|
May 2002
Belaboring
The Point
Economic
Rehab...The patient is clearly out of the clinic and
functioning as a productive member of global society once
again. At least according to the 1Q 2002 GDP report.
As you know, we have seen just the first volley in what is sure to
be a spate of revisions to this number ahead. Real GDP was
up a respectable 5.8% during 1Q. As we have discussed in the
past, as opposed to "real" results we prefer to focus on
the nominal numbers for obvious reasons. We live in a
nominal world of currency, corporate revenues and net
income. The last time we checked, corporations were still
reporting results in nominal terms. But, who knows, if pro
forma corporate reporting is deemed unacceptable by the powers
that be, maybe companies will adopt "real"
reporting. After all, it works for the BEA (Bureau of
Economic Analysis). Quarter over quarter, nominal GDP was up
1.6% in absolute terms. Maybe
more importantly is a look at final sales. Although final
sales were up modestly in nominal terms during 1Q, historical year
over year change tells a much different story: 
Our
fearless leader at the Fed has mentioned many a time that he is
more concerned with final demand than with reported GDP. On
this issue we agree. Without reiterating the obvious, final
consumption is what the American economy is all about.
Important now possibly more than ever in that the 1Q GDP report
reflected yet another decline in capital spending. A
sustainable economic recovery will not be built on inventory
restocking. It either will or will not be built on the back
of the very highly levered US consumer. As
we have suggested for some time now, inventories indeed had a big
impact in the academic calculation of GDP for the quarter.
Inventories fell roughly $35 billion (annualized) in the quarter
compared to an almost $120 billion contraction in 4Q of last
year. This change of pace alone accounted for 53% of the
reported gain in real GDP for 1Q. As is clear, companies
have continued to eat away at inventories, although the rate of
decline has slowed dramatically from 4Q. It's pretty clear
that second quarter reported real GDP will not receive this type
of academic absolute percentage gain boost from declining
inventory contraction. Production
numbers for many sectors of the economy have been strong recently
as the rate of change in inventory contraction almost certainly
hit its lows in the fourth quarter of last year. But, in
like manner, it also appears clear that inventories are also being
rebuilt via foreign sourced product manufacturing. The
recent significant widening in the trade deficit resulted from a
very dramatic pickup in dollar based import volume relative to
export volume that remained rather stagnant. We consider the
spread between dollar based imports and exports one of a number of
critical variables that will ultimately shape any potential
recovery in US labor markets directly ahead. At the moment,
this spread is as wide as anything ever seen in recent history: 
As
you know, the recent economic downturn has been a chance for many
companies to shutter domestic manufacturing and source more
product abroad or move more of their own physical production
abroad. Despite the wonderful 5.8% 1Q GDP reading, close to
a quarter million real jobs were lost during the period.
Although consumers have continued to borrow and spend during this
ongoing period of contracting employment, we suggest they may face
a much different set of circumstances as we move forward.
The critical moment of truth for the US consumer lies dead ahead. Belaboring
The Point...Although many recent economic statistics
characterize what is the classic beginning of an economic
recovery, we are witnessing recent divergence in what we believe
to be the key area for potential future economic strength - labor
(the consumer). Although this is not without precedent in
early recovery cycles, initial jobless claims remain high.
As you may know, the recent time extension in jobless benefits
entailed those nearing the end of their current benefit period to
go through a formal reapplication process. These renewal
applications were counted in jobless claims stats some weeks
back. It caused a temporary spike that has now dissipated.
Although the anomaly spike is now over, initial claims remain high
relative to experience of the last few years: 
The
only other post recessionary period where this elongation in
relatively high initial claims experience was seen was during the
early 1990's. Job growth was sluggish for more than a year
at least. Maybe more importantly this go around is recent
"continued" jobless claims experience. Continued
claims peaked in late 2001 and began dropping during the first few
months of 2002. Completely typical experience for an
economic recovery. Unlike historical precedent, recent
continued claims have spiked anew to a high beyond what was seen
in late 2001. Even adjusting for the estimated benefits
extension influence, continued claims are breaking out to a new
high. It just so happens that this type of experience is
without precedent in an economic recovery period. From our
vantage point, this is not good news for the consumer. And
by extension, an ill wind for the consumer driven economy. Anecdotally,
we have witnessed many a first quarter corporate earnings report
be accompanied by new rounds of announced job cuts. Although
GE "made the number", they felt compelled to allow 7,000
folks at GE Capital to soon become untethered from the corporate
apron strings. Could it be that in spite of dramatic
personnel reductions over the past twelve months that corporations
have yet to fully rationalize cost structures relative to what you
see in the chart of final sales above? The fact is that it
very well could be. As you know,
we witnessed clear excess in corporate capital spending during the
1990's. So too did we witness labor markets as tight as
anything seen in decades. As we mentioned concerning the 1Q
GDP report, capital spending declined in 1Q. Corporations
are still smarting from the excess build up of capital equipment
in the prior decade. The recent durable goods report clearly
represents the fact that for now corporations are afraid to
spend. They may have temporarily stopped cutting back on
spending, but renewed or accelerated spending is nowhere in sight: In
like manner, it may very well be that we enter a new period of
continued labor weakness ahead. We have seen temp employment
pick up recently, but it has not yet translated into permanent
employment gains. At the moment, help wanted advertising
lies all of one point above a 38 year low: 
Reading
Between The Lines...Many of the recent batch of corporate
earnings reports are being "made" on the back of
continued cost cutting, not on nominal revenue and operating
earnings gains. In terms of the importance of nominal
numbers, we have constructed the following table that is a little
peak at nominal year over year sales growth over the last five
years for a cross-section of well known household names.
We've simply picked these at random. No hidden or devious
rationales. Have a look:
|
Parameter |
'01 |
'00 |
'99 |
'98 |
'97 |
|
|
|
GE |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
(2.9)% |
16.8% |
11.0% |
12.7% |
12.7% |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
36.4% |
36.7% |
35.8% |
34.8% |
34.9% |
|
IBM |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
(2.1) |
.97 |
7.2 |
4.0 |
3.4 |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
23.9 |
23.5 |
22.9 |
26.6 |
27.4 |
|
Emerson |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
(0.4) |
8.9 |
6.1 |
9.3 |
10.3 |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
19.9 |
19.2 |
19.4 |
19.9 |
19.9 |
|
Home
Depot |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
17.1 |
19.0 |
27.2 |
25.1 |
23.7 |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
20.9 |
20.7 |
19.8 |
19.7 |
19.7 |
|
Microsoft |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
10.2 |
16.3 |
29.4 |
34.4 |
31.0 |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
40.0 |
38.9 |
35.5 |
39.9 |
47.6 |
|
DuPont |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
(12.5) |
5.0 |
8.7 |
2.8 |
(37.2) |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
20.0 |
18.6 |
16.6 |
13.8 |
13.0 |
|
Costco |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
8.2 |
17.2 |
13.1 |
10.9 |
11.8 |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
9.2 |
8.7 |
8.6 |
8.6 |
8.7 |
|
P&G |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
(1.8) |
4.8 |
2.6 |
3.9 |
1.4 |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
31.6 |
31.3 |
28.5 |
27.0 |
27.9 |
|
Caterpillar |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
1.4 |
2.4 |
(6.1) |
10.8 |
14.5 |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
18.2 |
16.1 |
16.1 |
15.3 |
14.6 |
|
Coca
Cola |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
1.0 |
0.4 |
5.3 |
(0.3) |
1.0 |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
43.3 |
43.0 |
49.6 |
44.0 |
41.6 |
|
Knight
Ridder |
|
Yr/Yr
Revenue Change |
(9.7) |
5.9 |
(1.9) |
7.5 |
21.2 |
|
S,G&A
As % Of Revenues |
28.3 |
26.9 |
27.1 |
27.7 |
26.8 |
What stands out to us is that
although revenue growth has certainly slowed, especially during
2000 and 2001, the fall off is nowhere near what has been seen as
the rate of change decimation in actual corporate earnings.
As you know, we just lived through one of the mildest
"real" recessions in many a decade, yet simultaneously
experienced one of the greatest year over year implosions in
nominal corporate earnings in half a century. So let's get
this straight. Mild recession in terms of revenue softness,
but a nightmare in terms of translation to the bottom line. In
reading between the lines (the top and bottom lines), it appears
that the mismatch in rate of change between revenues and profits
in 2001 suggests that costs were not cut quickly enough to match
the downturn in revenue related change to preserve bottom line
performance in a more stable manner than was experienced. Implication
for the future? Nominal revenues in the form of increased
final sales better materialize, and soon, or it would seem highly
likely that corporate cost cutting is about to click up a notch or
two. As you can see in the table, we have included S,G&A
(selling, general and administrative) expenses as a percentage of
revenues for each company across each year. Although a
number of companies such as Emerson have done a simply fantastic
job of matching S,G&A against revenues (holding S,G&A as a
percentage of revenues constant), others such as CAT, KRI, MSFT,
etc. have allowed S,G&A to creep much higher as a percentage
of slowing revenue growth in recent years. As a quick
tangent, the year over year change in advertising spending in this
country last year was the greatest decline in more than half a
century. Ad spending was being cut drastically.
Certainly the other key component of S,G&A is human bodies and
their coincident salaries. If nominal final sales do not
pick up ahead, there is an excellent chance that further S,G&A
rationalization relative to revenues will take place. Not a
good omen for the current labor situation. Of course
ultimately influencing consumer behavior in terms of final sales. Waging
The Battle For Recovery...In addition to the current trends in
labor stats and the potential for additional labor related S,G,&A
rationalization ahead, it just so happens that history teaches us
that wage growth in early stage economic recoveries is not exactly
vibrant. In fact, quite the opposite. In early stage
economic recoveries throughout the last three decades, average
hourly earnings growth has fallen to a new post recessionary
low. And this is across all industry segments. The
following historical charts tell the story for themselves: 




In
deference to rejuvenating corporate profits, moderation in wage
gains post an economic slowdown has been a real shot in the
arm. As you can see in the charts, in many cases it is
multiple years after a dark side economic interlude when year over
year wage gains again reaccelerate. At the moment, current
wages take on possibly a multi decade peak level of importance in
that existing consumer leverage is at record levels. In the
following chart we take a look at personal consumption
expenditures and household leverage, both relative to disposable
personal income over the prior four decades. Although there
has been some acceleration during the 1990's, consumption relative
to disposable income has been relatively stable:

Household
leverage, though, has been a different story entirely. From
the perspective of the consumer and his/her ability to power the
economy forward ahead, we find ourselves in currently unique
circumstances. We find a consumer being called upon to serve
two masters - the need for continued consumption of real goods to
stimulate macro economic expansion and the simultaneous mandate to
fund existing principal and interest payments in terms of
servicing household leverage. At the same time we would
suggest that the consumer will be deprived of one of the most
essential gifts that drove personal consumption over the last
twenty years - the ability to refinance all forms of household
debt during a secularly declining interest rate environment.
We may be at a point where the ability of the consumer to
refinance household debt ahead has hit a secular peak (inverse to
interest rates). A peak that may be in existence for a good
while to come. Of course
the ultimate irony of the moment is that the year over year growth
rate in both final sales and personal income is near a four decade
low.

Certainly
where the economy heads over a period of months is anyone's
guess. What is clearly of singular importance over the
intermediate term to the macro US economy is continued expansion
in personal consumption. We suggest a consumption crossroads
lies ahead directly related to continued labor market softness,
the need for corporations to further reconcile cost structures
unless final sales (revenues) accelerate significantly, historical
precedent of early cycle recovery softness in wage gains, and the
fact that consumers heavily levered relative to historical
experience have little, if any, opportunity to refinance household
debt ahead. Before
signing off, we'll leave you with one last chart to ponder.
It goes without saying that the consumer will make or break the US
economy ahead. But, is this issue, in terms of the meaning
of the US consumer to global consumption and economic growth,
really much bigger than that? (Answer: You better believe it
is.)
|