bn bid for Repsol YPF’s Argentine oil unit by China’s state-owned energy companies CNOOC and CNPC comes off, South America will also be the recipient of China’s largest outward investment to date. Bilateral trade with the region has risen 10-fold since 2000, reaching $143bn last year. China is now Brazil’s largest trade partner. It takes almost three-quarters of the iron ore produced by Vale, the world’s largest iron ore company. It has been a bigger buyer of Chilean copper than the US, and it is already a major investor in Venezuelan oil – even as Caracas has nationalised several western concerns.

FiNETIK recommends:

    Beijing formalised this heightened level of Latin attention last November. In a policy statement, it talked amicably of “win-win” strategies, and mutual political respect. Deeds followed words, with a renminbi currency swap extended to Argentina worth $10bn, a $1bn pledge to invest in an Ecuadorean hydroelectric plant and, in the Caribbean, loan packages to Jamaica and continued trade credits to Cuba. Meanwhile, Chinese light manufacturers eat their Latin American counterparts for lunch. A few years ago, the most oft-cited economic statistic in Mexico was that more sombreros were made in China than at home.

    Filed under: Argentina, Asia, Brazil, Chile, China, Energy & Environment, Latin America, Mexico, News, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    Venezuela announces joint oil venture with Vietnam

    President Hugo Chavez’s government says it is forming a joint oil company with Vietnam to exploit Venezuela’s heavy crude.

    State-run Petroleos de Venezuela SA, or PDVSA, will cooperate with Vietnam’s state oil and gas monopoly, PetroVietnam, on oil exploration and production in Venezuela, according to a presidential decree in the Official Gazette issued Friday.  The company, to be called PetroMacareo SA, will operate in Venezuela’s eastern Orinoco River basin, and may also participate in transporting and selling oil, the decree said.  Under Venezuelan law, PDVSA’s partners may hold only a minority stake in oil production projects.

    During a visit from Vietnamese President Nguyen Minh Triet in November, the two leaders discussed the possibility of building an oil refinery in Vietnam, and of cooperating with the Asian nation to build oil tankers. Chavez’s government has been forming joint oil ventures with allies ranging from Russia to China as Venezuela aims to diversify its oil clientele.

    The United States remains the top buyer of oil from Venezuela, which is the fourth-largest oil supplier to the US.

    Source: Forbes, 25.05.2009  click here for original article

    Filed under: Energy & Environment, News, Venezuela, Vietnam , , , , , ,

    China and Venezuela Launch Joint Oil Venture

    BEIJING – State-owned PetroChina and Petroleos de Venezuela SA, or PDVSA, have formed a joint venture to pursue exploration and production projects in Venezuela, the official Xinhua news agency reported Wednesday.

    China’s largest oil company will hold a 40 percent stake in the joint venture, PetroChina CEO Jiang Jiemin told company directors. PetroChina also approved the signing of a loan totaling 100 billion yuan ($14.7 billion) to fund foreign operations in 2009.

    “The drop in oil prices on the international market represents a special opportunity for expanding horizons,” PetroChina said.

    PetroChina and PDVSA plan to form two other joint ventures that will focus on transporting crude and developing two refineries, one of which will be in the southern province of Canton, Jiang said. The executive did not provide specific figures on the agreements reached with PDVSA.

    PetroChina, the world’s second-largest oil company in terms of market capitalization, trailing only U.S. behemoth ExxonMobil Corporation, expects to produce 40 million tons of Venezuelan petroleum annually, Jiang said.

    The joint venture created by PetroChina and PDVSA will allow the oil companies to work together and cut exploration and production costs.

    Source: Xinhua 13.05.2009, LatinAmerica Harald Tribune 18.05.2009

    Filed under: Asia, China, Energy & Environment, Latin America, News, Venezuela , , , , , , , , ,

    The Economic Outlook: 2012 and beyond

    To see into the future of our economies, with some small degree of certainty, we have to pay attention to what is happening around us and what we do.  American Cronical 22.02.2009 full article

    But to get an idea of how the future will be, one has to have a real picture of the present. This is important since a false picture will present us with false alternatives, on which we act which in turn will result in unexpected outcomes (i.e., future that we are not prepared for).

    It is not always easy to see through all the false pictures and data that we are constantly presented with. For example, in Norway on February 18th, the real-estate association came out with the statement that the housing crisis was almost over and the bottom was reached. This was plastered all over the place. Next day on February 19 th, the Norwegian Centre for Statistics came out with its own forecast; stating that house prices will continue to fall for the next year and that situation will deteriorate further.

    It was clear to some of us that the real-estate association was putting out false information to drum-up business for its members. But if banks, industrialists, and even politicians also send out false and misleading information, then the average person will make decisions that may be contrary to his or her best interests.

    Most of us do not have the time, energy, or even the necessary knowledge to gather and sift through large amount of data. We rely on news media, and the experts to make most of our decisions. Until last year, very few people were talking about the tremendous crisis that was well under way; even though as early as 2006, there were clear signs that the economy was under tremendous pressure.

    In this article I will try to provide you with a picture of the present situation and then try to extrapolate based on the current policies adopted by various governments, what the near future will look like.

    The current economic situation

    Let me tell you in no uncertain terms that we are facing a synchronised global economic depression and I am not the only one that is saying this. In early February, the International Monetary Fund’s chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn said the world’s advanced economies — the U.S., Western Europe and Japan — are “already in depression”. Gordon Brown, the UK’s Prime Minister also used the word “depression” to describe the global economy, although his aides quickly said it was a slip of the tongue.

    The politicians and others of course avoid using the term “depression” for fear of creating a panic; instead they use terms such as “severe recession” or “one of the most serious financial crises since the great depression”, etc. But they all are saying the same thing, we are in a depression and all the available data support this. An important fact to remember is that this depression is synchronised and this synchronicity has been made possible by the globalization and accompanying deregulation; the very things that were making workers poorer and the rich, richer.

    Now the chickens have come home to roost. All economies are now suffering. Such promising economies as Iceland’s saw its GDP shrink by 10%, while the success show case of Europe, Ireland, had its GDP shrink by 6%. Germany, the euro zone’s biggest economy shrank by 2.1% in the three months to December, seconded by Italy, which suffered a 1.8% drop in GDP. The French economy also contracted by 1.2% while IMF put Spain on its vulnerable list. UK ‘s GDP has also suffered and is forecasted to contract by 3.5% in 2009.

    The misery list includes most of the Eastern European countries as well with some such as Ukraine set to experience severe contraction. According to IMF Ukraine’s GDP will shrink by 8 to 10% in 2009. The Russian economic growth is also set to fall. According to the Russian Deputy Economic Development Minister Andrei Klepach the forecast for the Russian economy has worsened to a 2.2-percent contraction in GDP.

    Japan’s economy, the second largest in the world, contracted by 12.7 per cent on a seasonally adjusted annualised basis in the fourth quarter and is set to contract by. According to the Taiwanese government, Taiwan’s GDP will shrink by 3% in 2009. Another big economy in Asia is Korea. According to S&P sovereign ratings, Asia’s fourth-largest economy will contract by about 3.5 percent this year. All other South East Asian economies are reporting severe slow down or outright contraction except China.

    According to National Bureau of Statistics of China, by comparing the fourth quarter 2007 to that of the fourth quarter 2008, China had achieved a 6.8 percent growth in 2008. However, many believe that this figure is misleading and that the Chinese are hiding the extent of the economic contraction of its economy. They point out that energy consumption in China has substantially been reduced. This could not have happened without a marked slowing down of the economy.

    According to the article published in The Epoch Times (17 Feb 09) “Economists at the Standard Chartered Bank estimate China’s growth rate to be around 1 percent. Morgan Stanley analysts estimate it to be at 1.5 percent. This is much lower than the CCP reported 15 percent for the first quarter of 2007. According to economists at Merrill Lynch, the sequential growth rate of fourth quarter of 2008 was zero percent.”

    Middle Eastern countries have also been severely affected by the financial crisis. The revenue from their major source of income, oil, has fallen at an incredible rate. Oil prices that were around 120 to 140 dollars last year have come down to around 30 to 40 dollars this year. Every country has slashed its expenditure with the accompanying slowing growth. For example recently UAE was forced to halt construction projects worth $582 billion or fully 45% of all projects. A recent report in New York Times (11th Feb. 09) paints a grim picture of the situation in Dubai. The report states that ” with Dubai’s economy in free fall, newspapers have reported that more than 3,000 cars sit abandoned in the parking lot at the Dubai Airport, left by fleeing, debt-ridden foreigners (who could in fact be imprisoned if they failed to pay their bills)”. Iranians, Saudis, Iraqis, Kuwaitis and others have also been forced to slow down or freeze many projects. One must not forget that many of these countries’ petro-dollars are re-circulated back into the US and European economies. Those funds are drying-up fast.

    Turkey sitting between the Europe and Middle East is also suffering. Turkey has the largest GDP in the Islamic world. Turkey’s GDP was 750 billion in 2008, the GDP of Saudi Arabia was 600 billion dollar for the same period. A once dynamic economy is now negotiating with IMF for help.

    Having surveyed most of the economic landscape of Europe and Asia, we can now look at the world largest economy, the US. The US economy is in a terrible shape, with all sectors going through severe depression. Housing market has completely collapsed. The auto industry is going bankrupt. The banking sector is alive only by the grace of the government handouts. The entertainment industry (TV and film industry excluded) is facing severe problems and unemployment is increasing rapidly. The Federal Reserves’ forecast for 2009 shows a contraction of 0.5 to 1.3 percent of the GDP with official unemployment rising to 8.5 or 8.8 percent. Here one should note that this official unemployment rate does not present a true picture, since all those who give-up registering with the unemployment office or are barely working (part-time workers, etc) are not counted as unemployed.

    The missing engine of growth

    Before we look at the future development we have to remember that there are four factors that power an economy: consumers, investors, government, and a favourable trade balance. Some economies such as China rely on favourable trade balance and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) for their growth. For example according to the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, from 1990 to 2007, China received $748.4 billion in FDI. At the same time, since its economic liberalization, China has recorded consistent trade surpluses with the world. For example China has registered trade surpluses of $102 billion for 2005, $177.47 billion for 2006, $262.2 billion for 2007, and $295.47 billion for 2008. China currently has accumulated nearly two trillion dollars in foreign exchange reserves.

