The Monster That Is Europe

By: John Mauldin

This week, Geert Wilders and his Party for Freedom in the Netherlands and Marine Le Pen of the Front National (FN) of France held a press conference in The Hague to announce that they will be cooperating in the elections for the European Parliament next spring and hope to form a new eurosceptic bloc. Their aim, as Mr. Wilders put it, is to "fight this monster called Europe," while Ms. Le Pen spoke of a system that "has enslaved our various peoples." They want to end the common currency, remove the authority of Brussels over national budgets, and undo the project of integration driven with so much idealism by two generations of European politicians. (My thought about Marine Le Pen after looking at her policies is that if Marine Le Pen is the answer for France, they are asking the wrong question.)

For now, Le Pen and Wilders are in a decided, if growing, minority (think Beppe Grillo, who got 25% in Italy in the last election). But as the graphic below suggests, the stitching that is holding the Frankenstein of Europe together seems to be getting a little frayed. And my new worry is that the real monster, one likely to pop many more of the tenuous stitches that hold things together, could be lurking in German banks. This week's letter explores a problem as "hidden" as subprime was back in 2006. Not as big, to be sure, but it might not need to be big to tug too hard the frayed threads that hold Europe together. (Note: this week's letter will print out longer than usual due to the large number of graphs and pictures.)



But first and quickly, we have finalized the dates for next year's Strategic Investment Conference. Mark your calendar for May 13-16. We are adding half a day so we can bring you a few more must-hear speakers. In addition to our always killer lineup of investment and economics thought leaders, I want to add some technology and politics. The significant difference about this conference is that there are no "B list" speakers. Everyone is a headliner. No one pays to get to speak or promote their deal. When we started the conference 11 years ago, my one rule was that we would invite speakers that I wanted to hear and create a conference that I would want to go to.

With my co-hosts Altegris Investments, we have done that and more. Attendees typically rate this conference as the best they attend. This year we have moved to San Diego, where we can have more space. We will still keep it small enough so that you can meet the speakers, as well as a room full of extremely interesting fellow attendees. You can sign up now and book your rooms by going to http://www.altegris.com/sic. Don't procrastinate. Mark down the dates and plan your time accordingly.

The Complacency of Consensus

"But where are you out of consensus?" came the question. I had just spent a few minutes outlining my view of the world to a group of serious money managers here in Geneva, highlighting some of the risks and opportunities I see. The gentleman's question made me realize that for the short-term, at least, I am all too sanguine for my personal taste. I have never thought of myself as one of those consensus guys. But when you consider that Japan is continuing down its path to starting a global currency war, with a currency that will drop at least in half from where it is now (plunging Japan into Abe-geddon); that China is launching its most serious economic overhaul in 20-30 years; that the US is still careening toward its day of reckoning with entitlement spending while dealing with the fall-out from taper tantrums in emerging markets; and that Europe is steering a course straight into deflation – the lot leaving us with Disaster A, Disaster B, or Disaster C as the consensus choice; then yes, I suppose I am a consensus guy, of sorts. But those are all worries that will come to a head later next year or the year after, not in the next few months or weeks, which is where most traders live. The trader who quizzed me wanted to know what was going to affect his book this week!

We seem to occupy a world where we are all somewhat uncomfortable. The problems are all so apparent; but somehow we are compelled to take risks anyway, hoping that the risks we take are properly managed or that we can exit at the propitious moment. The game seems to be moving along, absent another major shock to the system. It's not quite party like it's 2006, because the level of complacency is nowhere near the same; but we do seem headed down the same risk path, even though it scares us. Which means that it might take somewhat less than a subprime debacle and banking shock to trigger a crisis, since no one wants to be exposed when the next crisis happens. The majority of market players appear to believe that another crisis might materialize, but in the meantime you have to dance while the music is playing. Fifty Shades of Chuck Prince.

So, as investors and money managers, we must be on shock alert. Where will the next one come from? By definition, a shock is a surprise to the markets, something that few people recognize until it becomes too big to ignore. Ben Bernanke achieved a degree of infamy for saying that the subprime crisis would be contained, even as some of us were shouting that losses would be in the hundreds of billions (what optimists we were!). And then came the shock that created the biggest global economic crisis since the Great Depression.
But an almost desperate reach for yield and shouldering of risk are clearly in evidence. Junk bond issuance is over 2.5 times what it was in 2006 and twice as high as a percentage of total corporate bond issuance. Leveraged loans are back to all-time highs, even as credit spreads continue to fall (see graph).



Collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) are close to all-time highs after almost disappearing in 2009. And subprime auto-asset-backed paper is projected to set a new record in 2014. Party on, Garth!
But if you ask the participants in those very markets, and I do, if there is any sign that the reach for yield is easing, the answer is generally "Not yet." After 2008, everyone remains nervous; but when the analysis is done, enough buyers conclude that the future will be somewhat like the recent past. Although no one I talk to believes that in 2014 we will see another year in the stock market like the current one, still, the consensus outlook is rather sanguine. But I talk to more bulls than you might think. Last night in Geneva David Zervos was arguing (till rather late in the night, for me at least) his familiar spoos and blues with me (long S&P 500, long eurodollar). He is ready to double down on QE. Our hosts bought an excellent if outrageously expensive dinner (for the record, there is no other kind of meal in Geneva – can you believe $12 Diet Cokes?), and it was only polite to listen. And the trade has been right.

But for how long? Central banks are still going to be easy. But markets can be characterized as fully valued, at best, especially since there have been more earnings warnings this last quarter than at any time in the recent past. While the conditions are not quite the same as in 2006-07, we are getting a little frothy. So is it 2005, so that we can enjoy the ride into late 2006 and then look for an exit strategy? I would argue that the markets actually need a "shock" of some kind. And in addition to the "consensus-view" shocks mentioned above, I see one especially big, nasty lion lurking in the grass. In the form of German banks.

The Sick (German) Banks of Europe

Quick: I say "German banks," and what's the first thing that comes to your mind? The Bundesbank? Staid, no-nonsense central banking? The Bundesbank is all about maintaining the price of money – forget QE. Deutschebank? Big, German – must be stable and low-risk. The fact that southern Europeans are opening accounts left and right in DB must mean that DB is lower-risk than the local wild guys. Except that they have the largest derivatives portfolio, at $70 trillion (but don't worry because it all nets out, sort of, and of course there is no counter-party risk!), and they are the most highly leveraged bank in Europe (at 60:1 in the last tests – not a misprint), which might give you pause. Although their CEO argues that their leverage doesn't matter. And keeps a straight face. Just saying…

If something happens to DB, they are, in all likelihood, Too Big To Save, even for Germany. But Deutschebank is not my focus here today. It is their much smaller brethren, Too small to be called siblings, actually. More like first cousins twice removed. But there are a lot of them, and they all piled into some very interesting and, as it turns out, very questionable trades. And the story begins with the American consumer.
This Christmas, we will all engage, as will much of the world, in an orgy of gift giving. (I helpfully offer a few ideas of my own at the end of the letter.) The iPads and Xbox Ones and GI Joes with the Kung-Fu Grip (gratuitous esoteric movie reference) will be flying off the shelves. But the one thing that ties all those gifts together is The Box, the humble container unit, the TEU, which allows the world to transport all those items ever more cheaply. That story is resoundingly told in a book that Bill Gates featured in his Best Reads for 2013, simply entitled The Box.

You can read a great review here. It turns out that the shipping container was created in the '50s by a force-of-nature entrepreneur who fought governments and regulators (who typically tried to protect unions rather than help consumers) to bring the idea to market. It finally took off when the military decided it was the best way to ship material to the troops in Vietnam. It is one of those things that make sense and would have happened anyway, but as often happens, military spending drove the ramp-up.

The container was not without controversy. Longshoreman unions fought it aggressively, as containers meant fewer high-paying jobs. But The Box also meant far cheaper transportation of goods, and so it helped boost international trade. Now it is hard to imagine a world without containers. And even though the container business started in the US, there is not one US firm in the top 18 container shipping companies. The business is dominated by European and Asian firms.

And container ships were profitable. Oh my, fortunes were built. And they were so successful that a few German bankers looked at the easy money made by US bankers securitizing and packaging mortgages and decided they could do the same with ship financing. I know it is hard to believe, but the German government decided to create pass-through tax vehicles that gave serious tax preference to high-tax-rate investors for all sorts of things, including movies (such cinematic monuments as Terminator 3, I Robot, and the forgettable Stallone flick Get Carter were financed with German "tax shelters"); but my research has so far unearthed nothing to equal the German passion for financing ships. Seriously, would any US government entity give tax breaks to a favored industry? Would a Canadian or Australian or [insert your favorite country here] government? Such things are done by many governements, of course. Here we may apply Mauldin's Rule (stolen from someone else, I am sure): Any seriously out-of-whack financial transaction requires government involvement (generally in the form of some market-distorting law).

Cargo ships, especially container ships, were serious cash machines for long-term money. Buy the ship with some leverage, put it to work, and watch the cash roll in. The Greeks were especially good at this, but the Germans and Scandinavians caught on quick. The Germans went everyone one better and allowed small high-net-worth investors to put their money into funds that financed these ships. At one point, I am told, German banks might have been financing 50% of the world's cargo ships. (They control at least 40% of the world's container ship market today.) Anyone familiar with limited partnerships in the US in the late '70s and early '80s knows how this story ends for the investors.

I came across this story from the inside, as a business partner of mine is in the shipping business; but he owns and operates a special type of ship: massive tugboats that move ocean drilling-rig platforms, and those are still in healthy demand. But his original financing many years ago was from Germany.

It turns out that if a little leverage makes a deal look good, then a lot makes it look even better. In 2007, ships were financed at 75% leverage (on average). It looks like 2008 vintages were financed in the 90% range! (Data is from a presentation I was sent, done by Dr. Klaus Stoltenberg of NordLB.)

To continue reading this article from Thoughts from the Frontline – a free weekly publication by John Mauldin, renowned financial expert, best-selling author, and Chairman of Mauldin Economics – Please Click Here.

Get our "Gold and Crude Oil Trade Ideas"

Growing Oil and Natural Gas Production Continues to Reshape the U.S. Energy Economy

The Annual Energy Outlook 2014 reference case was released today by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) presents updated projections for U.S. energy markets through 2040.

"EIA's updated Reference case shows that advanced technologies for crude oil and natural gas production are continuing to increase domestic supply and reshape the U.S. energy economy as well as expand the potential for U.S. natural gas exports," said EIA Administrator Adam Sieminski. "Growing domestic hydrocarbon production is also reducing our net dependence on imported oil and benefiting the U.S. economy as natural-gas-intensive industries boost their output," said Mr. Sieminski.

Some key findings:

Domestic production of oil and natural gas continues to grow. Domestic crude oil production increases sharply in the AEO2014 Reference case, with annual growth averaging 0.8 million barrels per day (MMbbl/d) through 2016, when domestic production comes close to the historical high of 9.6 MMbbl/d achieved in 1970 (Figure 1). While domestic crude oil production is projected to level off and then slowly decline after 2020 in the Reference case, natural gas production grows steadily, with a 56% increase between 2012 and 2040, when production reaches 37.6 trillion cubic feet (Tcf). The full AEO2014 report, to be released this spring, will also consider alternative resource and technology scenarios, some with significantly higher long-term oil production than the Reference case.

Low natural gas prices boost natural gas-intensive industries. Industrial shipments grow at a 3.0% annual rate over the first 10 years of the projection and then slow to a 1.6% annual growth over the balance of the projection. Bulk chemicals and metals-based durables account for much of the increased growth in industrial shipments. Industrial shipments of bulk chemicals, which benefit from an increased supply of natural gas liquids, grow by 3.4% per year from 2012 to 2025, although the competitive advantage in bulk chemicals diminishes in the long term. Industrial natural gas consumption is projected to grow by 22% between 2012 and 2025.

Higher natural gas production also supports increased exports of both pipeline and liquefied natural gas (LNG). In addition to increases in domestic consumption in the industrial and electric power sectors, U.S. exports of natural gas also increase in the AEO2014 Reference case (Figure 2). U.S. exports of LNG increase to 3.5 Tcf before 2030 and remain at that level through 2040. Pipeline exports of U.S. natural gas to Mexico grow by 6% per year, from 0.6 Tcf in 2012 to 3.1 Tcf in 2040, and pipeline exports to Canada grow by 1.2% per year, from 1.0 Tcf in 2012 to 1.4 Tcf in 2040. Over the same period, U.S. pipeline imports from Canada fall by 30%, from 3.0 Tcf in 2012 to 2.1 Tcf in 2040, as more U.S. demand is met by domestic production.

Car and light trucks energy use declines sharply, reflecting slow growth in travel and accelerated vehicle efficiency improvements. AEO2014 includes a new, detailed demographic profile of driving behavior by age and gender as well as new lower population growth rates based on updated Census projections. As a result, annual increases in vehicles miles traveled (VMT) in light-duty vehicles (LDV) average 0.9% from 2012 to 2040, compared to 1.2% per year over the same period in AEO2013. The rising fuel economy of LDVs more than offsets the modest growth in VMT, resulting in a 25% decline in LDV energy consumption decline between 2012 and 2040 in the AEO2014 Reference case.

Natural gas overtakes coal to provide the largest share of U.S. electric power generation. Projected low prices for natural gas make it a very attractive fuel for new generating capacity. In some areas, natural-gas-fired generation replaces power formerly supplied by coal and nuclear plants. In 2040, natural gas accounts for 35% of total electricity generation, while coal accounts for 32% (Figure 3). Generation from renewable fuels, unlike coal and nuclear power, is higher in the AEO2014 Reference case than in AEO2013. Electric power generation from renewables is bolstered by legislation enacted at the beginning of 2013 extending tax credits for generation from wind and other renewable technologies.

Other AEO2014 Reference case highlights:

• The Brent crude oil spot price declines from $112 per barrel (bbl) (in 2012 dollars) in 2012 to $92/bbl in 2017. After 2017, the Brent spot oil price increases, reaching $141/bbl in 2040 due to growing demand that requires the development of more costly resources. World liquids consumption grows from 89 MMbbl/d in 2012 to 117 MMbbl/d in 2040, driven by growing demand in China, India, Brazil, and other developing economies.

• Total U.S. primary energy consumption grows by just 12% between 2012 and 2040. The fossil fuel share of total primary energy demand falls from 82% of total U.S. energy consumption in 2012 to 80% in 2040 as consumption of petroleum-based liquid fuels falls, largely as a result of slower growth in LDV VMT and increased vehicle efficiency.

• Energy use per 2005 dollar of gross domestic product (GDP) declines by 43% from 2012 to 2040 in AEO2014 as a result of continued growth in services as a share of the overall economy, rising energy prices, and existing policies that promote energy efficiency. Energy use per capita declines by 8% from 2012 through 2040 as a result of improving energy efficiency and changes in the way energy is used in the U.S. economy.

• With domestic crude oil production rising to 9.5 MMbbl/d in 2016, the net import share of U.S. petroleum and other liquids supply will fall to about 25%. With a decline in domestic crude oil production after 2019 in the AEO2014 Reference case, the import share of total petroleum and other liquids supply will grow to 32% in 2040, still lower than the 2040 level of 37% in the AEO2013 Reference case.

• Total U.S. energy-related CO2 emissions remain below their 2005 level (6 billion metric tons) through 2040, when they reach 5.6 billion metric tons. CO2 emissions per 2005 dollar of GDP decline more rapidly than energy use per dollar, to 56% below their 2005 level in 2040, as lower-carbon fuels account for a growing share of total energy use.

Get our "Gold and Crude Oil Trade Ideas"

Weekly Futures Market Recap - Natural Gas, Gold and Coffee

For this weeks weekly futures recap we've asked our trading partner Mike Seery to weigh in on three of our favorite markets. Natural gas, gold and coffee......

Natural gas futures were up another 24 points this week in the January contract trading at 4.35 still above its 20 & 100 day moving average now hitting a 6 month high continuing its bullish momentum with extreme cold weather throughout much of the country stirring up demand as temperatures are far above average causing natural gas prices to continue its bullish run.

Many of the other commodities are starting to move higher with natural gas and in my opinion a triple bottom has occurred around 3.50 and as I’ve written in many previous blogs I am just outright bullish the natural gas sector due to the fact that I do believe the United States government is going to mandate natural gas usage here in the next 3 to 5 years which could double or triple prices just on demand without factoring any weather premium and in my opinion I’m advising all investors who have a long term horizon to be buying natural gas in the December contract of 2015 and holding because prices could skyrocket from these ridiculously low levels.

Remember natural gas prices traded as high as 13 – 14 just in the year 2008 that’s how far we’ve come and with the green energy policies and the trend getting away from fossil fuels continuing I believe natural gas demand will soar in the next decade as traders will shake their heads wondering why they were not in natural gas at 4.00.
TREND: HIGHER
CHART STRUCTURE: EXCELLENT

Gold futures had a wild trading week with a $30 up day and $30 down day finishing up about $5 for the trading week in the February contract going out this Friday in New York at 1,235 an ounce finishing up $11 this Friday afternoon as the trend still remains bearish in my opinion & I still believe that there’s a high probability that prices will retest the summer lows of 1,180 here in the next couple of weeks.

Next week will be very interesting to see if the Fed does taper bond purchases and how these markets will react so expect extreme volatility in the precious metals especially if tapering is announced. I would definitely expect prices to drop rather significantly quickly but the opposite could happen as well as if there is no tapering you could get a big knee jerk reaction to the upside so I’m advising just to sit on the sidelines and see what the statement says and go from there because it’s like flipping a coin at this time but the trend is to the downside so at least in the short term prices still look vulnerable.

Gold is still trading below its 20 and 100 day moving average we really have gone nowhere in the last month but we had extreme volatility as there is major support down at those levels. Gold is down about 35% from its all-time high of about 1,900 just a couple years ago and eventually there will be a bottom in this market I just don’t think quite yet.
TREND: LOWER
CHART STRUCTURE: OK

Coffee futures have broken out to a 7 week high trading nearly up 900 points this week currently at 115.20 in the March contract as a possible bottom has finally been formed after hovering around 5 year lows as the bulls have come back in this market with the next major resistance at 120. If you think coffee prices have bottomed my recommendation would be to buy a futures contract place a stop below the contract low of about 104 risking around $4,000 per contract as coffee is one of the largest commodities contracts with as every 100 points equaling $375 profit or loss.

The fundamentals have not changed in coffee with large world supplies and low demand at this time but eventually prices come to a bottom but I’m not 100% convinced that the sell off is over but I certainly would not be short this market as the short term trend is higher and I always try to trade with the short term trend. Coffee futures are trading above their 20 day moving average but still below their 100 day moving average which stands at 119 and I suspect that there will be some buy stops up at that level so prices could still have more room to run to the upside in the next several days.currently.
TREND: HIGHER
CHART STRUCTURE: EXCELLENT


Sign up for our "Gold and Crude Oil Trade Ideas"

GOLD’s Elliott Wave Analysis Bear Cycle Coming to a Close in December

When it comes to the actual trading aspect in gold our trading partner David A. Banister Market Trend Forecast has been our go to guy. Very interesting what he is bringing us this morning.....Is GOLD’s Elliott Wave Analysis Bear Cycle Coming to a Close in December?


