Russian money, Russian drive for power, or just Russian prudence

It’s a funny thing, but if you read the Western media you could be forgiven for believing Russia is to return to its bad old ways. Vladimir Putin is seen as little more than a former KGB man stuck in the rhetoric of the cold war era, and his decision to appoint Dmitry Medvedev as his successor, while Putin himself stays on as Prime Minister, is seen by many as an example of just how poor the Russian President’s democratic pretensions are.

But those views are apparently not shared by business and the markets.

In fact, The Russian stock market did something of a wobble in the weeks before Putin announced his big idea. Once Dmitry Medvedev had been confirmed as his choice for President, and once Putin announced his intention to stay on as PM, markets soared.

The truth is, that while Putin may be seen as something of an impaler to democracy, when it comes to being pro free markets, he is seen as the quite opposite of Vlad the Impaler – more like Vlad the Hailer of markets.

As for Medvedev, well, he is seen as even more of a market man.

Recently, the IMF revealed its latest set of projections for global growth – and while it was predicting growth of just 1.5 per cent for the US next year, it was projecting growth in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS – that’s the former Soviet Union) of 7 per cent.

As for Russia, recently the World Bank predicted growth of 6.5 per cent this year and 6 per cent growth in 2009.

Turning to the markets, the Russian State is seen as keen to develop them. It is now mandatory for Russian companies launching an international IPO to list at least a third of the shares on a domestic exchange. At the same time, it’s become a lot easier for a firm to IPO in Russia, with the levels of bureaucracy cut right back. It is also thought that the Russian Government wants to see Russia itself become the financial centre of the CIS region – and it is introducing measures to make it easier for firms based in neighbouring countries to list in Russia.

But then, last week, Dmitry Medvedev, opened a can of worms when he called for Russian firms to copy Chinese business, and buy up western businesses.

“This will allow us to re-tool Russian enterprises with technology, boost their production culture and grant them the opportunity to diversify investments and win new markets,” said the Russian President-in-waiting.

As for growing suspicions aimed at Russia, he said, “This is not a reason for hysteria. We should quietly and measuredly forward our interests and convince people that investments from Russia are effective, transparent and necessary for the countries involved.”

In fact, Russia is currently sitting on a $157bn Oil Stabilisation Fund. It seems a lot, but actually, look a little deeper and the amount of money involved is not so great.

Under new rules set by the State, 10 per cent of Russia’s GDP must be invested into AAA-rated sovereign bonds and, as things currently stand, that leaves just $32 billion available for more-risky corporate investments.

The question, though, is will this grow? Well, most estimates out there seem to suggest investment by sovereign funds is set to balloon But, much depends on the future movements of the price of oil. If oil stays up there in the $90-plus region, then sovereign fund investment will indeed expand. But if oil falls back, then it will be a different story.

Capital Economics, for example, looked at this and said, “Growth of sovereign wealth funds is likely to taper off sharply over coming years as commodity prices moderate, and the global imbalances which have driven up Asian surpluses unwind. While that will still leave many of them as major players, they will not change the rules of the game. As the events of the last few weeks have shown, Sovereign Wealth Funds should be welcomed as a source of capital for ailing Western banks rather than feared as a source of nationalist investment.”

But, for Russia, its ability to invest abroad may only be a short-term phenomenon.

Russia knows there is no guarantee that oil will stay high in price. So by investing now, diversifying its interests, it knows that if things take a turn for the worse, it has at least built up these valuable overseas assets.

That’s what you are supposed to do of course. Save when times are good, Alas, it’s where the US and UK have been going horribly wrong. We have experienced years of remarkable growth, and yet debt levels are at an all-time high.

Maybe the real lesson from Russia, is to learn prudence.

Sovereign Wealth Funds might be providing essential funding to western business, but in the long term, it means dividends will be flooding out of the UK and US. That’s what happens when you spend, spend and spend.

Bookmark this article:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Dow sinks as

If 2007 was a year of extraordinary volatility, then 2008 seems to be on course to outdo it. So far this year, the Dow has fallen by over 200 points in one day no less than 7 times.

Pity us. Once upon a time, a fall of that magnitude would have made a nice juicy headline – now, it’s just more of the same. Yesterday, the Dow finished the day at 12,501; that’s 277 points down on the day, and 1,662 points down on the all-time high set last October. That means, by the way, it is 12 per cent below the record,  meaning we are in correction territory, again.

The FTSE 100 fell to 6,026; that’s 695 points down on the seven-year high set at the end of October. The index has now fallen by 10 per cent of from peak to trough, so it just falls into correction territory too.

Yesterday’s falls were due to the banks. This time, Citigroup revealed an $18.1 billion write-down, mainly related to subprime debt, and a $9.83bn loss – the worst quarterly loss in the banking giant’s history.

Even more worrying, analysts weren’t impressed with the talk given by the bank’s new CEO, Vikram Pandit. Mr Pandit said the figures were “unacceptable,” but there is a suspicion that we have still not heard the full story, and more losses by the bank are still to follow.

Meanwhile, both Citigroup and Merrill Lynch announced more fundraising and investments from sovereign funds. This time the government of Singapore Investment Corporation topped the list of investors – it is pumping in $6.8 billion into Citibank. In all Citigroup said it is now raising $14.5bn; meanwhile, Merrill Lynch, $6.6bn.

The quote of the day must go to Charles Geisst, a Wall Street historian. He told the FT, “Not since before World War I, have companies gone looking for foreign capital as much as they are now.”

Bookmark this article:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Sovereign funds rush to rescue

The Kuwait Investment Authority, Saudi Arabian Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, and the China Development Bank stepped in to the breach yesterday, as two US banks attempted to raise around $12 billion between them.