    In contrast to the China, the United States has relied on consumers and the government for its growth. According to Peter G. Gosselin citing Roach of Morgan Stanley Asia, U.S. consumers constitute only about 4.5% of the global population, yet they bought more than $10 trillion worth of goods and services last year. In contrast the Chinese and Indian consumers combined which account for 40% of the global population bought only $3 trillion worth. He goes on to point out that according to government statistics, from 2001 to 2007, U.S. consumer spending shot up from a little over 73% of the economy to nearly 77%.

    If we just look at the differences in consumption levels between US and China-India, we’ll see that these countries are not in a position or have the financial resources to pick-up the slack left by the US consumers. Anyway, China’s growth is based on its exports and the FDI and not its consumers. When the international market shrinks, the Chinese will see (as they do now) a sharp drop in their actual growth. If they try hard they may be able to keep their people’s standard of living at its current level (highly unlikely); but they will be unable to increase consumption. Anyway, according to the Bloomberg (19 January 09), the Chinese unemployment rate has jumped to its 30 year high and will most likely increase further.

    How about Japan? Japan also started its economic miracle by export-led growth. Japan saved hard, and worked hard to become one of the largest economies in the world. However, the bursting of the housing bubble of 1990-91 started a deflationary period that Japan never really recovered from.

    If we look at the Consumer Price Indexes (CPI) for Japan, the U.S., and the Euro Area from 1999 to 2006, with 1999 being the base (100), we’ll see that by 2006, the CPI index for US was 122.8, 118.5 for EU and 97.7 for Japan. This shows that until 2006 Japan was still in the grip of deflation.

    Add to this the recent financial crisis and you’ll see that Japan is once again entering another deflationary period. In deflationary periods, consumers spend less and try to save more. The fear of losing one’s job, the psychology of ever decreasing prices, and general feeling of doom act against free spending by the consumers. One should also understand that Japanese consumers are reluctant to spend like their American counterparts. According to the available figures (2005), the Japanese consumption was only 55% of the GDP. Compare this to the American consumption of 77%. So the Japanese consumers cannot help either.

    What about the EU? Euro zone consumers have a slightly better consumption rate than the Japanese. The consumption rate for Euro zone (2005) was 57% of the GDP. In addition the Euro zone is facing severe financial problems with many countries such as Spain, Ireland, Italy and others facing mounting debt and shrinking export market. Consumers already hit by the housing crisis, financial crisis and now the imminent unemployment crisis cannot be expected to start spending wildly.

    So who is going to take the position left vacant by the US and act as the world’s economic locomotive and pull the world out of the depression? The answer is no-one and everyone. US is clearly not able to do that much. As a matter of fact the US consumers have to get used to lower spending levels for at least a decade, if not for good.

    According to Howard Davidowitz, chairman of Davidowitz & Associates, as quoted by Aaron Task in Yahoo Finance, American’s standard of living is undergoing a “permanent change” – and not for the better as a result of:

    • An $8 trillion negative wealth effect from declining home values
    • A $10 trillion negative wealth effect from weakened capital markets.
    • A $14 trillion consumer debt load amid “exploding unemployment”, leading to “exploding bankruptcies.”

    “The average American used to be able to borrow to buy a home, send their kids to a good school [and] buy a car,” Davidowitz says. “A lot of that is gone.

    The diminishing wealth
    Last year when the depth of financial crisis became apparent the US Feds started to aggressively cut interest rates, in the hope of reducing the severity of the crisis. Other countries specially the Europeans soon followed the Americans in cutting their interest rates. As the crisis spread to Asia and the Middle East, they also began to cut their interest rates. But soon it became apparent that this crisis was not like any they had seen since the great depression and simply cutting interest rates was not going to solve the problem.

    To start with the housing market had collapsed completely leaving many banks holding worthless pieces of paper. In addition, these papers were (partly) insured by many insurance and financial institutions that weren’t banks, but because of financial deregulations, had acted as banks. They were also hit by the bad mortgage problems. In short, all the financial institutions, banks, insurance companies and others were suddenly in trouble.

    This hit the stock markets, with the shares of these institutions taking a nose dive. These institutions are extremely important for the economy. They provide the logistics for financial transactions. Any problem here affects all parts of the economy. So it was not a surprise to see that all normal financial transactions suddenly came to a halt, hitting other sectors of the economy. Share prices of all the affected sectors began to go down and with it the fortune of the share holders. To see the extent of the damage done one just has to look at how much various stock markets have fallen.

    The following stock markets data was published by The Economist (21 Feb. 2009) which shows the extent of the fall since Dec 31st 2007:

    US (NAScomp) – 44.7%, US (DJIA) -43%, US (S&P 500), Japan (Nikkei 225) -41.3%, China (SSEA) -55.1%, Hong Kong (Hang Seng) -52.9%, Canada (S&P TSX) -53%, Australia (All Ord.) -61%, Britain (FTSE 100) -55.8%, Euro area (FTSE 100) – 59.5%, Euro area (DJ STQxx 50) – 58.7%, France (CAC 40) -56.1%, Germany (DAX) -55.3%, Greece (Athex comp) -73.7%, Italy (S&P/MIB) -63.1%, Netherlands (AEX) -60.4%, Norway (OSEAX) -64%, Denmark (OMXCB) -55.2%, Sweden (Aff.Gen) -57.7%, Russia (RTS, $ terms) -77.1%, Turkey (ISE) -70.3%, India (BSE) -64.9%, South Korea (KOSPI) -62.6%, Taiwan (TWI) -50.5%, Brazil (BVSP) -53%, Argentina (MERV) -56%, Mexico (IPC) -52.9%, Venezuela (IBC) – 55.6%, Saudi Arabia (Tadawul) -56.8%, South Africa (JSE AS) – 54.1%…. WORLD all (MSCI) -51.2%.

