Eight Catalyst-Driven Biotechs Ready to Advance: Michael Hay and Jocelyn August

Source: George S. Mack of The Life Sciences Report (11/26/13)

http://www.thelifesciencesreport.com/pub/na/eight-catalyst-driven-biotechs-ready-to-advance-michael-hay-and-jocelyn-august

Investors are attracted to small- and micro-cap biotech stocks because their life cycles are filled with share-moving milestones. Michael Hay and Jocelyn August of Sagient Research handicap those milestones and calculate the probabilities that drugs in development will be approved and successful in the marketplace. In this interview with The Life Sciences Report, Hay and August set a table investors can be thankful for, naming companies with upcoming catalysts and real potential for upside.

The Life Sciences Report: Michael, do you see high-impact catalysts changing over time? Do you see trends where one type of catalyst is really hot, and then later on it’s not so hot?

Michael Hay: We do. Some catalysts are always hot. Clinical trial data is always hot because it is the basis for a drug being approved or not being approved.

The catalysts that change over time have to do with market expectations. There was a time, back from 2007 to 2010, when very few drugs were being approved, and Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) dates actually became less important to investors. People came to expect that a drug was notgoing to be approved, so we actually saw less volatility to the downside. Investors did not want to trade those events because a lot of delays were occurring at the same time.

Then, as more and more drugs were approved in 2011ñ2012, there was a shift back to an interest in PDUFA dates. But upside volatility was a lot less because people had begun to expect the drugs would be approved. I guess the answer to your question is in two parts: It is not just whether there are changes in high-impact catalysts, but also about the direction of share price movement associated with those catalysts.

You see a lot of that with advisory committee (AdCom) panels as well. It used to be that everyone took an advisory panel decisionóyes or noóas a harbinger of what the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would do. However, investors have come to realize there is a lot more to the FDA’s final decision than the advisory panel’s up or down vote. While AdComs still remain high impact, investors are reading more into what’s actually said during the panel meeting, and trying to gauge how the FDA will interpret that.

Those are the major high-impact catalystsóthe regulatory aspect and the trial dataóbut you also see shifts within disease groups on those high-impact catalysts. For example, hepatitis C (HCV) drugs are expected to work, so you see less and less excitement about positive data in that sector than you would have two or three years ago. Also, HCV has become a very crowded landscape. The large number of drugs in development makes it less interesting.

There are trends, and right now the data for orphan drugs are very important. Once an orphan disease company has delivered good data, investors assume the path to approval is easy. Investors think the pricing power is there, and so they have shifted to orphan drug data. Typically, in an orphan disease, you’re looking to materially impact the course of the disease, and so results can be staggering. It’s not that you’re improving survival by two or three months; you may actually be allowing children or adults to live full lives rather than suffer and die early.

TLSR: Aside from clinical trial data, what are the current highest-impact catalysts in the biotech space?

MH: One of the largest-impact catalysts is an announcement from the Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). During the course of a clinical trial, the DSMB looks to make sure a drug is not causing significant harm to patients. Usually the trials continue as planned, many times with no announcement whatsoever. On the other hand, an announcement from the DSMB that there is a problem can be quite severe for companies. The trials are often terminated. If a hold is placed on the trial, the drug is left in doubt, and you see a very large stock drop because of that.

Any time a surprise event occurs, it’s going to have a very large impact. Sometimes it is on the positive side. A trial might be stopped early because the efficacy data are so overwhelmingly positive that it’s clear the drug is working, and that there will be a major advance in the approval process. That would be surprising to the market.

TLSR: Michael, you assign a numerical percentage for likelihood of approval (LOA) to drugs in development. What factors go into your probability number? Would you just give me a couple of the highlights, please?

MH: Sure, glad to. The LOA is based on the clinical profile of the drug. We look at two measures when we adjust the likelihood of approval: efficacy and safety. The primary factor that makes us adjust the likelihood of approval is clinical trial data, which, again, has the greatest impact on whether a drug will be approved. We look at clinical trial data in real time, the same day they come out, and as they come out we do an analysis and try to quantify the qualitative assessment of the data. Is the trial meeting the clinical endpoints that it is designed to? How does the drug compare to other drugs on the market or in development? Will it be successful competing with them? Efficacyómeeting the primary endpointóis the main thing we’re looking at. It’s what the FDA wants to see. We also look at the secondary endpoints to see how well a drug will compete commercially.

Safety is very important. We might weight more for the efficacy, but not increase the likelihood of approval too much if we’re concerned about the safety. And a lot of times, safety information is not reported publicly until you reach an AdCom.

The last measure that we look at is what other drugs in the class have done, not just from a competitive landscape but also to see if a similar drug reports positive data. That may increase the likelihood of approval across all the drugs within that class.

TLSR: When you factor in efficacy and safety, you’re really talking about something called the therapeutic index for the drug. Do you attempt to convert that into a numerical figure that you use internally for your probabilities?

MH: We do. We keep an internal matrix when we’re adjusting the LOA. We have an in-house guide that our analysts follow. If a drug is at 0ñ5%, that means one thing to us. If it’s 5ñ10% above average, it means another, depending on the phase of the study that the therapy is inóand a lot of times this is related to the efficacy and safety balance.

TLSR: Looking at your data sheets, I note that another catalyst you use is partnering. A small biotech company partnering with a large pharma is a very important factor, not just because of the financial and intellectual support but also because the large pharma is, in effect, validating that technology platform or approach for investors. But sometimes, after a partnership announcement, we see a selloff. Why?

MH: This is an interesting dilemma. Small companies need new money, and an upfront payment from a pharma is a nice way of monetizing some of their assets. A partnership also validates the product or platform, and gives the biotech security. To your question: Many times the large pharmaceutical company requires so much in a dealósuch as a high percentage of future revenuesóthat if an investor uses a discounted cash flow (DCF) model, the value of the small biotech shrinks based on that partnership split. While an upfront payment will be nice for the company and nice for management and operations, it does not compute into a very high present value as compared to what those future revenues would have been without splitting them.

TLSR: Partnering is one more form of dilution, isn’t it?

MH: Yes, it is. I’ve heard this from investors and I’ve heard it from smaller companies: A lot of times they don’t like to see partnership deals done the way they are. They’d rather see companies raise money in the marketplace because they give away too much to the pharmaceutical companies on future royalty streams.

I also think many investors do not take future partnership splits into account enough when they’re valuing a company. When we at Sagient look at a company’s pipeline and put a valuation on its drugs, we try to assume what its future royalty agreements will be. A lot of times a small biotech only gets 20%, and that could really reduce the value in a DCF model. If you’re only getting a 20% royalty, you need a billion-dollar drug to make up a decent valuation for yourself.

I think investors would rather see companies raise money in the marketplace, bring their drugs to a later stage of development (closer to approval) and then sell themselves outright to a pharmaceutical company, rather than give away a lot of the rights to a product. The proof of that is you do see quite high multiples on merger-and-acquisition deals.

TLSR: Sometimes phase 2 studies are just intended to determine the right population of patients and the design of a phase 3 trial, and the data are otherwise unimportant. How does an investor know when phase 2 trial data are highly material?

MH: There are many different types of phase 2 trials. Depending on the disease indication, one phase 2 study can be much more informative as to a phase 3 outcome than another.

In phase 2, the goal is to figure out which patients to put in the phase 3 study. In oncology, you really need phase 3 trial results, such as overall survival, which may dictate the approval. But there are drugs in infectious diseases, such as hepatitis C (HCV), or in diabetes, where you have a very good early surrogate marker. In HCV, it’s viral load. In diabetes it’s glucose levels. If you’re reducing these levels in phase 2, you’re almost always going to see a similar or greater reduction in phase 3. So the phase 2 result is, in some cases, indicative of the phase 3 outcome.

TLSR: Could we go ahead and talk about some companies and their catalysts?

MH: It’s a very interesting time in the marketplace now for stem cell therapies. We are hoping to see some of these drugs advance because, similar to some orphan drugs, they look to be more curative for the diseases they target because they get closer to the root cause of the problem.

Athersys Inc. (ATHX:NASDAQ) has a product called MultiStem (multipotent adult progenitor cells) that is being tested in several indications, but has two lead indications. First, Athersys is doing a phase 2 ischemic stroke trial on its own, with no partner, and it is expected to have results by the end of this year. Given the small, $115 million ($115M) market cap, and the high-risk nature of both stem cells and stroke, I think these data are going to be very important for investors if the trial is positive for patients.

TLSR: This trial has 140 patients in it, and is randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled. Is that powered well enough?

MH: Yes, 140 patients is sizable for stroke.

TLSR: Go ahead and address the other lead indication.

MH: The other indication for MultiStem is ulcerative colitis, and this has been partnered with Pfizer Inc. (PFE:NYSE). Pfizer is the lead of this program now, which does give some validation to it. I think Pfizer looked at the inflammatory bowel disease market because it is larger than the stroke market. Those results are also expected by the end of this year. This company is going to have some very pivotal, binary results that could make people very excited to see stem cells working. . .or say, “Oh, we’re not quite there yet.”

TLSR: Jocelyn, do you have a company you would like to mention?

Jocelyn August: On the device front, we are expecting an FDA approval of the 510(k) application thatSequenom Inc. (SQNM:NASDAQ) recently filed for its IMPACT Dx system, the clinical laboratory version of the MassARRAY instrument. If approved, we expect the IMPACT Dx system to contribute significant value to the company’s genetic analysis business segment, as the company is able to realize revenues from its MassARRAY system in the clinical diagnostics arena. We expect the FDA decision to occur either before year-end or early in 2014, based on the time of the 510(k) filing.

Additionally, we are expecting some near-term catalysts for Vascular Solutions Inc. (VASC:NASDAQ), with its GuideLiner technology in the treatment of venous reflux disease. First, Vascular Solutions is expecting approval from Japanese regulators in Q4/13 for its GuideLiner catheter. The GuideLiner is a specialty catheter designed to provide backup to the guide catheter in difficult coronary procedures. Vascular Solutions was the first company to enter the guiding catheter backup category in 2009. The GuiderLiner is producing a little more than $20M in annualized revenues. While Vascular Solutions is facing competition from Boston Scientific Corp. (BSX:NYSE) in the space, Japanese approval would go a long way toward improving GuideLiner’s market share in the face of that competition.

Vascular Solutions is also pursuing a first-in-human clinical trial for the Gel-Rope device, which offers a novel technique for treating venous reflux disease. Gel-Rope uses gelatin to extensively destroy the great saphenous vein. It is expected to be less painful than laser surgery and will not require anesthesia. The varicose vein market is currently estimated at $215M. Covidien Ltd. (COV:NYSE) currently controls $100M+ of the market. Revenues are not expected from Gel-Rope for at least another three years, but the first-in-human trials are expected to be underway in Q4/13.

TLSR: Michael, please go to the next one.

MH: BioDelivery Sciences International Inc. (BDSI:NASDAQ) is a quite interesting company. It is in the central nervous system (CNS) space, working with pain and drug addiction, and is working with reformulations of drugs using the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway. These types of drugs typically have a higher likelihood of approval because their components are already on the market, and a lot is already known about their safety profiles and how they work. However, these drugs may have less commercial appeal because they are typically headed into a very genericized market, which may make it difficult to differentiate the products.

BioDelivery has a drug, Bunavail (buprenorphine/naloxone buccal soluble film), for opioid addiction. It is in registration (new drug application [NDA] filed with FDA), and the PDUFA date is June 7, 2014. The company hopes to have a partnership by the end of this year. Having already filed the NDA, this would represent a pretty late-stage partner, and the company could garner some nice royalty agreements with that.

The area of drug addiction has been a tough one for some investors to buy into. A lot of people need treatment for drug addiction, but this can be done through counseling therapy, which is the preferred route, rather than by taking drugs. There are a lot of pieces to the puzzle of successfully marketing a drug in this area.

TLSR: This stock has an interesting market cap, about $175M, considering that it is working with drugs that have been in the public domain for quite some time. There must be a high probability of success.

MH: Based on the clinical trial results, we believe the probability is 5% above average for approval. The product only needs to show noninferiority to what is already on the market. We expect Bunavail to be approved. A partner would be seen as a positive at this late stage of development, and would be a large catalyst for this company. But, as we discussed, if it’s not a good partnership deal, the stock would trade down.

TLSR: Are there other names?

JA: We expect FDA approval in the near termólikely by the end of the yearófor Oculus Innovative Sciences Inc.’s (OCLS:NASDAQ) scar treatment device. The device is Microcyn Hydrogel, for the treatment of hypertrophic scarring. The Microcyn technology is currently approved in the U.S. for diabetic foot ulcer treatment, general wound healing and eczema.

In the company’s recent earnings call, Oculus stated that the FDA has asked some additional questions on the scar approval indication, which has resulted in a delay in the product’s clearance. In addition, the company expects to announce topline results from its clinical trial on scar management shortly after the FDA decision.

MH: In the orphan disease space, Catalyst Pharmaceutical Partners Inc. (CPRX:NASDAQ) has a few programs in indications that are less crowded and do not have many successful treatment options. The first of those is Tourette’s syndrome, for which Catalyst has a drug, CPP-109 (vigabatrin), in phase 2. Again, this is not a new molecular entity. Catalyst is exploring new uses for this product as a “research surrogate,” and is expecting to see results by the end of this year in a small, 10-patient, phase 1/2 trial. I will say that Tourette’s syndrome is not a condition that you have a lot of patients to enroll for, and I wouldn’t expect to see a whole lot of data from this trial that would indicate the drug can be approved.

Catalyst also has CPP-115, an analog of CPP-109, for infantile spasms, which is a form of epilepsy, and for which it has received orphan drug status in both the U.S. and the European Union. This is a pretty severe disease that impacts children quite a bit. If Catalyst is able to show decent results in its phase 1a trial, it will be looking for a partnership by the end of this year, hopefully to start a phase 1b trial. There are definitely companies interested in this area of development.

One of the interesting things we see with reformulated drugsóthose in the 505(b)(2) pathwayóis that large pharma is not as interested in partnering. These drugs attract more of a specialty pharma player, because the patent life is typically not as long and the intellectual property is not as easy to defend as that of a new molecular entity. Usually, the commercial outlook for the drug is not as great either. So these drugs require a different type of partner in many instances.

TLSR: I’m noting that the company also has Firdapse (amifampridine phosphate) in phase 3 for Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome (LEMS). What are the milestones ahead?

MH: Firdapse is in FDA phase 3, with orphan status, and it has been approved already in the European Union for LEMS. Back at the end of August, it was given breakthrough therapy designation by the FDA. This is quite an exciting drug. Catalyst expects to complete enrollment of its phase 3 trial by the end of this year, with data reported in Q2/14. Hopefully, the company can file an NDA in 2015.

The breakthrough therapy designation is something that’s been pretty hot in the marketplace lately, and we have seen companies accelerate development because of it. On Nov 13, Pharmacyclics Inc.’s (PCYC:NASDAQ) drug ibrutinib, now with the trade name Imbruvica, was approved for mantle cell lymphoma, a rare type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. That drug had been given breakthrough designation, and Pharmacyclics has obviously done quite well. Imbruvica was just the second breakthrough-designated product to get approved.

TLSR: We’ve now seen the first two breakthrough-designated drugs approved, just in the past month. This is encouraging, isn’t it?

MH: It is. If you were to look back, those drugs have been approved more quickly than people expected. I don’t know if it’s a direct result of the breakthrough designation, but the read-through to other drugs that have received breakthrough status is an encouraging one. It does mean that the FDA is very keen on getting them on the market quickly.

Firdapse is a very interesting drug for Catalyst Pharmaceutical. I would say, though, that LEMS is a small orphan indication, with only 2,000 patients a year. It might be hard to drive a lot of revenue from that indication.

TLSR: That’s an intuitive view, but the counterintuitive view has prevailed with orphan drugs over the past two years. Those with a few thousand patients a year have been the big gainers for investors.

MH: I completely agree with you. When investigators are studying drugs in these areas, there are so few patients that the researchers actually know them. The investigators are able to do much of their premarket and commercial research during clinical development, and when the drug is approved, they are ready to go out and sell the product. They are quite successful, and it is quite profitable. I think investors, many times, underestimate how quickly the revenue will come on. This looks like a very interesting company to me.

TLSR: A last name, Jocelyn?

JA: We would also like to highlight a catalyst that we expect by the end of 2013 for Given Imaging Ltd. (GIVN:NASDAQ). In November 2012, Given filed an FDA application for regulatory approval of its PillCam COLON 2 capsule system through a direct, de novo pathway, which allows for an expedited regulatory approval process. The application is expected to be approved during Q4/13. The PillCam COLON 2 capsule endoscopy system is a complement to conventional colonoscopies, and provides an alternative for patients who are at higher risk of complications during a traditional procedure and for patients who received an incomplete and or inconclusive analysis. Additionally, the PillCam offers an alternative to colonoscopy for patients who find the traditional procedure uncomfortable.

TLSR: Michael, you have some data on Cytori Therapeutics Inc. (CYTX:NASDAQ). Could you comment?

MH: Cytori is another stem cell or cellular therapy company. It has a product, adipose-derived regenerative cells (ADRCs), that has been approved for breast reconstruction in Europe. In the U.S., the company is looking at treating heart disease with its ADRCsóboth acute coronary syndrome and coronary artery disease. This field has been advancing in the last few years because cardiovascular disease continues to be a major cause of death. There are preventive drugs, such as statins and antihypertensive agents, but once you have cardiovascular disease, or if you have heart failure, there are very few modalities on the market that are able to reverse it and help the heart repair the damage. This is the problem Cytori has been working on.

TLSR: When are data expected?

MH: Cardiovascular data are expected this year, from two different trials. One is the phase 2 ADVANCEtrial, for acute myocardial infarction, with only 23 patients. The phase 1 APOLLO trial, for the same indication, is supposed to publish results for 18-month data. These data should give us more of a gauge of the way these cells work, and how well they’re working.

TLSR: Michael and Jocelyn, it’s been a great pleasure.

Michael Hay has been with Sagient Research for more than seven years and has more than 11 years of experience in financial markets. He manages the BioMedTracker analyst team and serves as vice president at Sagient. He is also responsible for product development, corporate planning and sales and marketing. Hay has consulted for numerous top-tier pharmaceutical companies on strategic decisions, as well as worked closely with top healthcare investment firms, providing insight on investment and trading decisions. Hay’s career in financial markets began at Thomson Financial in 2000. He reached the position of manager, capital markets intelligence, and was directly responsible for corporate client relationships within the technology sector. At Thomson he consulted for senior management regarding shareholder composition, financial markets and competitive positioning. Hay received a bachelor’s degree in finance from University of Colorado, Boulder.

Jocelyn August is currently the senior analyst and product manager for CatalystTracker, a proprietary research product focused on identifying and analyzing the future events that will materially impact publicly traded companies. In her years at Sagient, she has developed expertise in the highly event-driven medical device and diagnostic sector. In addition, she spearheaded the development of a new Natural Resource Industry product within the CatalystTracker product line with the publication of the “Catalyst Impact Study: Natural Resources Sector.” Outside of Sagient, August was named the director of communications for the San Diego Professional Chapter of MBA Women International. August received a master’s degree in business administration from the Rady School of Management at University of California, San Diego, and graduated cum laude from the University of California, San Diego, with a bachelor’s degree in sociology.

Want to read more Life Sciences 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) George S. Mack conducted this interview for The Life Sciences Report and provides services to The Life Sciences 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 Life Sciences Report:Catalyst Pharmaceutical Partners, Cytori Therapeutics Inc., BioDelivery Sciences International Inc., Athersys Inc., Oculus Innovative Sciences Inc. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services or as sponsorship payment.

3) Michael Hay: I own or my family owns 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) Jocelyn August: I own or my family owns 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.

5) Interviews are edited for clarity. Streetwise Reports does not make editorial comments or change experts’ statements without their consent.

6) 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.

7) 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 ñ The Life Sciences Report is Copyright © 2013 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 Life Sciences Report. These logos are trademarks and are the property of the individual companies.

101 Second St., Suite 110

Petaluma, CA 94952

Tel.: (707) 981-8204

Fax: (707) 981-8998

Email: [email protected]

 

 

 

GBPUSD stays within a upward price channel

GBPUSD stays within a upward price channel on 4-hour chart, and remains in the short term uptrend from 1.5854, the fall from 1.6240 could be treated as consolidation of the uptrend. Support is located at the lower line of the channel, as long as the channel support holds, another rise to re-test 1.6259 (Oct 1 high) resistance is still possible, a break above this level will signal resumption of the longer term uptrend from 1.4813 (Jul 9 low), then the target would be at 1.7000 area. On the downside, a clear break below the channel support will suggest that the upward movement from 1.5854 had completed at 1.6240 already, then the following downward move could bring price back to test 1.5854 support.

gbpusd

Provided by ForexCycle.com

How Goldman Sachs sees the Australian Economy in 2014

By MoneyMorning.com.au

Do you remember what we wrote last week?

We said if the Australian stock market didn’t do as we expect we’d end up with a lot of egg on our face.

We also said you could ‘hold the eggs’ because the Australian market would have a year-end rally.

Well, get those eggs ready to fling in our general direction. If the folks at Goldman Sachs are right, 2014 could be a tough year for the Australian economy and Australian stocks.

But then again, from an economic standpoint everyone pretty much knew that right? So is Goldman Sachs revealing anything new? We’ll give you our take below…

CNBC reports on the Goldman Sachs research note:

As the global economy continues to recover next year Australia will be left behind, according to Goldman Sachs, which tips it as the only developed market likely to see lower growth.

In a portfolio strategy research note published Monday, the global investment bank said they expect the world’s 12th largest economy to expand by 2 percent next year, slower than the consensus expectation of around 2.5 percent and down from 3.8 percent in 2012.

In other words, the Australian economy will grow, but not by as much as many had thought. But here’s the thing. We’re not convinced anyone in the mainstream really believed that the Australian economy was heading for stellar growth.

That explains why Australian stocks have lagged other markets for the best part of three years. Confirmation of that view is in another quote from CNBC…

Too Many ‘Crash Chasers’

The CNBC report goes on:

With 22 years of consecutive growth Australia was the envy of the developed world, however many analysts have turned bearish on the economy amid a number of worrying headwinds. The most prominent concern has centered on the slowdown in the country’s once booming mining sector, caused by declining demand from its major trading partner China. Many worry that Australia’s non-mining sectors will not be able to pick up the slack.

We’ve bolded the key part. The increase in bearish views on the Australian economy is something we’ve pointed out for well over a year. Having failed to predict the 2008 crash, there are now legions of ‘Crash Chasers’ trying to make a name by predicting the next one.

But here’s the problem for the ‘Crash Chasers’ – crashes tend not to happen when people expect a crash. Most crashes come from nowhere, with just a few on the fringe predicting them.

Those predicting a crash then don’t get many column inches in the press or airtime on national TV. And if they do it’s only so the mainstream columnist or host can laugh at the ‘lunatic from the fringe’.

Think back to the 2008 crash. We remember it well. The market slowly went down during the first eight months of 2008. Analysts were sure it was just a short-term drop and that there was nothing to worry about.

Contrast that to today, when most analysts see nothing but bad news for the economy and bad news for stocks. When everyone is taking the normally contrarian view (that the market will crash), you can bet your bottom dollar it’s not a real contrarian view anymore…it’s a mainstream view.

And that’s exactly why we say a stock rebound and rally to a record high in 2015 isn’t just possible, or even probable…it’s darn near a certainty.

The Market in a State of Surprise?

What most folks forget (and this is surprising because it’s an investing basic) is that stock prices simply represent the price of future company earnings.

Yet most investors seem to worry more about yesterday’s or today’s earnings.

Not only that, but most mainstream investors appear to believe the market is always in a state of surprise. They assume that just because they can’t think any further into the future than next week, that other folks can’t either.

The report from Goldman Sachs isn’t a surprise. In many ways the Goldman’s report probably paints a picture of the obvious.

But how much of this have investors already factored into stock prices? In other words, have stock prices failed to follow pace with overseas markets because investors expected lower growth anyway?

If so, it tells you that the market is now looking further ahead. The fact is that the Goldman Sachs report is just about useless to investors today. We’re looking at the potential for the market to rally through next year based on projected earnings for 2015 and 2016.

If you’re after a contrarian view…a view that seeks to predict the next market move before it happens, then this is it: a stock rally next year.

As for the idea of a major crash on the Australian market, we’ll cop it if we’re wrong (although you could take advantage of rising and falling prices here). As far as we’re concerned, predicting a crash is about as obvious and non-contrarian as it gets.

You can still hold those eggs. We haven’t seen anything yet to change our view on a stock rally through next year.

Cheers,
Kris+

Special Report: The ‘Wonder Weld’ That Could Triple Your Money

Join Money Morning on Google+


By MoneyMorning.com.au

Meltdown Coming? The Uranium Story You Haven’t Heard

By MoneyMorning.com.au

No, no. It’s not like that. My worry isn’t this year’s or even next year’s, it’s a long-term worry.

Then it’s not worth calling a worry. We live in an atomic age, Mr. Wormold. Push a button — piff bang – where are we? Another Scotch, please.

Our Man in Havana, Graham Greene

You remember the nuclear disaster at Fukushima? It was a horrible human tragedy that is still playing out – and in ways I am sure you will be surprised to learn.

The disaster also set back the so-called nuclear renaissance that was then in swing. Uranium prices fell like a piano tumbling down a flight of stairs, only recently crashing down to five-year lows and laying waste to uranium stocks.

But it’s been over two years since the meltdown at Fukushima, and memory is short. Here is Barron’s over the weekend, on its optimistic appraisal of Cameco, the world’s largest publicly traded producer of uranium:

Cameco shares recently rallied after stronger-than-expected third-quarter earnings, but are still flat for the year. They fetch just 15.2 times what the company has earned, well below its decade median of 24 times, and the low-cost producer generated net profit margins near 22% even when uranium prices slumped. Improving prices can only energize the stock.

Among the ‘reasons for optimism‘, Barron’s included ‘gradual progress toward the cleanup in Japan‘.

Barron’s piece inspired me to write to you today. As a long-term investor, I am not tempted – at all – by the apparent bargain in uranium stocks.

I want to preface what follows by saying I get the bullish case for uranium and nuclear power. I was a bull for a time and took positions in uranium stocks in February 2010, just before they started to lift.

The incident at Fukushima made me reverse course. We sold our uranium stocks in March 2011, shortly after the disaster. We took a 70% gain on Kalahari and saved a slim 7% profit on Paladin Energy. Kalahari got bought out and no longer trades. But Paladin, which I recommended selling at $3.29, is today 44 cents. In C&C, I also saved a 10% gain on Cameco and sold at $30. Today, it’s $20.

As good as the uranium story sounds, I think there are bigger reasons to avoid the stocks as anything other than trades.

First, because the disaster at Fukushima could easily have an Act II that could be worse than anything we’ve seen so far.

The cleanup is not front-page news, but perhaps it should be. Here is a good summary of the challenges that remain, as reported by Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers in CounterPunch:

There are three major problems at Fukushima: (1) Three reactor cores are missing; (2) radiated water has been leaking from the plant in mass quantities for 2.5 years; and (3) 11,000 spent nuclear fuel rods, perhaps the most dangerous things ever created by humans, are stored at the plant and need to be removed, 1,533 of those in a very precarious and dangerous position. Each of these three could result in dramatic radiation events, unlike any radiation exposure humans have ever experienced.

All three pose significant dangers, but the biggest threat is from No. 3.

The spent fuel rods weigh 400 tons and are packed tightly together like cigarettes. They hold the radiation equivalent of the atomic bomb that went off at Hiroshima — times 14,000.

They now sit in a damaged, tilting building, which is vulnerable to collapse. They must be removed. If they hit each other or break, they could explode and release massive amounts of radiation. They might have to evacuate Tokyo in such a case.

As The Japan Times reports:

The consequences could be far more severe than any nuclear accident the world has ever seen. If a fuel rod is dropped, breaks or becomes entangled while being removed, possible worst-case scenarios include a big explosion, a meltdown in the pool or a large fire. Any of these situations could lead to massive releases of deadly radionuclides into the atmosphere, putting much of Japan – including Tokyo and Yokohama – and even neighboring countries at serious risk.

Aside from the terrible human costs of such an event – which I do not want to minimise – what do you think it would do to uranium stocks?

Besides, there are still ongoing effects of the disaster we are only now beginning to understand. See, for example, recent headlines about the damaged thyroids of California babies exposed to radiation that traveled 5,000 miles across the Pacific.

Of course, the nuclear lobby is well-heeled and has its silver-tongued apologists who will do their best to discredit such stories. Beyond the despicable aspects of this, you should consider, from an investment point of view, the risk that the industry loses control of the public relations battle as more stories emerge – and legal consequences ensue.

The second reason I don’t want to own uranium stocks long term: Because there is certainly another Fukushima, another Three Mile Island, in the deck. We just don’t know when it will turn up.

Just look at the US, which produces more nuclear energy than any country on Earth. It has over 104 reactors. Most of them are old. Twenty-four of them have the same design at the Fukushima reactors.

The late Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, again in CounterPunch, wrote in 2011 about the number of aging reactors on US soil, several that sit on fault lines. They walk through a number of them, citing the age of the plants, past incidents and the potential for disaster.

The real takeaway for me, though, was the wisdom at the end:

Look at the false predictions, the blunders. Remember the elemental truth that Nature bats last, and that folly and greed are ineluctable parts of the human condition.

Why try to pretend that we live in a world where there are no force 8-9 earthquakes, tsunamis, dud machinery, forgetful workers, corner-cutting plant owners, immensely powerful corporations, permissive regulatory agencies, politicians and presidents trolling for campaign dollars?

Yes, why indeed?

This reminds me of another bit of wisdom I heard from Paul Singer, the excellent investor behind the hedge fund Elliott Associates. He said this at the Grant’s conference this fall:

Trading as if the world is always poorly managed and you can’t figure it out is right almost all the time… [However], never in my 37 years have I ever successfully timed a crash or a bear market, despite having a pretty good sense for what’s going on in the world.

Human beings make many mistakes. We are a disaster-prone species, as any casual review of our bloody, imbecilic history will show. As an investor, is it not wiser to assume things will not go according to plan? Doesn’t it seem better to assume that bad things will happen? And with nuclear power, we have clear potential for such errors, not to mention a record of rare but devastating disasters. Timing is the only thing that is uncertain.

If you adopt this kind of thinking, then uranium stocks are a no-go as a long-term investment.

Chris Mayer
Contributing Editor, Money Morning

Join Money Morning on Google+


By MoneyMorning.com.au

Xavier Grunauer: Small Oil and Gas Companies Are Rising Stars in Latin America

Source: Peter Byrne of The Energy Report (11/26/13)

http://www.theenergyreport.com/pub/na/xavier-grunauer-small-oil-and-gas-companies-are-rising-stars-in-latin-america

Independent oil and gas companies with technical skills, local know-how and bottom-up knowledge are playing a larger role in Latin American oil and gas, according to Xavier Grunauer, analyst with Edison Investment Research. Rather than looking to national oil companies and global oil majors, the “fallen stars” operating in the region, Grunauer tells The Energy Report that investors would be wise to get up to speed now on some of the smaller independent oil and gas companies that are poised to unlock value in Colombia, Argentina and Brazil.

The Energy Report: Xavier, Edison Investment Research recently published an investment report titled, “Fallen Angels, Rising Stars: Old Latin American Basin Creating Fresh Opportunities,” in response to demand from investors for a better understanding of the Latin American oil and gas space. Can you get our readers up to speed on what’s happening in Latin America?

Xavier Grunauer: We realized that over the last five years, global investors have mostly associated the Latin American oil and gas space with Colombia and Brazil. They think of Petrobras (PBR:NYSE; PETR3:BOVESPA) and gigantic oil fields that have attracted global oil companies to Brazil’s offshore basins.

When we took a fresh look at investment opportunities in the region, we found smaller, independent oil and gas companies that have outperformed Petrobras, Ecopetrol S.A. (EC:NYSE; ECP:TSX) and OGX Petróleo e Gás Participações S.A. (OGXP3:BZ). Most of these smaller companies are traded on Toronto, New York and U.K. exchanges, and are bringing North American oil and gas experience and technology not only to Colombia, but also to Argentina, Peru, Brazil and Chile. This technology transfer has been successfully implemented in Colombia, and we think that success could be repeated in Argentina, Chile, Peru, Trinidad, Paraguay and onshore Brazil.

Our investment report outlines 18 independent oil and gas companies that operate in Latin America and are listed in New York, Toronto and the U.K., and breaks them down by risk level, current operations, opportunities and where we see them going forward.

TER: Does the report focus solely on South America?

XG: Also included in this report is Trinidad, which has a long history of oil and gas production. We find Trinidad has been encouraging smaller companies to come to its mature onshore basins that were previously drilled using older technology. Several independent oil companies are already operating in Trinidad using modern methods to increase production. Recently, Trinidad has announced a move to lower taxes, which is quite encouraging, given that taxation can be a significant hurdle in Trinidad.

TER: How do you compare what’s happening in South America with what has happened in North America? I’m thinking, for example, of the use of hydraulic fracturing (fracking).

XG: We’re all learning as we go, but it is worth noting that the more successful companies in the North American shale boom have been smaller companies with technical knowledge and local know-how, first-movers who picked off the choicest acreage. We expect similar outcomes in Latin America.

TER: Is the political risk worth the reward in Latin America?

XG: I think so. Risk is always part of the equation when it comes to oil and gas production, regardless of where operations are based, and it can come in unexpected forms, such as environmental issues, the shutdown of fracking activities or a proposed key infrastructure asset not getting government approval. But there are also big rewards. The risks we see in Latin America as a whole are not new. Companies will continue to prosper in this part of the world. Those who choose to participate will reap bigger rewards than those that never participated at all.

TER: Argentina nationalized some oil and gas a couple years ago. Should investors be weary of wading back into those waters?

XG: Argentina devalued its currency in 2002 and has been involved in legal battles with investors since then. The point here echoes what I said earlier: Smaller independent oil companies do not attempt to have a monopoly hold on a national asset. Instead, we see independent oil companies operating in Argentina, companies that are keen on technology transfer and the development of conventional and unconventional assets—while realizing fair market value for their oil and gas production. We remain of the opinion that over the next two years, as President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner enters her last term, there will be change in Argentina.

TER: In mid-October, the U.S. was producing 7.9 million barrels of oil per day (7.9 MMbbl/d)—the most since 1989. Record-high crude oil supplies and weak U.S. economic data point toward even lower oil prices. Do oil and gas prices influence your investment thesis for Latin American oil and gas equities?

XG: First off, I would point out that Edison doesn’t publish buy, hold, sell recommendations. We find net asset value (NAV), which we realize making use of discounted cash flow models. We use an $80/bbl oil price, which we think is quite neutral, if not conservative. This removes the overlay of a top-down call on oil, and allows us look at the rocks, drilling programs and the proposed sequence of events, which then leads us to our published NAVs.

TER: You make a distinction between bottom-up and top-down knowledge. Can you tell our readers more about that concept?

XG: Largely over the last 10–15 years, equity investments in Latin America have been top-down driven. By that I mean choosing an investment was largely influenced by local economies and top-down metrics. What investors need to look for now is more bottom-up metrics: Who operates in these basins? What is management’s experience? Who are their partners? What have their results been to date? Where does the experience come from? I am of the opinion that all 18 companies highlighted in our report are worth taking a look at.

TER: Tell us about some of the companies in your report that have compelling stories.

XG: The main story thus far has taken place in Colombia. The Pacific Rubiales Energy Corp. (PRE:TSX; PREC:BVC) merger with Petrominerales Ltd. (PMG:TSX) could be a sign of more consolidation to come. The big story though, and what most people are looking to medium term, is the southern cone, and in particular the unconventional oil and gas potential of Argentina. I would point to three companies in our report: Madalena Energy Inc. (MVN:TSX.V), Americas Petrogas Inc. (BOE:TSX.V) and Crown Point Ventures Ltd. (CWV:TSX.V).

American Petrogas recently hired a large investment bank to look at its operations with an eye toward joint ventures or merger and acquisition. Americas Petrogas’ story has risks, and a lot of potential, should it be able to monetize its below-ground potential.

Madalena Energy is in a similar situation in Argentina, and has an added advantage of producing assets in Alberta. The Alberta assets can help support the company’s day-to-day cash flow and operations while Madalena continues to develop its large asset base in the southern cone.

TER: Crown Point also has some assets in the Neuquén Basin and Tierra del Fuego. Where is the company-maker asset in that mix?

XG: Crown Point’s production is currently focused on low-risk conventional oil and gas in Tierra del Fuego. The company is looking to increase netbacks and drill more conventional wells in 2014, and in the process will get a “free look” at the unconventional potential.

TER: Do you have other stories you’d like to discuss?

XG: Edison covers President Energy Plc (PPC:LSE), which operates in Paraguay. Some of the same basins that run in Argentina stretch into Paraguay. President Energy has recently signed a contract with Schlumberger Ltd. (SLB:NYSE) to drill exploration wells. The International Monetary Fund is also quite interested in these developments and is helping companies like President grow a sustainable business in Paraguay.

TER: You mentioned the opportunity for investors to position themselves in select equities now, in anticipation of a potential breakout. How far off is that?

XG: It’s always difficult to time these events. You have to be realistic about catalysts.

The North American shale gas boom wasn’t built overnight. In Latin America, especially in Argentina, there are political uncertainties, at least until the outcome of presidential elections are known in 2015. But if you wait until 2015 to invest, it will be a little late.

TER: Can you leave us with one more thought about investing in the explorer and producer space in Latin America?

XG: Independent oil companies are expected to continue playing a larger role in Latin America’s next wave of oil and gas production. The days of bringing financing to the table as your main contribution are behind us in Latin America. Increasingly, we will see national oil companies reaching out to smaller companies for joint ventures, technical expertise and know-how. Knowing more about these independent oil companies is a must, and could prove quite profitable for investors.

TER: Xavier, thank you for your time and insights.

Xavier Grunauer has more than 15 years of experience as an oil and gas analyst. He has spent the last six years working for Nomura, and prior to this worked for Dresdner Kleinwort Benson and ING Barings. His oil and gas coverage has focused on emerging markets and has included companies operating in Latin America, Eastern Europe, South Africa, China and Australia. Grunauer is a chartered financial analyst and has an engineering degree from the University of Toronto.

Want to read more Energy 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 Interviews page.

DISCLOSURE:

1) Peter Byrne conducted this interview for The Energy Report and provides services to The Energy 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 Energy Report: Madalena Energy Inc. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services or as sponsorship payment.

3) Xavier Grunauer: 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: President Energy Plc. 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 Energy Report is Copyright © 2013 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 Energy Report. These logos are trademarks and are the property of the individual companies.

101 Second St., Suite 110

Petaluma, CA 94952

Tel.: (707) 981-8204

Fax: (707) 981-8998

Email: [email protected]

 

 

 

Fundamentals Rendered Irrelevant by Fed Actions: Probability Based Option Trading

By J.W. Jones – OptionsTradingSignals.com

The fundamental backdrop behind the ramp higher in equity prices in 2013 is far from inspiring. However, fundamentals do not matter when the Federal Reserve is flooding U.S. financial markets with an ocean of freshly printed fiat dollars.

As we approach the holiday season, retail stores are usually in a position of strength. However, this year holiday sales are expected to be lower than the previous year based on analysts commentary and surveys that have been completed. This holiday season analysts are not expecting strong sales growth. However, in light of all of this U.S. stocks continue to move higher.

Earnings growth, sales growth, or strong management are irrelevant in determining price action in today’s stock market. In fact, the entire business cycle has been replaced with the quantitative easing and a Federal Reserve that is inflating two massive bubbles simultaneously.

Through artificially low interest rates largely resulting from bond buying, the Federal Reserve has created a bubble in Treasury bonds. In addition to the Treasury bubble, we are seeing wild price action in equity markets as hot money flows seek a higher return. Usually fundamentals such as earnings, earnings estimates, and profitability drive stock prices. However, as can be seen below the U.S. stock market is being driven by something totally different.

Options Trader

Chart Courtesy of www.zerohedge.com

The chart above is beginning to illustrate that fundamentals are becoming irrelevant. The only thing that matters in today’s marketplace is the flow of fresh liquidity out of the Federal Reserve and into the banking system. This process helps to fuel more risk taking and pushes longer-term investors away as hot, speculative money flows into high risk assets.

The chart below, which came from Thomson I/B/E/S demonstrates that the future outlook is clearly not any better.

Chart2 (3)

As can be seen above, over 90% of the S&P 500 companies have already reported negative 4th quarter 2013 pre-announcements. Essentially, these companies are warning equity investors that earnings expectations are going to be lower than expected.

Normally this would be seen as a headwind for equity prices particularly because the ratio is the worst on record. However, equity prices have rallied straight through the dismal earnings data.

In addition to earnings, global leading indicator analysis from Goldman Sachs is also issuing warning signals. The Global Leading Indicator Swirlogram is showing decisively that global leading indicators are slowing down and are moving toward possible contraction presently.

Chart3 (1)

 

On top of consistently lowered earnings estimates and forward guidance in S&P 500 companies at the worst levels on record, we are seeing evidence that would suggest the global economy is slowing down. In light of this information, how can risk assets be rallying?

The weekly chart of the S&P 500 Cash Index (SPX) going back to the beginning of 2012 tells a rather compelling story. The S&P 500 Index in that period of time has rallied by more than 43% as shown below.

Chart4 (1)

However, readers should note that the past 6 – 8 weeks have seen prices move higher. In fact, the last time the S&P 500 Index had 7 consecutive weeks of higher prices was back in 2007. In light of the negative fundamental data, this is the price action we are witnessing in real time.

How can anyone realistically purchase risk assets here? I realize that prices could go higher and likely will go higher if the Federal Reserve continues to accommodate the U.S. capital markets.

 

However, as prices move higher and bears continually get run over at some point a correction or possibly worse could be initiated. Clearly a bubble has formed in Treasuries, but if this type of price action continues a bubble will form in equities as well. Several famous financial pundits are already beginning to discuss this very real possibility.

 

Financial pundits and asset managers are beginning to come forward to discuss their views that equities are at full value and are forming a possible asset bubble. Famous investors and portfolio managers like Larry Fink and Carl Icahn have stated recently that they believe the U.S. equity market is moving into dangerous territory where large corrections could loom in the future.

Furthermore, in a recent interview with Fox News, renowned economist and political pundit David Stockman made the following statements:

“This is the fourth bubble the Fed has created through easy money and printing press expansion.”

“The Fed has taken itself hostage.”

“This is a destructive poisonous monetary medicine that is being put into the system that is distorting all kinds of economic mechanisms with mal-investments on a massive scale.”

 

Stockman concludes that “its like 2007 – 2008 all over again.” Whether the bubble exists in the Treasury market or in U.S. equities is hard to say. In fact, we maybe witnessing bubbles in both asset classes and history says the endgame will likely end badly.

I want to be clear that many times bubbles are viewed in hindsight and we may be months or even years from the top. What I do know is that the Federal Reserve has a horrible track record. They have reduced the U.S. Dollar’s purchasing power incredibly since their inception. Additionally they have always reduced economic stimulus too late and inflation has ravaged markets historically.

While I do not know when the bubbles will burst, what is known is that recently the mere mention of a possible tapering of the Fed’s Quantitative Easing program sent U.S. stocks considerably lower.

All eyes are on the Fed and when they finally taper, they will find out that they are trapped. While prices may continue higher for months or years in the future, history suggests the endgame will be ugly for those who chased the speculative bubbles.

In closing, I will leave you with a quote from a recent interview with legendary investor Jim Rogers, “The Fed will self-destruct, before the politicians realize what is going on.”

To learn more about probability based option trading, consider becoming a member of www.OptionsTradingSignals.com for a totally different view of the markets and how to trade options for consistent profitability over the longer-term.

 

 

This material should not be considered investment advice. J.W. Jones is not a registered investment advisor. Under no circumstances should any content from this article or the OptionsTradingSignals.com website be used or interpreted as a recommendation to buy or sell any type of security or commodity contract. This material is not a solicitation for a trading approach to financial markets. Any investment decisions must in all cases be made by the reader or by his or her registered investment advisor. This information is for educational purposes only.

 

 

Elliott Wave Forecast: Bull Market Nearing Interim Peak on SP500

By MarketTrendForecast.com

Elliott Wave Forecast: Back on September 12th  with the SP 500 at 1689 we forecasted a run in the SP 500 to 1829, a very specific number.  We use Elliott Wave Theory and Analysis in part to come up with projected pivots for the SP 500 and this was our projection.

Elliott Wave Analysis is based largely on Human Behavioural patterns that repeat over and over again throughout time. It’s really crowd behavior or herd mentality as applied to the broader stock markets. This can also apply to individual stocks, precious metals and more.  At the end of the day, an individual stock is worth what investors believe it is worth, and it won’t necessarily reflect what a private valuation may accord it.

With that in mind, the stock market as a basket of 500 stocks can pretty easily be patterned out and then we can apply our Elliott Wave Theory to that pattern and predict outcomes. Back in mid-September, we believed we were in a 3rd wave up of the bull market as part of what we call Primary wave 3.  The primary waves are 1-5 and Primary 3 is usually the most bullish of the 5 primary waves with 2 and 4 being corrective.  Well, within Primary wave 3 you have 5 major waves… and we projected that Major wave 3 would be running to about 1829.

This projection was based on the 1267 pivot for Major wave 2 of Primary Wave Pattern 3 which was a corrective wave. We then simply applied a Fibonacci ratio to the Major wave 1 and assumed that Major wave 3 would be 161% of Major 1.  That brings us to about 1822-1829… and here we are a few months later heading into Thanksgiving with the SP 500 hitting 1807 and getting close to our projection.

What will happen afterwards should be a Major wave 4 correction.  We expect this to be about 130 points on the shallow side of corrections, and as much as 212 points.

So the Bull Market is not over, but Major Wave Pattern 3 of Primary 3 is coming to an end as we are in a seasonally strong period for the market. We would not be shocked to see a strong January 2014 correction in the markets as part of Major wave 4.

Below is our September 14th elliott wave forecast chart we sent to our subscribers and you can see we continue now along the same path.

Elliott Wave Forecast Model

 

Join us to stay on top of the Elliott Wave Forecast Trends in 2014 at www.MarketTrendForecast.com

 

 

 

 

Five Profitable Plays for the Coming Stock Market Correction

By George Leong, B.Comm.

The number of references to a “bubble” that we’re hearing in the mainstream is on the rise, along with the S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average, which are advancing to new record heights.

Some say the stock market will continue to rise, driven by the Federal Reserve’s likely strategy to maintain its low interest rates for another two years. There are those nervous about the tapering, but I don’t really care about that; in my view, the low interest rates are much more critical.

The stock market participants are now faced with a dilemma of whether to chase equities higher. With the gains we have seen, it makes sense to take some profits.

The reality is the broad stock market strength has also rewarded weak companies, which have been supported by the overall enthusiasm to buy stocks.

Some traders are looking at the short side, especially the hedge funds that believe the stock market is overvalued. The problem is that short-selling is not easy, especially in this kind of market. It has been difficult to make money from the short side, and as long as the bullish bias holds, I expect shorting will continue to be a tough path to making money. (Read “How to Profit by Buying ‘Bad’ Companies.”)

