Finance

KnowNOW!

Tags

Finance

Syndication

Recent Posts

Archives

About the Author

Nivine Richie, Ph.D., CFA is an Associate Professor of Finance at the University of North Carolina Wilmington. She teaches courses in corporate financial management, derivatives, fixed income, and commercial bank management. Her research interests include cost of capital, banking, and derivatives. She has published studies in the Journal of Economics and Finance, Journal of Futures Markets, Review of Futures Markets, and Journal of Trading, among others.

Life of the Young Investment Banker

05-24-2013 10:28 PM with no comments

Young analysts at top banks are being wooed by hedge funds, private equity firms, and venture capital firms. Traditionally, analysts were recruited after they’d spent two years at their first job, but the competition for these young minds is getting more fierce and the recruiting is beginning in the first year out of college.

                             

According to the NY Times (23 May 2013)

 

“Every year recruiters get hold of full lists of analysts in the top groups at the top banks,” said a second-year analyst at JPMorgan Chase who secured a private equity job a year ago. “Private equity funds want kids from the mergers and acquisitions, leveraged finance and financial sponsors groups so headhunters will call the main line at these desks and just recruit the analyst that picks up the phone.” It is difficult for these analysts to resist when recruiters sell the promise of high salaries and better hours.

 

“Right now, major investment banks are so highly regulated that they are no longer the most exciting places to be,” said Skiddy von Stade, the chief executive of OneWire, a technology recruiting platform focusing on the financial services industry. “Private equity shops are smaller, leaner and much less bureaucratic. You’re given the leeway to be creative and take risks. You may put in long hours when there’s a lot of work, but you don’t have to put in the face time when things are slow.”

 

For discussion:

 

What is the difference between a “buy-side” firm and a “sell-side” firm? Why would an analyst choose to leave the sell-side for the buy-side?

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

The Power of Compounding

05-23-2013 2:29 PM with no comments

“Compound interest is the most powerful force in the universe.

~ Albert Einstein

 

 

This report shows that $1 invested in 1925 would be worth $18,000 if you had invested in small cap stocks. Government bonds would only have yielded $123 and gold even less.

 

For discussion:

 

What is the compounded annualized return on each of the investments listed in this video? How much would you have earned if you invested $1,000 back then? What if it was $10,000? How much would you have earned if you had only invested for half of that time?

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

The "Narcissist" Stock Rally

05-22-2013 10:50 PM with no comments

Why do stocks go up?

 

Stocks rise on good news: corporate earnings, growth potential, economic growth. But one little mentioned reason for a stock rally is stock buybacks.

 

Dubbed the “narcissist rally,” the increase stock prices is being driven to some degree by the demand for shares by the issuing companies themselves.

 

According to NBC News (19 May 2013):

 

Flush with cash and a world of opportunity at their doorstep, companies have decided there's nothing more attractive than themselves. So, they're offering big money to buy back their own stock. This year, big U.S. companies have given the go-ahead for $286 billion of buybacks, up 88 percent from the same period last year, according to Birinyi Associates, a market research firm. If the pace continues for the rest of the year, the tally will exceed the record set in 2007.

 

The question is: just how much of an impact can companies have by announcing stock repurchase programs?

 

From the article:

 

Stocks move up for all sorts of reasons, so the exact impact on prices of individual stocks when companies buy their shares is unclear. In any event, the total amount of buybacks doesn't appear to be enough to have a big effect on the whole market. If companies in the S&P 500 follow through on their plans this year, the buybacks will amount to just 1 percent of total trading, estimates Robert Leiphart, an analyst at Birinyi.

 

Still, companies that do buy back their own stock are seeing prices soar, and almost immediately.

 

For discussion:

 

Why do companies buy back their own shares?

 

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Are Stocks On Course to Win?

05-19-2013 10:17 AM with no comments

According to experts, the evidence in favor of stocks is “overwhelming”.

In a CNBC interview, hedge fund manager David Tepper lists the evidence in favor of stocks. In the words of My Cousin Vinny, in fact, the evidence is so overwhelming that stocks will beat bonds, that Mr. Tepper says, “Case dismissed.”

 

This video below with hedge fund manager Ray Dalio tells the same story. He describes why bonds are less attractive than stocks in this market. The search for safe returns has driven short term rates to a negative real return and bond rates to less than 1%. Investors are searching for yields, leading them to explore other financial assets. Good news for stocks.

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Is Powerball The Winning Investment?

05-17-2013 11:01 PM with no comments

This video describes who the real winners of the Powerball lottery are:

 

1.    The state keeps 50% of the proceeds.

2.    The federal government takes 40% of the winner’s share.

3.    The city and state also win, depending on where the winner lives.

            

All told, the winner of the $600 million Powerball lottery on Saturday night will take home about $200 million. Not bad.

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Are Oil Prices Manipulated?

05-16-2013 3:06 PM with no comments

Several oil companies are under investigation for colluding on oil prices. In a series of surprise inspections, the European Commission is looking into whether BP, Royal Dutch Shell, and Platts colluded to manipulate the price of oil.

 

According to the NY Times (14 May 2013):

 

The authorities are focused in part on the price reporting system for oil and other petroleum products, which is dominated by a small group of companies like Platts. Such companies determine prices by polling traders and using other industry data.

 

In recent years, Platts has instituted a so-called electronic window through which a significant amount of oil is traded. At the end of each day, Platts determines prices based on the trades that go through this system, rather than by simply relying on polling companies.

 

There are concerns in the industry that companies could distort the prices through a blizzard of last-minute trades. “If you want access to liquidity you are forced to use the window,” said a senior oil trader. But he also said that the window, in theory, should be more accurate than prices determined just by polling traders because the prices were determined by actual trades.

 

For discussion:

 

Why is the price setting mechanism for oil and oil related products so important to regulators?

 

What are the concerns about the use of the Brent crude oil price as a benchmark?

 

What are some characteristics of a “good” benchmark price?

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Theme Park Investing

05-14-2013 5:13 PM with no comments

Despite the problems with the economy, consumers still go to theme parks for fun. Maybe because when times are tough, people find “stay-cations” more attractive or maybe because theme parks remind them of their own childhoods, parks like Cedar Point continue to bring in the profits.

                                   

For discussion

 

The video above describes how long it takes to bring a new roller coaster to market. In terms of capital budgeting, what details must the theme park operator consider before it can unveil a new roller coaster?

Posted by Nivine Richie

How to Judge an IPO

05-12-2013 6:11 PM with no comments

IPO investing seems to be the ticket to success in the stock market. However, not all IPOs have been winners, as investors in Facebook can attest.

 

According to Cramer, here are three things to evaluate when considering whether to invest in an IPO. Possibly more important than what the company makes is:

 

1.   The company’s pedigree. Who comprises the management team? What do we know about the folks who will be running the company?

 

2.   The company’s investors. If the current owners are private equity firms, then the investment may be difficult to judge. And the firm may not necessarily be profitable.

 

3.   The brokerage house bringing the deal. Large, well-known investment banks have their reputation on the line, so are perhaps less likely to bring a bad deal to market.

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Beach Boys Market Value

05-11-2013 3:57 PM with no comments

The largest collection of memorabilia is up for auction. One thousand pieces of Beach Boys memorabilia will be sold as one lot, including sheet music of Good Vibrations and their first royalty check for $990. The collection was found in a Florida storage unit and, after a long legal battle for control, is expected to bring millions at auction.

 

For discussion:

 

What is the book value of this collection? What is the difference between book value and market value?

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Monitoring Before the Crisis

05-10-2013 1:06 PM with no comments

In his recent speech at the Conference on Bank Structure and Competition, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Benanke discussed one of the responsibilities of the central bank, namely monitoring of the financial system. In the excerpt below, he explains the differences between triggers of financial crises and vulnerabilities associated with a financial crisis.

 

Ongoing monitoring of the financial system is vital to the macroprudential approach to regulation. Systemic risks can only be defused if they are first identified. That said, it is reasonable to ask whether systemic risks can in fact be reliably identified in advance; after all, neither the Federal Reserve nor economists in general predicted the past crisis. To respond to this point, I will distinguish, as I have elsewhere, between triggers and vulnerabilities.2 The triggers of any crisis are the particular events that touch off the crisis--the proximate causes, if you will. For the 2007-09 crisis, a prominent trigger was the losses suffered by holders of subprime mortgages. In contrast, the vulnerabilities associated with a crisis are preexisting features of the financial system that amplify and propagate the initial shocks. Examples of vulnerabilities include high levels of leverage, maturity transformation, interconnectedness, and complexity, all of which have the potential to magnify shocks to the financial system. Absent vulnerabilities, triggers might produce sizable losses to certain firms, investors, or asset classes but would generally not lead to full-blown financial crises; the collapse of the relatively small market for subprime mortgages, for example, would not have been nearly as consequential without preexisting fragilities in securitization practices and short-term funding markets which greatly increased its impact. Of course, monitoring can and does attempt to identify potential triggers--indications of an asset bubble, for example--but shocks of one kind or another are inevitable, so identifying and addressing vulnerabilities is key to ensuring that the financial system overall is robust. Moreover, attempts to address specific vulnerabilities can be supplemented by broader measures--such as requiring banks to hold more capital and liquidity--that make the system more resilient to a range of shocks.

 

For discussion:

 

Discuss each of the four components of the financial system that are most closely monitored by the Federal Reserve.

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Advice for Investors

05-09-2013 9:07 PM with no comments

Winning a winner’s game requires skill. The winner’s decisions must be superior to the opponent’s decisions. The loser’s game is different. Winning a loser’s game means staying in the game long enough to let your opponent lose. That is, winners must make fewer bad decisions than their opponents.

 

Charles Ellis, founder of Greenwich Associates and former director of Vanguard, is well-known in the investment management industry for describing the investment process as winning the loser’s game.

 

From a recent interview with Money Magazine (7 May 2013):

 

He shook up Wall Street in 1975 with a landmark article in a financial trade journal that attacked the notion that professional money managers consistently beat the market.

 

Nonprofessionals stand even less chance of outperforming the benchmarks, argued Ellis, so individuals need to rethink their approach to building wealth. That influential piece was the basis for Ellis's classic investing book, Winning the Loser's Game, the sixth edition of which is due in July.

 

For discussion:

 

According to this Vanguard blog about Charles Ellis, how can an investor outperform the market?

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Academic Research Meets Economic Policy

05-08-2013 8:46 PM with no comments

A recent Washington Post opinion piece by Lawrence Summers, past president of Harvard University and former Treasury secretary in the Clinton administration, sheds some light on the academic study being blamed for the current economic woes.

 

The study in question is a paper by Reinhart and Rogoff “Growth in a Time of Debt” which was then criticized by researchers at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. In response to the criticism, Reinhart and Rogoff issued the following statement:

 

In May 2010, we published an academic paper, “Growth in a Time of Debt” in the American Economic Review.  Its main finding, drawing on data from 44 countries over 200 years, was that in both rich and developing countries, high levels about of government debt — specifically, gross public debt equaling 90 percent or more of the nation’s annual economic output — was associated with lower rates of growth.

 

On April 15, 2013, three economists at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, released a paper criticizing our findings. They correctly identified a spreadsheet coding error that led us to miscalculate the growth rates of highly indebted countries since World War II. They also accused us of “serious errors” stemming from “selective exclusion” of relevant data and “unconventional weighting” of statistics.

 

Summers points out a few lessons worth remembering:

 

1.      Though the researchers being criticized are careful and credible, journals should confirm the accuracy of results before publishing.

2.      Even when the results are accurate, we should be careful about relying on prior data when forecasting.

3.      These researchers are not to blame for the economic policy, nor should people of differing political viewpoints take pleasure in embarrassing them.

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Are Rolling Stones' Tickets Too Rich?

05-05-2013 6:35 PM with no comments

 

This Bloomberg video shows that the $600 tickets to the Rolling Stones concert are a tough sell. Not that there isn’t demand for the tickets. After all, when the promoter had a “flash sale” on tickets for $85, they sold 1,000 tickets and nearly crashed the ticketing system.

 

The ticket promoter is on the hook if tickets don’t sell. They’ve already guaranteed a specific amount of money to the band, so unsold tickets are not the Rolling Stones’ problem.

 

Supply and demand. It’s a tricky thing sometimes.

 

For discussion

 

Based on this Bloomberg video, how is the promotion and sale of Rolling Stones tickets similar to a “Best Efforts” underwriting in the new issue bond market?

 

What are other ways that a bond underwriter can bring a deal to market without taking on so much risk?

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Should We Buy LinkedIn Shares?

05-04-2013 4:50 PM with no comments

LinkedIn’s shares were down in spite of increased revenues and profits. Though revenues doubled and profit quadrupled, the numbers did not hit analyst estimates.

 

Jim Cramer likes the stock anyway.

 

Do you?

 

For discussion:

 

What negative news caused the stock to fall?

 

How does LinkedIn generate a profit?

 

Is the business model for social media firms like LinkedIn likely to be profitable in the future? What do you think of LinkedIn’s growth prospects?

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

Betting on Boeing

05-04-2013 12:19 AM with no comments

Would you bet on Boeing?

 

According to this interview, Boeing stock has the potential to go higher. Recently, options activity suggested that investors were optimistic that the stock would go up. That is, investors bought call options and the stock rose above $90/share. Some believe the stock could rise to over $100/share. The trader in this interview suggests several compelling reasons to buy the stock. One reason is the 2.1% dividend yield, which is better than buying US Treasury bonds.

 

For discussion:

 

What is a call option? What is a put option?

 

What does it mean to be long or short calls and puts?

 

Which option contract would you buy if you thought the price of a stock was going up? Which one would you buy if you thought that the price was going down?

 

Posted by Nivine Richie

More Posts Next page »