    For people in general, shares act both as saving and investment. The average person buys share in hope of getting better return than the banks. It is also easy to get in and out of the market. The advancements in information and communication technologies, the costs of buying and selling have fallen steadily in the last decade. So now anyone with a computer can buy and sell shares. This ease of entry enticed an ever increasing number of ordinary people to enter the stock markets.

    Now the people have been hit by three disasters. First they lost a lot of money in the housing market. This was both real and illusory. First they were hit with the housing crisis. Many have lost their homes or have seen the value of their homes depreciate heavily. Then they were hit with the collapse of the stock markets. Trillions of Dollars, Yens, Euros and Yuans have been wiped-out in a relatively a short time. Then many have lost their jobs and many are uncertain about the future job security. All these have had a tremendous impact on the consumers, forcing many to heavily reduce their consumption, which in turn have begun to affect businesses which in-turn are shedding workers to compensate for the loss of sales and revenues. This is a classical deflationary circle that feed on itself.

    The governments’ response to this threat has been to stimulate the economy by pumping large sums of money into the economy. A decade ago, a hundred billion dollar was an astronomical sum. Today we don’t even bother to look at it twice. Today we talk of Trillions. A few hundred billions here and a few hundred billions there soon add up to a few nice trillions; especially the trillions that we don’t have.

    Now we face a classical problem: the increasing budget deficits. Exactly when the economy is contracting and tax receipts are falling, the government expenditure is rising rapidly. In addition, the governments are buying bad debts (US, UK, etc) and trying to spend more on whatever they can in order to arrest the increasing unemployment and stimulate the economy. These large sums have to come from somewhere. They can be borrowed or money can simply be printed. The problem is that some governments are opting for both.

    The most important economy is of course the US economy. The US government under Bush spent close to one trillion dollars, and now the Obama administration is promising to spend trillions in the years to come to stimulate the economy. With official US debt now close to 11 trillion dollars and climbing fast, the situation is becoming untenable. According to treasurydirect.gov, last year (2008) US government paid $451 billion dollars interest on its debt. Add to this the Medicare and social security obligations and suddenly things look a lot worse than they appear.

    So how can the US continue its deficit spending? By issuing treasury bonds and other security certificates of course. Both public and foreign governments buy these securities which are guaranteed by the US government. According to Reuters (February 18th 2009), foreign central banks alone held $1.76 trillion dollars in US treasuries. According to the same report “The combined holdings of Treasuries and agency securities by foreign central banks at the Fed totalled $2.573 trillion, up $11.223 billion”.

    The coming inflation

    So far the foreign governments and businesses have been willing to buy US debt, but with the current economic downturn things are beginning to change. According to New York Times, in the last 5 years China has spent as much as one-seventh of its entire economic output buying mostly American debt. However, with the sharp slowdown in its economy, China is finding it difficult to keep buying. China has also come-up with its own $600 billion stimulus plan. This along with the falling trade surplus and the falling tax receipt will make it exceedingly unlikely that China can keep financing part of the US government’s deficit spending. The same applies to other countries as well.

    So as the economic downturn continues we can see two things: the interest on US treasuries increase substantially to make it attractive and or printing money. Printing money is not so farfetched as many would like to believe. Already countries that cannot find willing lenders are resorting to this. A good example of this is UK. With the current plans to nationalise a few more banks (Lloyds and Royal Bank of Scotland), the UK national debt is set to surpass the £2.2 trillion pound mark. This is 150% of UK’s GDP. It is not then surprising to see that the Bank of England voted unanimously earlier this month to seek consent from the government to start the process of quantitative easing by buying gilts and other securities. Quantitative easing means printing money. With interest rates at 1%, printing money is likely to increase inflation.

    Already many governments find it difficult to cover their deficits. It is only a matter of time before they also begin to print money. It is especially appealing for the US government to do this since inflation means a real value reduction in debts. With mounting trade and budget deficit and decreasing tax receipts and the shrinking of the number of willing lenders, US government may not have any choice but to print money.

    So far, all governments are reducing their interest rates to historic lows and at the same time spending a lot of money that they don’t have. It will take at least two more years for the economy to stabilise. Here we should note that by stabilise I mean an arrest in decline rather than outright growth. Once that point is reached we will begin to see the effects of the loose monetary policy: a tremendous rise in inflation which can be accompanied by low economic growth or in other words stagflation.

    The fear of stagflation arises from the fact that from all indication, growth will not strengthen anytime soon. It is quite clear now that the US and to a large extent the European consumers have been hit hard by the current crisis. There is also the possibility that another banking crisis may still ensue such as the commercial real-estate mortgage defaults and above all the repetition of currency crisis (1997 Asian Financial Crisis). Already we see that China Japan, Korea and others are setting-up $120 billion currency defence fund to protect Asian currencies against speculative attacks.

    The current economic crises have left many countries’ local banks with foreign currency loans that they find difficult to repay in that currency. This and the possibility of defaults have made these countries a good target for speculators. If such an attack starts, many countries will automatically have to devalue their currencies (even more than they already have) or try to defend their currencies. In either case this may trigger yet another crisis that may actually destroy a good portion of many economies around the world.

    Even if we assume that no more nasty surprises will appear in the next two years and the economies stabilise, we are left with the reduced levels of consumption around the world, especially in major economies. As I have mentioned above, it is very clear that at least in US, the consumers are not going to recover anytime soon. I have also shown that the Chinese and Indian consumers cannot replace the US and European consumers. So there will be a dearth of market for the goods and services produced by others. In absence of US, the question will be: which country or countries are able to increase demand to such a degree as to trigger a recovery; a recovery that most likely will be accompanied with high inflation.

    In 2006 in the article “the coming financial crisis”, I stated the following:

    “At the end of the WWII, 45 nations gathered at a United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, to address the problems of reconstruction, monetary stability and exchange rates.

    The delegates agreed to establish an international monetary system of convertible currencies, fixed exchange rates and free trade. To facilitate these objectives the delegates agreed to create two international institutes: the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the World Bank). An initial loan of $250 million to France in 1947 was the World Bank’s first act.

    Since then there has already been considerable criticism of the roles of IMF and the World Bank. The above mentioned problems and the ongoing trade imbalance in the world have to be addressed by a similar gathering. Sooner or later, both the United States and the rest of the world have to address the existing problems. These problems are not the United States’ alone. We cannot ignore the largest economy on earth. It is said that if United States sneezes, the world catches cold. We have to either make sure that the United States doesn’t catch cold or vaccinate ourselves against it.”

    Once again I restate my earlier arguments: we need a new “Bretten Woods” agreement where we can address the existing problems and restructure the world’s economic system. If we don’t do this, and soon, we will face protectionism, low economic growth, and even trade wars. We have ignored this problem for a long time and are now paying the price. What would the price be if we continue to ignore the existing systemic problems?

    Dr. Abbas Bakhtiar lives in Norway. He is a management consultant and a contributing writer for many online journals. He’s a former associate professor of Nordland University, Norway. He can be contacted at : Bakhtiarspace-articles@yahoo.no

    Source: American Cronicle, 22.02.2009

    Filed under: Asia, Australia, Banking, Brazil, China, Energy & Environment, Japan, Korea, Latin America, Malaysia, Mexico, News, Singapore, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    China’s influence in Latin America

    While the United States is preoccupied with other parts of the world, China is paying ever more attention to Latin America, sending leaders to the region, opening banks and promising investment. At this writing, two Chinese leaders are touring the Western Hemisphere.

    One of them is Vice President Xi Jinping, who is likely to succeed President Hu Jintao early next decade as China’s maximum leader. Xi left this morning on a tour that will take him to Mexico, Jamaica, Colombia, Venezuela and Brazil, all nations eager to enhance ties with China.

    Elsewhere in the region, Vice Premier Hui Liangyu is paying official visits to Argentina, Ecuador, Barbados and Bahamas from Feb. 7 to 19. Might seem like no big deal, you say? Well, recall that President Hu visited Latin America in November, stopping in to Cuba and Peru. And while Hu was rubbing elbows with most of the major Latin presidents at the APEC summit in Lima, China’s highest ranking military officer was elsewhere in South America on tour. That officer, Xu Caihou, is vice chairman of the Central Military Commission, which controls the People’s Liberation Army. Only President Hu outranks Xu in the military hierarchy. On his trip in November, Xu toured military installations in Venezuela, Chile and Brazil and promised increased exchanges between the two regions.

    For Washington to match this pace of high-level visits, it would have to send President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen and a fourth senior official, perhaps Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to Latin America within four months.

    I doubt we will be seeing that. The Chinese officials aren’t going empty handed either. Just take a look at the $7.3-million national stadium Chinese workers are erecting in the Bahamas, a quick boat ride from Miami. I’m sure Hui will tour the site later this week and receive multiple huzzahs from the Bahamians for this showpiece project.

    Xi will be attending a big powwow of Mexican industrialists on Tuesday. If one were looking for a specific gauge of China’s growing influence on the world stage in relation to the United States, one could do worse that just studying the Beijing-Washington-Latin America triangle.

    Consider the trade numbers between China and Latin America and the Caribbean, for example. Trade between the region and China jumped 13-fold since 1995, from $8.4 billion to $110 billion in 2007. China is now the region’s second biggest trading partner after the United States.

    A concrete sign of China’s growing trade importance occurred just a couple of weeks ago. On Jan. 12, China formally became a member of the Inter-American Development Bank, the leading hemispheric financing arm for long-term development projects. As Chinese Ambassador Zhou Wenzhong signed the forms for membership, China also threw in $350 million into bank coffers. With the Chinese flag flies along with the other 47 flags of the IDB’s member states.

    Another sign of Chinese interest: Beijing has agreed to open branches of the China Development Bank in Mexico, Brazil and two other countries, a sign of intensified trade cooperation. My understanding is that this is a quasi-private bank. The world has indeed grown smaller. If Latin America was once considered part of the U.S. backyard, it’s now also part of China’s backyard.

    Source: McClatchy Newspapers By Tim Johnson 08.02.2009

    Filed under: Banking, China, Energy & Environment, Latin America, News, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    Latin American Outlook, Profit Potential and Risks in 2009

    The “right” Latin America will thrive in the New Year, fueled by ts own growth – with an assist from the continued hot growth from China – while the “wrong” Latin America will get left behind.

    The second phase of emerging markets expansion is well on its way – a period of self-sustaining growth, driven by consumer growth and infrastructure spending.  And Latin America, following China and other Asian economies, is one of the key global pillars of growth that will save the global economy and the U.S. financial system from total collapse. But not all the countries in Latin America will go on to prosper.  There is a wide gulf in the policies that will continue to separate the winners from the losers.

    Let me explain.

    In a recent article in our affiliated monthly newsletter,  The Money Map Report, Money Morning Investment Director Keith Fitz-Gerald made three important points:

    * The emerging markets (of which Latin America is the second-most-important leg) will play a growing role in the continued long-term growth of the world economy.
    * The U.S. economy will continue to grow long-term, but its relative importance in the world economy will continue to decline.
    * In the near term, the emerging markets could well play a determining role in keeping the overall global economy – and the U.S. financial system – from dropping into a depression-like funk that we won’t be free of for years. Emerging economies in Asia and parts of Latin America have huge cash reserves, much of which will be invested in infrastructure projects over the next 20 years.

    In the next three years, China, alone will invest as much as $725 billion in infrastructure, while Brazil will invest $225 billion for the same purpose.
    This is important to remember, given that the dramatic sell-off the emerging markets have experienced has many investors doubting the ability of these countries to “decouple” from the global economy.  The reality of the situation is that most investors and pundits are failing to differentiate between economic decoupling and market decoupling.

    The Gloomy Present

    While growth in emerging economies has dropped slightly, the prices of securities and currencies in emerging markets has fallen drastically.   Many investors think that the U.S. economic crash will lead to a dramatic drop in U.S. orders of emerging-market products, which will cause those economies to drop off. That, in turn, would squeeze the profits and market valuations of the companies that operate in these economies.

    But that’s a mistaken assumption. And here’s why.

    In Brazil, for instance, exports account for a mere 13% of gross domestic product (GDP). In China, exports are just 10% of GDP. So some contraction in U.S. and European orders can easily be counterbalanced by fiscal and monetary stimulus in these countries.

    On Oct. 27, in the depths of a rabid, indiscriminate sell-off, I published an extremely bullish piece on Brazil. Since that article was published, Brazil went on to rally as much as 47%. As of Friday’s close – even after some subsequent profit-taking – the exchange traded fund (ETF) that represents the Brazilian market (EWZ) is still up 21% (and has risen as much as 42% since my recommendation).

    And most emerging markets economies have plenty of fiscal and monetary maneuvering room. Leading the pack is China, which accounted for some 27% of global growth last year, and which has continued to use both fiscal and monetary tools to keep itself on a solid growth path.

    It recently slashed interest rates again, down to 6.66% (a lucky number in the Chinese culture, meaning “things (are) going smoothly”).  With record foreign reserves of $1.9 trillion, China also approved a “fast and heavy-handed” $586 billion stimulus, mainly in housing and infrastructure, to be implemented through 2010.  And the Chinese yuan will drop almost 7% vis-a-vis the U.S. dollar to cushion losses in trade.  It has also lowered taxes on investments in capital goods.  And in a key move that’s been almost totally overlooked by the media, China has made huge market-oriented reforms in agriculture.

    China has just allowed its 780 million farmers to rent, transfer or utilize as collateral their rights to their lands and eliminated all taxes on agricultural production and to farmers.  This will allow for a massive increase in the scale of production by consolidating companies.  In this way, China will keep its 120 million hectares dedicated to agriculture exclusively, with no possibility of urbanization, while at the same time allowing the millions of small farmers to sell out, and get capital to move to the cities.  This will not only increase the productivity of Chinese farming dramatically by allowing for economies of scale to work and attracting billions in investments, it also will create a huge incentive for these millions of farmers to move to the cities, boosting housing and infrastructure demand.

    Brazil’s plans are very similar to those of China. There’s a:

    * Strong fiscal stimulus, allowing a drop in the value of the real currency (a decline that’s already been substantial) in order to cushion exports.
    * An easing of capital requirements to Brazil’s strong banking system, which will incentivize housing and car loans.
    * Export financing.
    * And huge local infrastructure projects.

    There is another little-understood phenomenon that cushions the blows for emerging economies: Intra-emerging market trade has become increasingly important.  By now everybody understands that iron ore from Brazil and coal and oil from other emerging markets is flowing into China in order to fuel China’s massive infrastructure buildup and growing consumer demand.

    The Breakdown on Brazil

    Increasingly, a growing proportion of the infrastructure needs of industrial goods being bought by emerging economies are goods produced by other emerging economies.  Trade between Latin America and China has increased by 13 times since 1995, from $8.4 billion to $100 billion.  And China, now the second-most-important commercial partner to the region after the United States, has finally been accepted as a member of the Inter-American Development Bank, committing itself to contribute $350 million to the bank. As an example of this growth in industrial trade, Argentina just bought 279 subway cars from China’s CITIC Group.

    However, not all trade with China has been successful, due to China’s notable deficiencies in quality control, especially in health standards.  For example, Latin American imports of medicines manufactured in China had catastrophic results in Panama two years ago, where more than 100 people died and hundreds more became ill from medications containing toxic Chinese glycerine.  Recently, Panama detected toxic chemicals in imported Chinese sweets and crackers and Argentina’s customs recently seized Chinese 20,000 thermos containers for having elevated content of toxic chemicals.

    And all of this means that there is a market disconnect between the prices of Brazilian shares and those elsewhere in Latin American equities and the fundamentals of the underlying companies, that we will see played out in the next and subsequent years.  Why?

    Just because huge financial losses by banks precipitated a massive de-leveraging cycle, which means they had to sell their holdings, regardless of merit. And that included big sell-offs in preferred investments, including the hugely promising and profitable Petroleo Brasileiro SA (Petrobras) (ADR: PBR), Vale (ADR: RIO), and many others.

    And what is worse, their sales hit the stop losses of major hedge funds, who were also leveraged in such favorite plays as commodities, steel, coal, agro, emerging markets and even defensive stocks such as the U.S.-based Pepsico Inc. (PEP).

    When you have the proprietary positions of banks and hedge funds all trying to get out of the same door at the same time because of risk management issues, you get the current disconnect between market fundamentals and pricing.

    Another impact that we have to understand is that the ongoing dramatic interest rate drops in all major G7 economies and the more than $3 trillion in G7 fiscal programs will have a marked impact on growth next year, containing what would have been a much nastier economic contraction.  But while G7 countries will barely grow between negative 0.5% and a positive 1% in 2009, with the worst contraction front-loaded and recovering in the second half, emerging economies will grow at a minimum of 4%, and in the case of China maybe as high as 10%.

    In my October Brazil analysis, I detailed the massive stress that Brazil came under in 1995 because of another exogenous shock: The Mexican devaluation, the so-called “Tequila effect,” which ricocheted around the world, and which caught Brazil in 1995 in a much weaker position than it is in today. Back then, Brazil had a much higher level of debt, much lower reserves, a fiscal sector that needed huge reform, and a much lower capacity for exports.  Brazil dealt with this massive stress effectively and went on to work at each one of its weaknesses in the next 13 years, getting itself into a position of strength today.

    While having the temptation and the perfect excuse for a default right at hand, Brazil proved its seriousness back then by taking the hard, but certain road to progress, keeping its international commitments and gradually affecting strong structural reforms.  Since then, it has become a net creditor to the world; it controlled inflation, and avoided an overheating of its economy with tight fiscal and monetary policies during the recent run-up in commodity prices.

    This is paying off strongly today.  The policies, run day to day by a sophisticated technocracy led by top economists and international bankers, many of which held top positions in leading international banks, has allowed Brazil to move forward and to anticipate GDP growth of 4% to 5% for the New Year.
    Hence, Brazil is by far my favorite Latin American play for 2009.

    Checking Out Chile

    Following closely behind, and hindered only by its small size, is the poster child of fiscal and monetary prudence: Chile.

    Chile, which came out of its 1970s default by eliminating its foreign debt and successfully restructuring its banking system, has made every effort to maintain very prudent fiscal and monetary policies and to diversify its exports away from copper, which, being the largest exporter of the metal in the world, still accounted for 38% of its GDP.

    Today, Chile exports many diversified products, including agricultural products, wine, fertilizers and industrial wares.  And because it’s situated on the Pacific Coast, it is geographically well positioned to trade with the fastest-growing markets in the world – China and the other emerging Asian tigers.

    But Chile, in order to minimize the cyclical nature of its economy due to the wide fluctuation in the price of copper, decided years ago to start a “rainy-day” fund, which would accumulate wealth in the good years and be used to soften the blow in the bad ones.  Now, Chile boasts a $28 billion sovereign wealth fund, accumulated almost completely from its copper profits.  That’s almost equal to a staggering 14% of the country’s GDP in cash savings!  This will enable Chile to implement counter-cyclical policies to keep growing at 3.5% to 4% next year – or about the current rate of growth, even with the worldwide meltdown.

    Chile already has started to deploy this capital, having passed a $1.15 billion government plan on top of last month’s $850 million to stimulate housing and small-business lending, injecting that capital into a government bank that will make available loans for small businesses.

    Avoid Argentina

    Chile’s fiscal prudence is in direct contrast to Argentina’s lack of discipline.  Argentina’s Peronist government, which squandered the agricultural commodities bonanza in fiscal spending, is now is trying to use its majority in both houses in Congress to pass the nationalization of the privatized pension funds under the excuse of “protecting them from market volatility.”

    These funds, which now have successfully grown to more than $30 billion in size, or 73% of the government’s budget and have returned an average of more than 13% a year since inception will allow the government to cover its fiscal gap and debt maturities next year and to financed public works and consumption projects.  The government, at the same time, is suffering from an important loss of confidence, as evidenced by its need to resort to police controls in order to prevent the illegal purchase of U.S. Dollars.  Argentina might end 2009 with growth of negative 2% and unemployment of 10%.  Stay away.

    A “Maybe” for Mexico

    Mexico, given its strong links to the United States, is receiving a heavy dose of external shocks on many economic and financial fronts – especially where the United States is concerned: It’s being hit by a drop in exports (the United States is the main component), the drop in oil prices, lower tourism (its largest proportion of travelers is from the United States), falling U.S. investments in Mexico, and reduced remittances from Mexicans working in the United States back to their Mexican relatives.

    In addition, many companies suffered strong losses in their derivatives hedges, banks have had to reduce lending due to reduced liquidity and the Mexican peso has lost some 22% of its value against the U.S. dollar.  Mexico’s growth in the New Year may fall to about 1% from 2008′s 2.4% pace, and the country is on its way to approving the first budget with a fiscal deficit in four years.  The government’s target will be negative 1.8% of GDP, in order to stimulate the economy.  Mexico, seeing its oil production declining, is seen moving soon towards opening some oil areas for exploration and development, which some estimate could add another 1% to GDP.

    Once the U.S. markets have stabilized, Mexico’s stocks will be an incredible buy once more, since they discount a very bad scenario at these prices.

    A Case Against Colombia

    Colombia, another country that has merited a lot of attention, given its staunch support of U.S. anti-drug and anti-money-laundering efforts, has seen its free trade agreement with the United States inexplicably delayed.

    The country foresees a tightening of credit conditions, so it is moving up its peso-based borrowing to this year.  Next year it will issue only $1 billion in foreign bonds and tap $1.4 billion from multi-lateral lenders.  So the refinancing risk for Colombia is muted, given the small amounts involved, and the country’s economy should expand a minimum of 1% in the New Year, even in the worst economic scenario. However, Colombia could grow as much as 4% under a moderate scenario.

    That would represent a big drop from the 8% growth recorded this year.

    The story in Colombia has been the curbing of inflation, and how far behind the curve the central bank has been, at least as recently as July, when it boosted rates up to 10% and then kept them there.

    These ultra-high interest rates, combined with the global slowdown, have blunted demand for consumer products in Colombia. Since the passage of the trade pact is a situation in flux, I want to wait and see right now.

    I will not go into the economies of Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, which, with massive intervention by their governments and advances against property rights, are experiencing severe economic and political stress, and which do not offer the guarantees needed for foreign investment.

    Source: Money Morning, by Horacio Marquez, 15.12.2008

    Filed under: Argentina, Banking, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Energy & Environment, Exchanges, Mexico, News, Peru, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    Spanish Investors “priorities” in Latam: Brazil, Mexico, Argentina

    According to the Spanish insurer Credito y Caucion one of the reasons for this relegation can be tracked to market size, described as “relatively small”.

    Not surprisingly among those Spanish corporations with interests in Latinamerica, Brazil is the “maximum priority”; 69% according to the poll.

    The report under the heading of “A complex panorama: investment and trade in Latinamerica”, points out that Mexico and Argentina with 48% and 40% respectively complete the priority list for corporations with interests in the region.

    A chapter from the report reveals that half of the 300 corporations surveyed at world level said the Latinamerican investment option was geared mainly because of the significant slowdown of developed countries markets.

    Besides 61% of corporations interviewed expect sales to in the region to increase at an annual average above 6% until 2011, and 59% believe profits will follow “a similar tendency.

    Source: Mercopress, 27.11.2008

    69% DE LAS EMPRESAS DARÁ MÁXIMA PRIORIDAD A BRASIL, 48% A MEXICO, EN LOS PRÓXIMOS TRES AÑOS

    * El 69% de las empresas con intereses en Latinoamérica dará máxima prioridad a Brasil en los próximos tres años. México (48%) y Argentina (40%) completan la lista de los principales mercados.
    * Más de la mitad de las empresas que aborda la zona lo hace influenciada por la desaceleración de sus mercados tradicionales.

    Madrid, 27 de noviembre de 2008.
    El 69% de las empresas con intereses en Latinoamérica señala a Brasil como mercado prioritario en su estrategia en los próximos tres años. De acuerdo con las conclusiones del estudio “Un panorama complejo, la inversión y el comercio en Latinoamérica”, México (48%) y Argentina (40%) completan la lista de los principales mercados que centrarán la expansión empresarial a medio plazo. Chile, considerado como el mercado con el mejor entorno operativo, es prioritario sólo para el 22%, probablemente debido a su relativamente pequeño mercado interno. El 53% de las empresas que aborda la zona lo hace influenciada por la desaceleración de sus mercados tradicionales.
    El informe del Grupo Atradius, que opera en España, Portugal y Brasil a través de Crédito y Caución, ha sido elaborado en colaboración con la Economist Intelligence Unit, el departamento de investigación del semanario británico de noticias y asuntos internacionales de The Economist. Para ello se ha tenido en cuenta la opinión de más de 300 empresas de todo el mundo que comercian con Latinoamérica o planean hacerlo.

    El informe destaca el marco existente en Brasil y México mientras otros importantes mercados de la región, como Venezuela y Argentina, aún deben confrontar el aumento de inflación y la percepción de la inestabilidad política. Perú y Chile aparecen bien valorados en lo que se refiere a las facilidades para operar que conceden a las empresas extranjeras, estabilidad económica y política, gobierno corporativo, ordenamiento jurídico y ausencia de controversias comerciales.
    El 61% de las empresas que han participado en el estudio prevé que su cifra de negocio en la región crezca por encima del 6% en los próximos tres años. El 59% espera la misma tendencia para sus beneficios.
    “Latinoamérica tiene mucho que ofrecer a las empresas que buscan nuevos mercados para su expansión. Dispone de una población joven y en crecimiento sensible a la importación de bienes de consumo. Además, las reformas de los últimos años siguen mejorando la estabilidad económica y política en gran parte de la región”, explicó el máximo ejecutivo (CEO) del Grupo Atradius, Isidoro Unda.

    Fuente: Grupo Atradius, 27.11.2008

    Filed under: Banking, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, News, Venezuela , , , , , , , , , , , ,