Merrill Lynch is after $4 billion, and Citigroup between $8bn and $10bn. And the money seems set to come from the Middle East and China again, as sovereign funds rush in once more to shore up holes in western banks’ balance sheets.

According to the FT, The Kuwait Investment Authority is set to be one of the main contributors to the Merrill fundraising. It has already stumped-up $2bn to $3bn into Citigroup too, so, as the FT put it, it is “emerging as a large source of rescue finance on Wall Street.”

Meanwhile, Citibank is planning its second round of fundraising in as many months. Less than two months ago, in addition to the money raised from the Kuwait Investment Authority, it was on the receiving end of $7.5 billion invested by the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority. This time, it looks like Saudi Arabian Prince Alwaleed bin Talal and the China Development Bank will be providing much of the required funds.

It’s big bucks, but in the scheme of things still small fry. Even so, it does seem to us that a dramatic change is occurring right now. It has long been argued that the US and UK balance of payment deficits do not matter, as they are easily covered by flows of money.

In fact, until recently, the UK and US have been borrowing money from abroad, paying out low interest payments and reinvesting some of the money into deals paying out more-handsome returns. No wonder the balance of payment deficits didn’t seem to be a problem.

But it does seem that this is now changing. Foreign investors are securing much better deals for their money - and in the long term this could completely change the make-up of international capital flow.

Bookmark this article:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Big events of the year

Well, it would be churlish to deny the iPhone seems to have been the product of the year, although the Nintendo Wii has enjoyed something of a stunner too. Nintendo is now suffering from not being able to meet demand.

As for central bankers, where do we begin? Is it the letter sent by Mervyn King to Gordon Brown? The bold step taken by the world’s top central banks to work in unison to pump money into the system earlier this month, or the even bolder step by the European Central bank, to carpet-bomb the Eurozone with credit? No, we would like to award the prize of most extraordinary statement from a central banker to a man who retired earlier this decade.

Earlier this year, the former governor of the Bank of England, Lord Eddie George told the Treasury Select Committee “My legacy to the MPC, if you like, has been ’sort that out’.”

This is how this extraordinary admission went, in more detail: “In the environment of global economic weakness at the beginning of this decade… external demand was declining and, related to that, business investment was declining… We only had two alternative ways of sustaining demand and keeping the economy moving forward - one was public spending and the other was consumption.

“We knew that we were having to stimulate consumer spending. We knew we had pushed it up to levels which couldn’t possibly be sustained into the medium and long term. But for the time being, if we had not done that, the UK economy would have gone into recession just as the United States did.”

But then, of course, 2007 was the year when the UK’s economic boom just went on. Sixty-one quarters of uninterrupted growth, we have never had it so good. Well maybe we have, according to Ernst and Young: our discretionary income is at its lowest level in five years. Back in June, Ernst and Young said that after tax contributions, mortgage payments and monthly household bills, the average family now has just over 22 per cent of its gross income left over, as opposed to over 28 per cent in 2003.

The typical household now faces monthly mortgage payments of £698.85, that’s 65 per cent higher than in 2003. The same household now spends £156.23 per month on petrol, that’s 11.7 per cent upon 2005/06. Other debt repayments (loans, credit cards, overdrafts) are up more than 30 per cent since 2003/04 to £103.83 per month, and Ernst and Young says average household unsecured debt now stands at £8,028.43, compared with £6,568.32 in 2003/04.

Furthermore, council tax is up 20 per cent since 2003/04 to £110.10 per month for a band D property, and monthly pension contributions to defined benefit schemes are typically some 65 per cent higher than in 2003/04, up from £144.26 to £238.78.

Ernst and Young says the average household now has £837.53 to spend each month after total fixed monthly outgoings, compared with £898.54 in 2003/04.

But, it seems that the truly major economic development of the year has not really had the publicity it deserves.

Earlier in the year, China said it was to invest less money into bonds and more into equities. Meanwhile, other sovereign funds, especially from Qatar, Dubai and Singapore, have been moving-in on US and European assets.

It seems that while the beginning of the year saw private equity muscle-in using borrowed money to buy-up companies, in this post-credit crunch era, it’s overseas money, money that is invested, rather than lent, that is pumping up the system.

This morning, the FT revealed that a Saudi fund is preparing to invest $1.73 billion into UBS, this on top of the $9.7 billion we already know about from Singapore. Yesterday, Morgan Stanley was seeing $5 billion from China. Barclays had found itself with some extra cash provided from China, as has private equity giant Blackstone. A Qatar fund has invested into the London Stock Exchange. We could go on.

Last month, Merrill Lynch estimated that the total assets managed by sovereign funds may exceed $2 trillion. That’s more than all the world’s hedge funds combined. More to the point, it estimates that this figure could grow to $7.9 trillion by 2011. Incidentally, it also believes that, right now, assets of the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority alone are worth $875 billion.

The point about these sovereign funds is this. Right now, the borrowing craze has led to crisis, and crisis has left us needing cash and led to selling assets on the cheap. Much of the money that funded the debt build-up came from abroad, and it was all rather good. Not only were we using some of this money to spend, we were also reinvesting some if it, and getting good returns on our investments too.

Foreigners were providing us with cheap credit, we were reinvesting some of it, and getting much better returns: this in turn made it seem as if our debt was affordable.

But, moving forward, it won’t be like that. Expect the flow of dividends leaving this country to rise dramatically in a few years’ time. Right now, we should be investing to provide an income for the baby boomers when they retire. Instead, the opposite is occurring.

Bookmark this article:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit