Joe Mazumdar: Seven Gold and Uranium Juniors with Near-Term Growth You Can’t Ignore

Source: Peter Byrne of The Mining Report   (2/4/14)

http://www.theaureport.com/pub/na/joe-mazumdar-seven-gold-and-uranium-juniors-with-near-term-growth-you-cant-ignore

Many junior miners have an ace up the sleeve, and that is commodity price leverage. Joe Mazumdar, senior mining analyst with Canaccord Genuity, sat down with us to share what he looks for in junior companies with a lot of commodity price leverage. In this interview with The Mining Report, find out why bigger isn’t necessarily better when it comes to gold mining projects, and why the market is favoring uranium explorers over producers—for now. Mazumdar also shares names of gold companies with “bite-sized” capital needs from Burkina Faso to California, as well as the apples of his eye in the Athabasca Basin, where management teams with significant track records are heading up promising exploration programs.

The Mining Report: The Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) global index dropped 50% during the past year. Where is the silver-gold lining in this cloud?

Joe Mazumdar: Financing risk for the junior mining sector was highly elevated, to say the least, in 2013 and remains a source of uncertainty in 2014. To reduce the risk of financing a project, we seek projects that generate double-digit returns in the current pricing environment. We also look for management teams with the technical capacity to not only build and operate a mining project, but also to successfully execute the business plan, which includes permitting the project and attracting good personnel. We want to mitigate the technical and execution risks inherent in a project by selecting these management teams. As senior management cannot mitigate all risks such as geopolitical and financing risk, we seek projects in manageable jurisdictions where the management has appreciable relevant experience. Another key is that the underlying asset requires a manageable or “bite-sized” upfront capital requirement.

To be clear, we tend not be overly attracted to projects with significant production profiles that move the needle for large producers. These projects tend to require significant upfront capital expenditures, which puts one at the extreme end for financing risk, and do not offer the returns that investors are currently seeking. We are interested in projects with smaller annual production profiles (100,000–150,000 ounces [100,000–150,000 oz]) that can interest an intermediate acquirer and provide a decent internal rate of return (IRR). At that level with a good IRR, an intermediate can show growth that would not move the needle for a major, as well as provide a return for its shareholders.

TMR: In terms of financing, exchange-traded funds (ETFs) have negatively affected the positions of shareholders in the mining spaces. Do you see any change in that phenomenon?

JM: Since inception, the ETFs have eroded the premiums of gold mining companies. But most of the erosion has happened among majors and intermediate producers, less so for junior developers and explorers, as they do not actually produce gold and do not attract the same investor base. In the last year, in our analysis of the sensitivities of gold equities to the gold prices, we have certainly seen that the junior sector is best for investors who want high beta to the gold price.

TMR: Let’s talk about mergers and acquisitions (M&A), which are always germane to junior mining companies. How are those getting funded in today’s financial environment?

JM: As producers have not seen share price depreciation to the extent that juniors have, suitors have tended to finance their M&A transactions predominantly through shares and less so with cash. Some deals include cash as an incentive to make the deal transactable—or to avoid having to go back to the shareholders for a vote to complete the transaction. We saw a cash component in the hostile bid byGoldcorp Inc. (G:TSX; GG:NYSE | Buy rated covered by Tony Lesiak) for Osisko Mining Corp. (OSK:TSX | Hold rated covered by Rahul Paul). That deal was positive for the gold sector because it provides confidence to shareholders that majors can be disciplined enough to make accretive transactions and not always make their acquisitions at the peak of the cycle.

The fall in the junior mining sector over the past few years and the “U-shaped” recovery make this a buyer’s market. In part due to the underlying financing risk, developers and explorers are trading at low historic multiples. The potential suitor, whether it be an intermediate or a major, can be very selective, as the ability to “transact” these acquisitions is high. Potential acquisitions will be suitor specific where the nature of the jurisdiction, as well as the suitor’s comfort level with developing and operating that asset, will come into play.

Suitors will acquire assets to diversify their asset base and/or add to their development pipeline with inexpensive options. While a few years ago a company would pay up to $70/oz for gold ounces in the Inferred category, currently it may be able to acquire for the same price or less ounces in the reserve category that may already be permitted for development.

TMR: Gold prices in India have dropped from a September high. What is your demand outlook for physical gold in India and China?

JM: Because India suffers from inflation and a weak currency, the local gold price has remained relatively high. India also has imposed duties and restrictions on the importation of gold. Nonetheless, gold still gets into the South Asian nation—albeit with less transparency than a few years ago. The bottom line is that India is buying physical gold because the underlying demand for it remains strong. In 2013, gold continued its flow from West to East with ETF outflows and growth in physical demand by China and India. China is the largest player in the gold market as it has replaced India as the biggest consumer of gold and is also the largest producer.

TMR: How do these trends affect the stock prices of junior gold companies?

JM: The gold price was down 15–30% in various currencies that we track in 2013, mostly due to investment underpinned by ETF outflows. That obviously had a negative impact on our sector. Now, the gold price has been flat to up, but because the betas are so high, the sector as a whole has moved up. Companies that were down over 60% came up almost that much in the month of January, and the gold price itself has not moved that much. We are seeing hypersensitive stocks with high betas to gold react to shifts in the gold price and the re-emergence of an underlying M&A bid for these stocks due in part to the current depressed valuations.

We are looking for companies that may be considered as M&A targets but with management teams that have the capacity to go it alone if the offers are less than attractive. Companies that lack these management teams will have no choice but to take the bid. I encourage investors to seek junior mining stocks where the underlying assets generate double-digit returns (>20%) under the current price environment. Note that companies seeking debt financing for projects are having their assets stress tested to gold prices of US$1,000 to US$1,100/oz.

TMR: Do you have any picks for us?

JM: One company that stands out is Orezone Gold Corporation (ORE:TSX | Spec Buy rated covered by Joe Mazumdar), which has rebranded itself from developing its Bomboré asset in Burkina Faso as a low-grade, open-pit milling operation on the oxide and sulphide ore that is marginal at current gold price levels to seeking to develop an open-pit, heap-leach scenario on the oxide portion of the resource. Orezone released a scoping study to provide the market a preliminary glance at the economics of the heap-leach scenario last week, which generates a >20% return applying our gold forward curve. The bite-sized capital requirement of US$200 million helps provide that level of IRR. The asset is located in a manageable geopolitical jurisdiction that has seen some M&A activity in the latter part of 2013.

Orezone is planning on delivering a feasibility study on the heap-leach scenario in the latter part of 2014. The management team has considerable experience in vending projects to majors in Burkina Faso. Not long ago, the CEO vended the Essakane gold project in the northern part of Burkina Faso to IAMGOLD Corp. (IMG:TSX; IAG: NYSE | Hold rated covered by Tony Lesiak).

 

TMR: What makes Burkina Faso attractive?

JM: Burkina Faso has 1) a significant geological endowment, 2) a streamlined permitting process, 3) other operating mines and pools of trained workers. The execution risk is not as high as in some West African nations. The combination has attracted some M&A activity in the area in the latter part of 2013. We saw B2Gold Corp. (BTG:NYSE; BTO:TSX; B2G:NSX | Buy rated covered by Rahul Paul) acquire Volta Resources Inc. (VTR:TSX). We saw Centamin Plc (CEE:TSX; CNT:ASX; CEY:LSE | Speculative Buy rated covered by Dmitry Kalachev), seeking diversification from Egypt, acquire Ampella Mining Ltd. (AMX:ASX). In our opinion, Burkina Faso and Ghana are two of the more stable countries in which to look for companies that can attract M&A bids.

 

TMR: What else is on your radar?

JM: We also favor Castle Mountain Mining Co. Ltd. (TSXV:CMM | Speculative Buy rated covered by Joe Mazumdar). This is an open-pit, heap-leach development play in California’s San Bernardino County. I know that some are wary of California, but this is a permitted project that was a producer in the 1990s (Viceroy). Castle Mountain Mining continues to derisk the potential restart and declared a resource with a significant amount of Indicated resource. We anticipate a scoping study out by February 2014. This is a micro-cap play that may represent an easy bolt-on for an intermediate. We find it quite attractive.

 

TMR: How has the market been treating Castle Mountain over the last period?

 

JM: We started covering it in October 2013 when it traded at $0.40/share. It has come up 50% since then after it released a resource update in the latter part of 2013. Our current target price of CA$1 is based on its M&A potential and the further derisking to come through the delivery of a scoping study and eventually a feasibility study. Remember the project already has a permit to develop the deposit as it was left on care and maintenance after the previous operation was reclaimed.

 

I also want to draw your readers’ attention to another open-pit, heap-leach project in California (Kern County): Golden Queen Mining Co. Ltd. (GQM:TSX | Speculative Buy rated covered by Joe Mazumdar). It is also a permitted open-pit, heap-leach development play but with 2P reserves known as Soledad Mountain. The company is currently breaking ground on the Soledad Mountain project. The project’s proximity to infrastructure such as rail, highway and power are advantages for controlling potential capital escalation.

 

TMR: Is that an old mine that was producing?

JM: Soledad Mountain was previously an underground mine. Golden Queen has been working to restart it as an open-pit, heap-leach project. It has taken a while to permit because the firm had to deal with changes in the reclamation laws in California, which involve certain levels of backfilling of waste and limits on the mining rate, among other requirements. Golden Queen Mining has joined Castle Mountain and Midway Gold Corp. (MDW:TSX.V; MDW:NYSE.MKT | Hold rated covered by Joe Mazumdar) that have permitted open-pit, heap-leach projects in the southwest U.S.

 

TMR: Is anything happening for you in the uranium space?

 

JM: Uranium prices, with spot prices hovering around US$35/pound (US$35/lb) U3O8, have hurt producers. However the deferral of capital projects and prospects for a growth in demand from Asia, specifically from China, are positives. Given the long lead times from exploration to production, we favor junior explorers in the sector within low geopolitical jurisdictions such as the Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan.

 

We cover Fission Uranium Corp. (FCU:TSX.V | Speculative Buy rated covered by Joe Mazumdar), which we believe has an outstanding project along the southwest margin of the Athabasca Basin. Drilling over the past year or so has returned phenomenal results that indicate a shallow average depth of the U3O8 mineralization. We currently estimate a resource of 34–35 million pounds (34–35 Mlb) grading 3.6% U3O8. It may be fully valued at 34–35 Mlb U3O8, but the attainable goal is to declare a resource greater than 50 Mlb.

 

Fission just released its first round of preliminary results from its 30,000 meter 2014 drill program, which were excellent. The news flow will keep going until March or April 2014, when the winter program ends, but we should still be seeing assays for another two months following that. Some of Fission’s zones of U3O8 mineralization are technically amenable to open-pit mining at a pretty decent grade—well over 1%. Saskatchewan is a very good geopolitical jurisdiction. Fission will, in our opinion, require further derisking in the form of a maiden resource estimate leading to a scoping study to attract any significant M&A bids.

 

TMR: Are there any other promising uranium juniors operating in the Athabasca Basin?

 

JM: Our 2014 Junior Mining Sector Watch List is composed of some uranium exploration companies that have management teams with explorationists who have discovered or worked on well-established deposits in the Athabasca Basin. Two companies that we prefer are spinoffs from the merger of Fission Uranium and Alpha Minerals Inc. (delisted). Alpha Exploration Inc. (AEX:TSX.V) is one of them. It is run by the old Alpha Minerals team, who were also part of the old Hathor Exploration Ltd. team. So it has quite an excellent track record. The team recently accepted an award at the Vancouver Mineral Exploration Roundup just last week for discovering the deposit. The other spinoff is Fission 3.0 Corp. (FUU:TSX-V), which has the same management team as Fission Uranium, which, incidentally, won an award. [Editor’s note: Ross McElroy Fission Uranium CEO won the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada2014 Bill Dennis Award for an important Canadian discovery and prospecting success.] Both of those companies have stellar management teams that have been there and done that in the basin.

 

And in terms of investing in people who are comfortable where they are working and who have a history of finding the U3O8 mineralization and converting it to resources, I like Forum Uranium Corp. (FDC:TSX.V). The company is run by a management team with a track record of discovering with major uranium players such as AREVA SA (AREVA:EPA).

 

TMR: I have noticed that there is a bit of a disparity in the stock performance of the uranium industry in the Athabasca.

JM: The disparity between the valuations of producers and explorers is in our opinion due in part to the fact that the Broker Average price is trading around the marginal cost of producing a pound of uranium for some producers. The low spot price, and the long-term price as well to some degree, is a function of a surplus in part resulting from the protracted reactivation of the Japanese nuclear industry. Depending on a company’s exposure to spot prices and the quality of the underlying asset, margin squeeze may be an issue.

 

Uranium explorers, however, are focused on the long term where one seeks the incentive price to bring a project forward. The thesis for the long term is that China is planning on expanding its nuclear capacity. There is a long lead time—10 years—to finding, developing, permitting and actually producing uranium. The time is ripe now for exploring, especially in low geopolitical jurisdictions that offer high-grade deposits such as the Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan. That accounts for the dichotomy between an explorer that’s exposed to the long-term incentive price that people are modeling at over $65/lb and producers that are exposed to spot levels of $35–37/lb.

 

TMR: Why should our readers invest in uranium stocks over the Dow Jones’ best performers?

 

JM: Because if there is a potential shortfall in uranium going forward, investing in explorers is the way to go. The uranium explorers in Saskatchewan did quite well with respect to financing last year, whereas the producing companies suffered. In our opinion, in 2013, uranium was one of the few sectors in the junior mining sector that attracted investor interest.

 

TMR: Does that analysis apply to gold as well?

 

JM: In terms of the precious metals sector, we are witnessing a slow rebound from the June 2013 low on the TSX Venture. We urge your readers to follow well-run companies exploring for or developing assets that can generate decent returns in the current gold price environment. These are companies, we believe, that will attract financing. Junior companies with assets that represent out of the money options may continue to suffer if gold remains sideways to down.

 

TMR: Always a pleasure, Joe.

 

JM: Thanks for inviting me, Peter.

 

Joe Mazumdar joined Canaccord Genuity in December 2012 from Haywood Securities, where he also was a senior mining analyst focused on the junior gold market. The majority of his experience is with industry including corporate roles as director of strategic planning, corporate development at Newmont in Denver and senior market analyst/trader at Phelps Dodge in Phoenix. Mazumdar worked in technical roles for IAMGold in Ecuador, North Minerals in Argentina/Chile and Peru, RTZ Mining and Exploration in Argentina and MIM Exploration and Mining in Queensland, Australia, among others. Mazumdar has a Bachelor of Science in geology from the University of Alberta, a Master of Science in geology and mining from James Cook University and a Master of Science in mineral economics from the Colorado School of Mines.

 

Want to read more Mining Report interviews like this? Sign up for our free e-newsletter, and you’ll learn when new articles have been published. To see a list of recent interviews with industry analysts and commentators, visit our Streetwise Interviews page.

 

DISCLOSURE:
1) Peter Byrne conducted this interview for The Mining Report and provides services to The Mining Report as an independent contractor. He or his family own shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None.
2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of The Mining Report: Fission Uranium Corp. and Forum Uranium Corp. Goldcorp Inc. is not affiliated with The Mining Report.Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services or as sponsorship payment.
3) Joe Mazumdar: I or my family own shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I personally am or my family is paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. My company has a financial relationship with the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.
4) Interviews are edited for clarity. Streetwise Reports does not make editorial comments or change experts’ statements without their consent.
5) The interview does not constitute investment advice. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her individual financial professional and any action a reader takes as a result of information presented here is his or her own responsibility. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer.
6) From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as well as persons interviewed for articles and interviews on the site, may have a long or short position in securities mentioned and may make purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or otherwise.

 

Streetwise – The Gold Report is Copyright © 2014 by Streetwise Reports LLC. All rights are reserved. Streetwise Reports LLC hereby grants an unrestricted license to use or disseminate this copyrighted material (i) only in whole (and always including this disclaimer), but (ii) never in part.

 

Streetwise Reports LLC does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported.

 

Streetwise Reports LLC receives a fee from companies that are listed on the home page in the In This Issue section. Their sponsor pages may be considered advertising for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1734.

 

Participating companies provide the logos used in The Gold Report. These logos are trademarks and are the property of the individual companies.

 

101 Second St., Suite 110
Petaluma, CA 94952

Tel.: (707) 981-8999
Fax: (707) 981-8998
Email: [email protected]

 

 

Uganda holds rate, drops warning about inflation

By CentralBankNews.info
    Uganda’s central bank held its Central Bank Rate (CBR) steady at 11.5 percent but softened its warning about inflation, saying it expects headline and core inflation to remain in the 5-6 percent range in the first half of this year and then rise only gradually above the bank’s target over the next 12 months as excess capacity is absorbed.
    In today’s policy statement, the Bank of Uganda (BOU) omitted last month’s stern warning that it would take “appropriate action” to ensure than core inflation remains around the bank’s 5.0 percent target.
    However, the central bank still noted there were several risks to inflation, including the dry spell in parts of the East African region that might affect food prices along with a reversal of the current exchange rate appreciation that could strengthen inflationary pressures.
    Uganda’s core inflation, which excludes food, energy and utilities, eased to 4.6 percent in January from 5.7 percent in December, with core prices virtually flat in the three months to January due to exchange rate appreciation of about 6.8 percent over the last 12 months.
    Headline inflation rose to 6.9 percent in January from 6.7 percent due to a rise in annual food crop inflation to 21.4 percent form 12.7 percent.

    The BOU last cut its CBR rate by 50 basis points in December after cutting the rate in June and then raising it again in September.
    The BOU reiterated its forecast for economic growth in the current 2013/14 financial year, which began on July 1, to range between 6.0 and 6.5 percent, as household demand is slowly gaining traction and expected to continue to rise with banks’ credit to households rising by 38 percent in December compared with a 13 percent contraction at the same time in 2012.
    The BOU expects this buoyant credit to support growth going forward, on top of fiscal stimulus and public infrastructure investment, but cautioned that the economy faces risks if the conflict in South Sudan is sustained.
    Uganda’s economy contracted by 0.6 percent in the third calendar quarter from the second quarter for annual growth of 2.2 percent, down from a rate of 5.8 percent in the second quarter.

    http://ift.tt/1iP0FNb

Pension Promises Go Unfulfilled

Guest Post By Dennis Miller – Pension Promises Go Unfulfilled

I don’t know which is worse: realizing you cannot keep a promise you made to someone important to you, or being the person who relied on the promise when you grasp that it is not going to be kept.

In 1973, I was 33 years old and just starting a public-speaking career. The National Speakers Association asked me to join, and I became a charter member. Our first president, the late Bill Gove, was a terrific speaker and also a great salesman—one of the top life insurance salesmen in the country for many years.

One of his favorite lines was quite telling. He would ask his prospect, “How much life insurance do you have?” The person would tell him. Bill would pause, get a funny look on his face, and deliver the punch line as a question: “You don’t plan on being dead very long?” Every time I saw him deliver that line, the audience would roar.

Were Bill alive today, he would probably be selling annuities to those same clients. I don’t understand why insurance companies don’t call annuities “enjoying-life insurance.” If they did, they would probably sell more. Somehow I can’t see Bill telling a story of asking a prospect about their retirement portfolio, and then delivering the punch line, “You don’t plan on being retired very long?” My guess is the audience would shift in their seats and perhaps chuckle uncomfortably. What’s the difference? An entire generation would know he is right; we are very worried that we won’t have enough money to enjoy retirement.

So what has changed since 1973? Most of us never thought too much about retirement when we were younger. In the 1970s, if you worked for the government, were a union member, or worked for a medium to large corporation, there was a good probability that you were guaranteed a pension, particularly if you worked there for any length of time. Couple that with Social Security and you could enjoy retirement. My dad had two pensions—one from the State of Illinois and another from the post office—and he did just that.

During my career, I trained salespeople and managers. I always warned salespeople not to exaggerate or overpromise to their clients. I told them: “Don’t let your hippopotamus mouth overload your hummingbird ass!” That line certainly got their attention. The consequences of not keeping a promise in the marketplace can be devastating. They can include the loss of a client, but also the loss of your reputation.

The corporate world, many unions, and federal, state, and local governments are all guilty of doing just that. They made pension promises to their employees that they just could not keep. I had a good friend who became a senior pilot at Delta Airlines and was quite proud the day he flew his last flight into Atlanta Hartsfield Airport. The customary fire hoses greeted his plane, and he had a big retirement party. Less than two years later, Delta filed for bankruptcy, the government took over its pension obligations, and his pension was drastically reduced. Sad to say, he passed away within five years.

The current Employee Benefit Research Institute Retirement Survey reports that only 3% of employees in the private sector have a pension plan. The rest have some sort of savings plan, like a 401(k). Corporate America has successfully unraveled from its pension promises in two ways: either companies bellied up and shifted the pension liability to the government; or they transferred the responsibility back to individual workers. It is now our job to worry about our own well-being. In effect, companies now just administrator voluntary savings plans for their employees.

While corporate America made promises it could not keep, at least most companies ‘fessed up to the economic reality, explained that making good on their promises would force them into bankruptcy, and got out from under those commitments.

Our government is doing the opposite of ‘fessing up. While corporate America is unraveling from economic promises it could not keep, governments big and small are doing the opposite. In addition to their generous pension plans, we all now have health care (even non-citizens), food stamps, longer-term unemployment benefits, etc. The list of promises goes on and on. The government has its hippopotamus mouth going full blast in every election cycle, making promises to win elections.

Those who speak up (see Ron Paul) and point out that those economic promises are going to bankrupt us all are criticized and ridiculed. Unfortunately, there is one major difference between corporate America making promises and the government doing the same: the government is making promises with our money! It is driving us into bankruptcy. When that happens, the value of a country’s currency will normally collapse, destroying the wealth of seniors and savers in the process.

While it may be bleak, it is not hopeless. I recently read John Stossel’s latest book, No, They Can’t: Why Government Fails—But Individuals Succeed. The book outlines our current predicament in very easy-to-understand terms. It also strengthened my personal resolve and gave me hope… a funny choice of words, as I think about it.

Every day, more people see these promises for what they really are: hollow and illusionary. There is no point in debating whether they were made in good faith or not. Who the hell cares? The real issue is: they are promises that are financially impossible to keep.

John’s book reinforced what I already knew: Americans are a hardy lot, and a lot of us succeed in spite of horrible obstacles placed in front of us. The first step is to pop the illusion bubble, accept the responsibility for our own retirements, and get on with the job.

Oh, and to address the question I asked in the first paragraph. Worrying about breaking a promise is only important to folks with a conscience—not the kind of people who will just tell others whatever they want to hear. Guess what? We are on to their game and their phony promises. Educated, take-charge retirees can thrive when they put their minds to it. The government may renege on their promises, but we will succeed in spite of that.

I was so impressed with Stossel’s book that I invited him to join us for an exclusive discussion on the challenges facing seniors. In addition, I’ve pulled together other experts including David Walker, former Comptroller General of the United States, and Jeff White, president of American Financial Group, to give you practical solutions to today’s financial challenges.

Our event, America’s Broken Promise: Strategies for a Retirement Worth Living is free, and is available on-demand. Act now to watch this special event and learn more about the challenges facing retirees and savers.

 

 

 

Romania sees sharp drop in H1 inflation, then within target

By CentralBankNews.info
    Romania’s central bank, which earlier today cut its policy rate for the sixth time in a row, said its inflation report will reiterate the outlook for a sharp, albeit temporary, drop in inflation in the first half of 2014 before returning to the bank’s target band and then remaining in the upper half of the band due to changes to administered prices and a gradual narrowing of the negative output gap as the economy improves.
    The National Bank of Romania (NBR), which cut its rate by 25 basis points to 3.50 percent, did not give any specific policy guidance in its statement, apart from saying it would closely monitor domestic and global economic developments and calibrate monetary policy to ensure price stability over the medium term.
    The quarterly inflation report, which will be released on Feb. 6, points to faster disinflation due to one-off factors, such as above average crops in 2013, a cut in VAT for bread, flour and some bakery products, the base effect of the weak 2012 harvest, higher electricity prices in December 2012, along with more persistent factors, such as the negative output gap and inflation expectations.
    Romania’s inflation rate fell to 1.6 percent in December from November’s 1.8 percent, with the average annual rate for 2013 down to 4.0 percent in December. The central bank targets inflation at a midpoint of 2.5 percent within a band of plus/minus one percentage point.
     In its November inflation report, the NBR forecast end-2013 inflation of 1.8 percent and 2014 inflation of 3.0 percent and forecast that inflation would fall below the lower bound of its target range, i.e. 1.5 percent, in the first half of this year and then gradually rise.
    “The significant improvement in the path of inflation and the related outlook has enabled the central bank to gradually adjust the monetary policy stance over the past few months, while effectively anchoring inflation expectations and closely monitoring domestic and external developments,” NBR said.
   Risks in the new forecasts related to volatile capital flows and the variability of investors’ risk appetite as far as their exposure to emerging economies. Domestic risks relate to the implementation of structural reforms amid the upcoming elections.  
    Romania’s economy has been improving in 2013 mainly due to higher exports – improving the current account – while consumption and investment are seen recovering more gradually. Lending to the private sector is negative, the NBR said, but rate cuts are feeding through to lending rates with a lag and the reduction in the minimum reserve requirements should provide further incentives for lending to the Romanian economy.
    The country’s Gross Domestic Product expanded by 1.6 percent in the third quarter from the second quarter for annual growth of 4.1 percent, up from 1.5 percent in the second quarter.

     www.CentralBankNews.info
   

Emerging market c.banks face tough choices-BIS paper

By CentralBankNews.info

    Central banks in emerging markets (EM) face tough monetary policy decisions in coming years as advanced economies eventually start to raise short-term rates and trim their holdings of bonds, with a massive expansion in international debt issuance by EM corporations in recent years raising their vulnerability to foreign exchange swings.
    One of the characteristics of global finance in the last decade has been the deeper integration of emerging markets into global debt markets, making them much more sensitive to changes in bond markets in advanced economies, writes Philip Turner of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in a highly topical working paper.
    Since the financial crises, borrowers from emerging markets have relied more on international bond markets and less on international banks, with EM borrowers raising about $900 billion from international bond investors, double the amount that banks have lent to them.
    Some of these corporations are wholly or partly owned by EM governments and despite the turbulence in global bond markets from May 2013, net bond issuance remained quite strong in the second half of last year,” Turner writes in BIS working paper: “The global long-term interest rate, financial risks and policy choices in EMEs.”

    Turner examines what the proceeds from these foreign currency bonds could have been used for and concludes that on the face of it, the currency exposures of EM corporates have increased.
    He also finds that the issuance of bonds on that scale could affect domestic banking systems in EM countries if the funding were to dry up: This could happen hrough local banks, who might turn their back on small firms if large firms return from global markets, by a drying up of wholesale funding markets, or through the hedging of foreign exchange or maturity exposures by the large corporates.
    “As a result of these linkages, the central bank may face greater instability in its domestic interbank market whenever large corporations find it hard to finance themselves abroad,” Turner writes.
    The movements in U.S. long-term interest rates can thus have major implications for both monetary policy and financial stability in emerging market economies with the long period of declining global interest rates over.
    “Downward pressures on some EM currencies could be accentuated, increasing the local currency cost of servicing dollar debt,” Turner writes, adding:
    “Higher long-term rates, currency depreciation and more volatile markets could make even more difficult the choices that EM central banks face on their policy rate, on the exchange rate, on the long-term interest rate and the best use of their balance sheet.”

Daily Technical Strategist on EURUSD – Vulnerable, Bear Threats Yet To Be Over

EURUSD: Vulnerable, Bear Threats Yet To Be Over

EURUSD: While recovery attempts may be seen, EUR remains weak and susceptible to the downside. This leaves the risk of a recapture of the 1.3476 level on the cards. Further down, a break will aim at the 1.3400 level, its psycho level followed by the 1.3350 level and subsequently the 1.3300 level. On the other hand, resistance resides at the 1.3602 level, its Jan 29’2014 low with a cut through here turning attention to the 1.3650 level and then the 1.3700 level. Further out, resistance is seen at the 1.3739 level, its Jan 24 high and then the 1.3818 level, its Dec 30 2013 high. All in all, EUR remains biased to the downside short term.

Article by www.fxtechstrategy.com

 

 

 

EURUSD Elliott Wave Analysis: Heading Much Lower

As expected, the EURUSD has turned down from above 1.3700 area where we labeled end of an expanded flat formation that now shows signs of completion after sharp fall trough 1.3500. A decline is showing signs of an impulsive price action so we suspect that EURUSD is heading much lower. Trend is down as long as 1.3683 remains in place, while any rallies should find resistance in 1.3540/1.3600 zone.

EURUSD 4h Elliott Wave Analysis

EURUSD 1h

EURUSD on the other hand, did not move much in the last few sessions which was expected as we were looking for a wave iv) pullback up to 1.3530/60. If we take a look closely at the substructure from the latest low we can see an overlapping price action, which is personality of a corrective rally so we think that pair will turn back to the lows in sessions ahead. Resistance or swing region for wave iv) remains at 1.3530-1.3570.

EURUSD 1h Elliott Wave Analysis

Written by www.ew-forecast.com

14 days trial just for €1 >> Register Now

 

 

 

“Harvard Economist Is Pulling His Money From Bank Of America”

An excerpt from a new article by Terry Burnham, a former Harvard economics professor.

By Elliott Wave International

EWI’s president Bob Prechter has been warning about the safety of the U.S. banking system for a while.

Enjoy this excerpt from a new article by Terry Burnham, a former Harvard economics professor, author of “Mean Genes” and “Mean Markets and Lizard Brains”, who spoke at last year’s Socionomics Summit in Atlanta.

Mr. Burnham’s article appeared on pbs.org on January 30 and was quickly picked up by Zero Hedge.

Last week I had over $1,000,000 in a checking account at Bank of America. Next week, I will have $10,000.

Why am I getting in line to take my money out of Bank of America? Because of Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen, who officially begins her term as chairwoman on Feb. 1.

Before I explain, let me disclose that I have been a stopped clock of criticism of the Federal Reserve for half a decade. That’s because I believe that when the Fed intervenes in markets, it has two effects — both negative. First, it decreases overall wealth by distorting markets and causing bad investment decisions. Second, the members of the Fed become reverse Robin Hoods as they take from the poor (and unsophisticated) investors and give to the rich (and politically connected).

Why do I risk starting a run on Bank of America by withdrawing my money and presuming that many fellow depositors will read this and rush to withdraw too? Because they pay me zero interest. Thus, even an infinitesimal chance Bank of America will not repay me in full, whenever I ask, switches the cost-benefit conclusion from stay to flee.

Let me explain: Currently, I receive zero dollars in interest on my $1,000,000. The reason I had the money in Bank of America was to keep it safe. However, the potential cost to keeping my money in Bank of America is that the bank may be unwilling or unable to return my money. They will not be able to return my money if:

Many other depositors like you get in line before me. Banks today promise everyone that they can have their money back instantaneously, but the bank does not actually have enough money to pay everyone at once because they have lent most of it out to other people — 90 percent or more. Thus, banks are always at risk for runs where the depositors at the front of the line get their money back, but the depositors at the back of the line do not. Consider this image from a fully insured U.S. bank, IndyMac in California, just five years ago.

Some of the investments of Bank of America go bust. Because Bank of America has loaned out the vast majority of depositors’ money, if even a small percentage of its loans go bust, the firm is at risk for bankruptcy. Leverage, combined with some bad investments, caused the failure of Lehman Brothers in 2008 and would have caused the failure of Bank of America, AIG, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns, and many more institutions in 2008 had the government not bailed them out.

In recent days, the chances for trouble at Bank of America have become more salient because of woes in the emerging markets, particularly Argentina, Turkey, Russia and China. The emerging market fears caused the Dow Jones Industrial Average to lose more than 500 points over the last week.

If the chance that Bank of America will not return my money is, say, a mere 1 percent, then the expected cost to me is 1 percent of my million, or $10,000. That far exceeds the interest I receive, which, I hardly need remind depositors out there, is a cool $0. Even a 0.1 percent chance of loss has an expected cost to me of $1,000. Bank of America pays me the zero interest rate because the Federal Reserve has set interest rates to zero. Thus my incentive to leave at the first whiff of instability.


See what Bob Prechter’s Elliott Wave International has to say about the outlook for the global markets and the safety of your financial assets.They have just published their annual report, The State of the Global Markets — 2014 Edition.

You’ll get some of the choicest selections from their monthly publications along with analyst presentations covering the U.S., European and Asian-Pacific markets.

Sign up to get access to The State of the Global Markets — 2014 Edition now >>

This article was syndicated by Elliott Wave International and was originally published under the headline “Harvard Economist Is Pulling His Money From Bank Of America”. EWI is the world’s largest market forecasting firm. Its staff of full-time analysts led by Chartered Market Technician Robert Prechter provides 24-hour-a-day market analysis to institutional and private investors around the world.

 

 

 

 

The Euro Trying to Increase, the Pound Falling

The EURUSD Enters into a Range Again

Falling of the EURUSD suspended due to the support around the 1.3475 level. From it the bulls are trying to start attack, but the attempts are limited by the resistance at 1.3535. Thus, the pair entered into a new range, limited by the indicated levels. Despite preserved demand near the support, a negative sentiment still remains and the risks of a breakout through 1.3475 still remain. The euro can correct to  1.3545—1.3560, where a possibility to open short positions should be considered. It is necessary to remember that on Thursday a press conference by Mario Draghi will be held, and his speech can change radically the situation.

eur




The GBPUSD Continues Correcting

Obviously, the GBPUSD has formed a peak and came under pressure amid profit taking. Yesterday, the pair continued to fall and  tested the support around the 63rd  figure. Today, in the Asian session the support was broken, and the pair fell to 1.6256. The 100-day MA moves slightly above the daily chart, so it is quite possible that this support will be able to suspend the pair’s falling for some time, but its loss will lead to falling up to 1.6200-1.6173. From here the pound may bounce towards the 64th figure that should be used to open short positions. Nevertheless, the decision of the Bank of England regarding interest rate and / or volumes of the asset purchase program can change the situation.

gbp




The USDCHF Drops to 0.9003

Yesterday, stock markets had undergone a selloff, the flight of investors from risky assets  triggered   increased interest in the ” risk-free ” assets again, to which  traditionally belonged the Swiss franc. Amid it is actively growing in cross-rate with the euro and in pair with the U.S. dollar. From resistance at 0.9080 the pair was sold, and its rate fell to 0.9003. Attempts to increase are limited by  the resistance at the 0.9035 level, where interest to sales remains. However, while support at 0.9000 continues to cope with its task, the possibility of renewed growth and testing 0.9118 remains high, but the loss of support will lead to a fall to 0.8930-0.8900.

chf




The USDJPY Is In the Power of the Bears

The downward correction in the USDJPY pair continues.  Yesterday, the pair broke the support at the level 101.59 and dropped to 100.77. Pullbacks are limited by the 101.37 level, where interest to sales remains. Nevertheless,  the support still is unable to hold the bears` onslaught and if in the short term it is not broken, the USDJPY can recover to 101.59—102.00. Theoretically,  the possibility to open short positions should be considered. In addition, it is necessary to remember that an uptrend is still in force and a rise above the 102th figure can signal about its resumption.

jpy

provided by IAFT

 

 

 

 

Romania cuts rate 25 bps to 3.5%, sixth cut in a row

By CentralBankNews.info
    Romania’s central bank cut its policy rate by 25 basis points to 3.50 percent, its sixth rate cut in a row, but maintained the minimum reserve requirements for both leu- and foreign currency denominated deposits by banks.
    The National Bank of Romania (NBR) said further details about its decision, along with the quarterly inflation report, would be released later at a press briefing at the bank’s headquarters.
    The rate cut was expected by most economists who also expect this to be the last reduction in the current easing cycle that started in July 2013. Since then, rates have been cut by 175 basis points, including 50 basis points this year, in response to falling inflation.
    Romania’s inflation rate fell to 1.6 percent in December, down from a 2013-high of 6.0 percent in January. In its November inflation report, the NBR cut its end-2013 inflation forecast to 1.8 percent and the 2014 forecast to 3.0 percent.
    The central bank, which targets inflation of 2.5 percent, plus/minus one percentage point, said it expected inflation to fall below its lower bound in the first half of this year and then gradually rise.
    Romania’s Gross Domestic Product expanded by 1.6 percent in the third quarter of 2013 from the second quarter for annual growth of 4.1 percent, up from 1.5 percent in the previous quarter.
    In addition to the 25 basis point rate cut in January, the NBR cut the reserve requirement on leu-deposits by 300 basis points to 12 percent and the requirement on foreign-currency deposits by 200 basis points to 18 percent. This cut came after the central bank in December released a report that showed the proportion of non-performing bank loans was 21.7 percent end-October.
    Last week currency dealers said the central bank indirectly had sold euros to limit the decline in the leu amid the general decline in emerging market currencies. Last year the leu fell in May, along with other emerging market currencies, but ended the year only 0.7 percent lower against the euro. The intervention last year helped the leu buck the overall declining trend in emerging market currencies and the leu was trading at 4.46 to the euro today, up from 4.47 end-2013.

    http://ift.tt/1iP0FNb.