Welcome, Guest | Register or Login
Jim on Facebook Jim on Twitter Jim's YouTube Channel Jim on Google+

Important Stuff

Archives

Stuff Jim Reads

Get your portfolio ready for the profitless global economic recovery

posted on January 19, 2010 at 10:49 am
Print This Post
economic recovery

So what should investors do about it?

What’s “it”? The global crisis in profits caused by excess supply over demand.

Take a look at how “it” is at work across the global economy.

The aluminum industry—awash in excess global capacity with more scheduled to come on line.

The auto industry—awash in excess global capacity with more scheduled to come on line.

The steel industry—awash in excess global capacity with more scheduled to come on line.

The memory chip industry—awash in excess global capacity with more scheduled to come on line.

I think you get the idea. (I’ve described the problems in some of these industries in recent posts such as http://jubakpicks.com/2010/01/13/fords-dilemma-it-has-to-sell-more-cars-in-places-like-india-to-survive-but-can-it-make-a-profit-there/ for the auto industry and http://jubakpicks.com/2010/01/12/alcoa-delivers-bad-news-for-global-profits/ for the aluminum industry.)

 As I’ve written about repeatedly in the last week or two, because the world hasn’t begun to address the problems of excess capital and the excess production capacity that it creates under current economic rules, the global economic recovery is going to turn out to be extraordinarily profitless in industry after industry as producers with excess capacity cut prices in an effort to buy market share.

This isn’t a short term problem. With the short-term success of the Chinese economy in recovering more quickly from the depths of the downturn than any other global economy, China’s “solution” of flooding the economy with cash, building new plants, and then exporting the excess has become a model to emulate. The mis-match between global supply and demand in many areas of the global economy will go on for years, and in some sectors the excess of supply over demand will get worse before it gets better. (I spelled out the way that China’s economic model contributes to this problem in http://jubakpicks.com/2010/01/15/china-isnt-an-asset-bubble-waiting-to-burst-its-worse/ )

The problem is too big and too long-lasting to ignore. So what are investors supposed to do about it?

How about building a portfolio to, in general, avoid niches, industries, and sectors where global over capacity will create a profit-less recovery?

Well, Duh! Of course. Simple. Easy.

How about some advice on what to avoid and where to put money to work? Sure, like most advice—“Never put anything smaller than your elbow in your ear” to “Buy low and sell high”—this admonition isn’t very useful without specifics.

I’m going to start with three sectors that you should target now and in the next few years that will avoid the worst of these problems. (I’ll even throw in a glancing reference to a niche or two that has the characteristics you want to buy.) And I’m going to end by naming three stocks that you should own (one is already in Jubak’s Picks, one is in the Jubak Picks 50, and one is a new buy)—from one of these sectors.

To avoid the trap of excess capacity killing even modest profits I think you have to look for sectors that have barriers that prevent excess capacity from driving down all prices as companies slit each other’s throats to acquire profitless market share.

I can think of three big barriers like that.

First, brands. In markets and for products where consumers are willing to pay for a brand, the brand provides protection from excess capacity running prices so low that the producer can’t make a profit. This isn’t some new intellectual breakthrough on my part: its right out of the Warren Buffett playbook. It’s why he owns brands like American Express (AXP) and Coca Cola (KO). American Express manages to charge more for its cards (and to merchants who accept its cards) and Coke sells for more than the no-name sodas that my Dad used to buy because of their brand names. Unfortunately, there are fewer and fewer brand names that are able to withstand the onslaught of excess capacity. Cereal brand names such as Kellogg (K) are losing the pricing war to store brands. The Washington Post (WPO), another Buffett holding, has lost the news and ad battle to the excess capacity of the Internet. (Frankly, I think Buffett owns the Post these days for its Kaplan testing and electronic education business. Which is busy eating away at the brand names that support brick and mortar Halls of Ivy.) Look at your own buying habits: How many brand names do you pay extra for these days?

Second, distribution and service networks. Building new production capacity is relatively fast and easy these days. But distribution and service? That’s tough. Give me access to cheap capital and I can be turning out Jubak’s Cola—“The cola that talks back”–within a year and undercutting Pepsi and Coke on price too. But getting the stuff into stores? That’s the work of consistent investment running into the billions over a decade if you hope to compete with the system that puts PepsiCo’s (PEP) sodas, juices, water, and Frito-Lay snacks into every store from Buffalo Gap to Beijing. You can make a cheaper tractor than Deere (DE) sells—lots of companies do and more are trying—but Deere’s network of service centers and dealerships has been crafted over decades. Wal-Mart (WMT) is able to eat competitors alive every day not because it sells stuff for less but because it has a purchasing and distribution system that lets it sell stuff for less and still make a five-year average gross margin of 24.5%. And the company never stops honing this competitive weapon. If I were a Wal-Mart competitor I’d be up late almost every night worrying about news that Wal-Mart is going to up the percentage of the goods it sells that it buys straight from manufacturers.