A better alternative to shorting individual stocks or indices would be to play a possible stock market correction via the use of bearish exchange-traded funds (ETFs), such as the Direxion Daily S&P500 Bear 3X Shares (NYSEArca/SPXS).

You can also play a possible stock market correction via the use of put options.

As a hedge, you can buy downside protection for your equities by buying put options on your stocks, a certain sector, or an index, such as the NASDAQ, Russell 2000, or S&P 500. This strategy is pretty easy, and it allows you to have some protection in exchange for paying a premium.

Another strategy you can use to play a possible stock market correction is if you want to buy stocks on weakness. If you are looking to buy on a market dip, you can wait for this to happen or you could write or sell put options on a particular stock you are interested in or an index. Under this strategy, you essentially set the buy price for a certain stock or index.

For instance, say you want to buy Facebook, Inc. (NASDAQ/FB) but not at its $47.00 share price as of Thursday. You feel the stock market or Facebook may head lower for a buying opportunity. Say you feel a correction is coming by February 2014. You determined that $38.00 is what you want to pay for Facebook. You can sell the February 2014 $38.00 put option and receive $1.09 per share in premium income. By selling the put, you are liable to buy Facebook should it fall to $38.00. Add in the premium, and your adjusted cost, should this happen, is $36.91 per share.

Of course, you can always take profits in cash, and avoid the sleepless nights.

This article Five Profitable Plays for the Coming Stock Market Correction is originally posted on Profitconfidential

 

 

Overnight Rally Lost in Gold, Vietnam Announces Bargain-Hunting Plan

London Gold Market Report

from Adrian Ash

BullionVault

Tues 26 Nov 11:45 EST

AN OVERNIGHT RALLY in gold evaporated in London trade Tuesday, pulling the metal back to last week’s closing level of $1243 per ounce.

“Gold’s rally over the past 24 hours,” said a note from bullion and investment bank Standard Bank earlier, “we ascribe to small-scale short-covering” by bearish traders closing their positions.

 “We still expect selling into rallies to be the main strategy.”

 Last week’s 4-month lows, says German refining group Heraeus, “led to a strong increase in demand” for investment bars.

 “Private investors appear to have considered gold below $1250 a good buy-opportunity and reacted consequently.”

 Overnight Tuesday, “Purchases of physical gold in Asia,” says the commodities team at Germany’s Commerzbank, “China in particular, may well also have helped prices recover.

 “Demand for gold is likewise high in India, though only little gold is being imported due to the restrictions imposed by the country’s government and central bank.”

 “Evidences of renewed demand,” agrees a separate note from a London trading desk, “is emerging from [emerging-market] countries, Turkey and India mostly.

 “[But] it is clearly not enough to counter the cyclical bear momemtum in gold that is currently building around the Fed, the taper and debt-ceiling.”

 The State Bank of Vietnam, “foresee[ing] a downward trend in the price in the next six months or one year,” is planning to buy gold for its foreign currency reserves, according to Vietnam.Net.

 “It is still not clear about the timing, but we have got ready,” says director of the Foreign Exchange Department, Nguyen Quang Huy, at the central bank – currently not holding any sizeable gold reserves according to IMF data, and unlikely to try buying gold directly from private citizens rather than dealers, according to local analysts.

 China’s top jewelry retailer, Chow Tai Fook, meantime reported better-than-forecast 6-month profits today, nearly doubling net income from March-Sept. 2012.

 Shares in the world’s largest jewelry stock by market cap have slipped 1.1% so far in 2013, the newswire notes, compared with a 4.5% gain in Hong Kong’s broader Hang Seng index and a 26% drop in bullion prices.

Adrian Ash

BullionVault

Gold price chart, no delay | Buy gold online

 

Adrian Ash is head of research at BullionVault, the secure, low-cost gold and silver market for private investors online, where you can fully allocated bullion already vaulted in your choice of London, New York, Singapore, Toronto or Zurich for just 0.5% commission.

 

(c) BullionVault 2013

Please Note: This article is to inform your thinking, not lead it. Only you can decide the best place for your money, and any decision you make will put your money at risk. Information or data included here may have already been overtaken by events – and must be verified elsewhere – should you choose to act on it.

 

 

 

 

 

What’s Making Me Nervous About My Favorite Retail Stocks

By for Investment Contrarians

Favorite Retail StocksRetailers are likely sitting on the edge as we head into the Thanksgiving weekend on Thursday, which means Black Friday is nearly here. The three days from Friday to Sunday are the most critical period in the shopping calendar for the retail sector, followed by “Cyber Monday” (the Monday after Black Friday when many retailers offer steep discounts online), which has historically been the biggest one-day online shopping event of the year.

So these four days are make-or-break for some retailers. What happens during these days could also help dictate what happens in December and 2014. And of course, what happens with consumer spending and the retail sector will dictate the gross domestic product (GDP) growth.

Yet while I was previously more positive towards the retail sector, I’m beginning to have some doubts. Not only am I worried about the weak jobs market, but confidence levels aren’t exactly high now, either. Currently, I expect the retail sector will face greater headwinds in December and early into 2014.

The reality is that the average consumer is uneasy about their economic situation, so they are nervous and hesitant to spend. This will impact the fourth-quarter GDP and make it much more difficult for investors to play the retail sector.

Retail sales advanced for the second straight month in October; albeit, at a muted pace, but it was still nonetheless better than what the market watchers expected. Sales on an ex-auto basis increased 0.5% in October, above the 0.4% Breifing.com estimate and in line with September’s reading. It was also the second straight up month for the retail sector.

But despite these advances, with the jobs picture not improving and the economy stalling a bit, I have become less optimistic towards the retail sector in December. In fact, I believe merchants may be forced to discount merchandise and clear inventory just to boost sales this holiday season, which will, of course, impact operating margins.

On top of all this, we have been seeing some flat results and poor guidance from some retailers.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE/WMT), which is a bellwether stock in the retail sector, is struggling with cautious consumer spending worldwide. Rival Target Corporation (NYSE/TGT) also struggled due largely to costs associated with its Canadian expansion. Other major retailers, such as Sears Holdings Corporation (NASDAQ/SHLD), The Gap, Inc. (NYSE/GPS), and Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (NYSE/ANF), also offered muted results and/or disappointing guidance.

And while I still continue to like the discount retailers, discounter Dollar Tree, Inc. (NASDAQ/DLTR) reported a shortfall in its earnings and lowered its earnings guidance for its fourth quarter. The company cited caution towards the retail sector and consumer spending.

All of this makes me nervous. Given these numbers, investors should tread carefully and see how things unfold with the holiday shopping season, getting a better picture of where the retail sector is headed before creating an investment strategy or buying retail stocks for your portfolio.

 

http://www.investmentcontrarians.com/stock-market/whats-making-me-nervous-about-my-favorite-retail-stocks/3345/