Third, technology. I don’t mean commodity technology like memory chips. Once a technology gets mature enough so that anyone can produce it, technology itself stops being a barrier that protects your profits. Steel and automobiles were once cutting edge technologies too. No I’m talking about technology that’s on the edge of what’s new and where the company gets paid something extra for making something that’s more powerful, or smaller, of faster, or more complex than what existed yesterday. And I’m talking about companies that can produce a relatively constant stream of new technology products like that are able to constantly push the envelope of what’s possible.

Investors are fortunate right now to have two areas of the technology sector that are showing solid growth and that present significant barriers to the destruction of profits by global excess capacity. One is the next generation of networked information technologies. Desktops and laptops, storage devices, and even increasingly servers themselves are on their way to becoming technology commodities (if they’re not there already—have you priced a desktop lately?) where profits get crushed by global excess capacity. (Dell (DELL), for example, has run into this global buzz-saw.) But networked servers, and networked storage, and networked communication devices, and networked software that connects as a unified system both within the corporation and with customers as a cloud of distributed computing —that’s not a commodity. It isn’t because getting all this stuff of work together requires building not just a product but a system of suppliers and sub-suppliers that can provide compatible pieces and then also the service organization that can make sure that it all connects—securely—and keeps on connecting.

In a recent report Forrester Research called for a six- to seven-year cycle of spending on what it calls the new information technology foundations for unified computing (including cloud computing, storage and serve r virtualization, and unified communications. Global spending on information technology, which fell 9% in 2009, will climb 8% this year.

The other technology area with strong barriers to global excess capacity is the upgrading of wireless networks to handle the deluge of traffic that’s overwhelming networks as owners of iPhones, and Nexus Ones, and Blackberries, and Androids all do exactly what the companies that make and sell those devices want them to do: use them to download and send vast quantities of music, video, and graphics, and to run huge numbers of applications over their mobile devices.

Anyone who appreciates irony—well, anyone who appreciates irony but doesn’t work at AT&T (T)—had to chuckle when AT&T shut down iPhone sales in New York for a few days because iPhone users had overwhelmed its network. According to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) wireless data use is up 700% over the last four years and will grow by 130% a year for the foreseeable future.

Here the barriers to global excess capacity are very similar to those I just ran through for the new generation of information technology. The key to success in this area isn’t the cheapest price but the ability to deliver a seamless networked service.

I’ve got some names that you should own in this sector if you want to protect your portfolio from a profitless recovery created by global excess capacity.

One is Cisco Systems (CSCO). This stock is already in the Jubak Picks (and I think you can still buy it at current prices). Cisco is the IBM of the Internet—companies can buy the company’s gear and know that it will talk to the rest of the gear in their network (because Cisco probably sold them a good part of that gear and because everybody makes sure their gear works with Cisco equipment.) Plus Cisco has used recent acquisitions to continue its transformation from a simple—but globally dominant–seller of routers into a company that builds unified digital communications systems.

A second is Google (GOOG). Yes, Google stands a good chance of getting kicked out of China with its 1.3 billion potential Internet users (How old does a baby need to be to use the Gmail?). But no company is better positioned for the long-term trend toward distributed computing over the Internet than Google. If you own it, hold for the long-term and pick up more on any China-related weakness. (See my update of Google in the Jubak Picks 50 portfolio later today.)

A third is Marvell Technology Group (MRVL). The company has succeeded in driving its system on a chip solution from stand alone hard drives to the network itself in such areas as networked storage and mobile devices. I’m adding Marvell Technology Group to Jubak’s Picks with a buy today. See my post later today for more details including a target price.

These three areas and these three technology picks aren’t the only way to build a portfolio that avoids the danger of a profitless recovery. You can also look for smaller niches where it’s just about impossible to build new capacity—North American trans-continental railroads come to mind. I doubt that anyone will ever build another. Which has something to do with why Warren Buffett is buying Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNI).

You shouldn’t by any means assume that the only companies with barriers to global excess capacity like those I’ve talked about live in developed economies. One of the reasons that I recently added AmBev (ABV) to the Jubak’s Picks portfolio is because of the barriers created by its strong brands and distribution system in South America. See my post http://jubakpicks.com/2010/01/12/buy-ambev-abv/

And finally you shouldn’t assume that the best managed of the world’s companies aren’t aware of this problem. They’re busy working on new ways to differentiate themselves and protect their pricing power in a world of so much excess capacity. But that’s the topic for another column.

Full disclosure: I own shares of AmBev and Cisco Systems in my personal portfolio.

Related Posts

No related posts.

14 comments

  • bruttiumlv on 19 January 2010

    Jim , Intel does not fit those critera ? I don’t understand your recomendation then .

  • djpoints on 19 January 2010

    brittiumlv – I was wondering the same thing.

  • ichy_b on 19 January 2010

    From the article:
    “No I’m talking about technology that’s on the edge of what’s new and where the company gets paid something extra for making something that’s more powerful, or smaller, of faster, or more complex than what existed yesterday. And I’m talking about companies that can produce a relatively constant stream of new technology products like that are able to constantly push the envelope of what’s possible.”

    Pretty clearly describes Intel to me.

  • djpoints on 19 January 2010

    Also from the article:
    “The memory chip industry—awash in excess global capacity with more scheduled to come on line.”

    “Third, technology. I don’t mean commodity technology like memory chips. Once a technology gets mature enough so that anyone can produce it, technology itself stops being a barrier that protects your profits.”

    I agree with Jim’s statements above and the whole article for that matter, but they conflict with his earlier recommendation to buy Intel, no?

  • sukols on 19 January 2010

    Folks, Intel is not just some memory chip company. They make processors. Better, faster, smaller, more complex processors that do more with less power than anybody else’s. They’re not just powering PCs anymore, either. They power smartphones and tablets and will probably power the next line of gizmos that we haven’t even heard of yet. Intel is not stuck in some cheap commodity market. And have you checked out the competition lately? (Trick question–they don’t have any real competition!)

  • Jim Jubak on 19 January 2010

    If you’ve memorized everything I’ve written about Intel in say the last five years (what! you haven’t!), you’d see a stready change in my thought about Intel from analyzing it as a technology company to analyzing it as a manufacturing company. That’s why Intel doesn’t make my technology list along with a Cisco or Marvell. Intel is one of the greatest manufacturing companies in the world. Hands down. And the company really has only one competitor, itself. As a manufacturing company Intel rides a cost cycle. When Intel is introducing a new manfacturing cycle–as it is now–margins expand as the company is able to shift its selling mix toward new chip size. When that happens margins expand and I think you want to own the stock–as I do now. When the manufacturing platform matures, Intel cuts its own price to destroy any room for a competitor to gain a foothold by selling commodity chips at a profit. (No one can gain market share in the low cost product and use that to climb the competitive ladder because there’s no profit in that low cost product unless you already have Intel’s scale and manufacturing plants). When the company is in a price-cutting phase I think you want to consider selling the stock because even Intel doesn’t always manage the transitions in selling mix to perfect. I hope that clarifies things. (Intel is indeed not a commodity chip maker–it constantly gets out of commodity businesses.)

  • ramkumar on 19 January 2010

    Intel is also a great brand in PC market. ( The first criteria of the three from this article) .. Look at all the PCs and servers that sell just because it has “intel Inside” even though AMD makes some of the comparable / faster chips for PCs and sells cheaper than Intel made PCs.

  • richard.bready@gmail.com on 19 January 2010

    Jim, you omit here some good advice you gave a couple of years back: buy scarcity goods. Where supply is limited and demand can’t really go down, technology that produces, for instance, drinking water won’t see overproduction. This is a long-haul investment, but a retirement portfolio needs those too.

  • sigli on 20 January 2010

    Profitless prosperity was the buzz word for years following the Great Depression. I think we’ll see the same.

    What about an industrial REIT to play the distribution chain idea? If they aren’t making any more railroads then there isn’t going to be anymore railroad frontage land. Wouldn’t companies with a strong distribution chain rely on REITs that own railroad frontage land and property for expansion?

  • sigli on 20 January 2010

    @richard: How to play water besides everyone’s darling Flowserve? I think membranes are a great idea, but the technology seems to be controlled by GE, Seimens, etc–no pure play. There’s no real barrier to entry in drip irrigation other than distribution network. But then again, HD and LOW are always looking for lower merchandise costs, so what’s Toro’s big advantage?

    Maybe something out of Israel, the world leaders in H20 saving tech?

  • dennisjr42 on 20 January 2010

    I wholeheartedly agree with riding on the back of Cisco for the next 5-10 years. However, I think there has been a critical reason omitted from the above article. The evolution of the technology industry has seen the amount of IP traffic grow exponentially over the last few years. This trend is set to march steadily onward, or even pick up pace. DVD’s, Blu-Ray discs… in 10 years these will be things of the past. Physical media for movies and video games (two enormous industries) will be a thing of the past. Distribution methods will have shifted to a completely IP based digital model.

    There is also the upcoming conversion to IPv6. IPv4 addresses are set to run out in the next few years. This will require an upgrade in network infrastructure in most places.

    So global networks are needing to shift to IPv6 and support exponentially more traffic than they do now. It sounds to me like the company with a stranglehold on the network device industry would be a good play. Another play on this would be companies focused on digital storage.

  • richard.bready@gmail.com on 21 January 2010

    @sigli: I play water quietly and slowly, in Claymore and Calvert water funds. I like Calvert especially, for a commodity where profit can mean a lot of human suffering.

Post a comment

You need to login in order to post a comment.
 

Comments that include profanity, or personal attacks, or antisocial behavior such as "spamming" or "trolling," or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. We will take steps to block users who violate any of our terms of use. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.



Jubak in your Inbox

Get Email Alerts

Sign up now and download Jim's latest Special Report

Get the RSS feed

Quick Quote

Quotes provided by Yahoo! Finance and are delayed up to 20 minutes.