Our Last major Elliott Wave Analysis of Gold came in early September when Gold had touched the 1434 area, and in that analysis we called for a re-test of 1271-1285 levels. This was based on our Elliott Wave Analysis of the patterns involved since the 1923 spot highs in the fall of 2011. Our clients of course were updated on a regular basis since that public analysis and we have been looking for clues to a bottom in this Gold bear cycle from the 2011 highs.

Most recently, we noted that we are seeing patterns commiserate with what Elliott wave theory calls a “truncated 5th wave” pattern. All Bear cycles have 5 full waves to the downside from the highs, and we have been in wave 5 since the 1434 highs. The key then is determining how low that wave 5 will take you in Gold, and planning your investments and timing around that forecast.

To qualify for a truncated 5th wave, you have to have a very strong preceding 3rd wave to the downside. In this case, we had that as Gold dropped from just over 1800 per ounce to 1181 into late June 2013. As we approached the 1181 areas, we also put out a public forecast saying that Gold has indeed bottomed and should rally strong to the upside. Recently, Gold hit a bottom at 1211 spot pricing last week and that is when we began to consider a truncated 5th wave pattern.

We sent our clients about a week ago regarding this possible Elliott wave theory bottom:

If we fast forward a week later, we had Gold running up to 1261 which was the pivot resistance line we told our subscribers to watch for. We hit it on the nose and backed off to 1224 yesterday. We now expect that if GOLD holds the 1211 area, that we will again rally back up and over 1261 and then head to the 1313 resistance zone. We would like to see Gold get over 1313 and if so our targets are in the 1560 ranges for Gold in the first half of 2014.

Aggressive investors should be accumulating quality small cap gold producing and exploration, or Gold itself depending on your preference during these last few weeks of December as our Elliott Wave Analysis is signaling a bottom is near. We would again watch 1211 as a key level to hold for this possible truncated wave 5 to work out.

Click here to join Banister at Market Trend Forecast for regular Gold & SP 500 Elliott Wave Analysis updates

Anadarko gets three downgrades after court decision, shares Down 11.5%

Anadarko Petroleum (APC) almost certainly will appeal yesterday's court ruling against it in the Tronox litigation: "We vehemently disagree with the judge's decision... We fully expect to pursue every avenue available to us through the appellate process to protect the interests of our stakeholders, once a final judgment including damages has been rendered."

The severity of the ruling for APC will come down to damages: While the judge found that the trust is entitled to recover $14.17B, APC may be able to lower the figure by $9B for offsetting costs it may have incurred from the Tronox transaction.

J.P. Morgan downgrades APC to Underweight and a $77 price target, while Citi and Global Hunter cut shares to Neutral from Buy; Credit Suisse views $65-$70 as a potential floor level valuation.

Jefferies, maintaining a Buy rating and $111 price target, believes APC could pursue more aggressive dividend/buyback moves to instill shareholder confidence that the ruling will be found excessive.


Get our "Gold and Crude Oil Trade Ideas"
 

Six Traits of Successful Retirees

By Dennis Miller

When I coached baseball many years ago, a young ballplayer came to me asking for advice. I offered my opinion: he needed to get his act together. Then, like many young men might do, he griped about me to one of the other coaches. Our paths crossed again when he was 28 years old, at which point he said, "Now that I have a family of my own, I've thought back on your 'lectures' and realized you were just answering my questions honestly. Thank you."


Not surprisingly, my lectures as a coach weren't so different from those I'd received from a WWII colonel turned coach and teacher at my high school. The only difference: I never asked for his opinion, it was offered as he held my shirt collar. Still, when I came home on leave from the Marine Corps a few years later, I showed up at my old high school, walked onto the practice field, and thanked him. He was a solid mentor when I needed one but was too young to know it.

Years later, as a retirement mentor, I've spent countless hours analyzing the habits shared by successful retirees. Six stand out, and I urge all of our readers to take these steps sooner rather than later. I'm not going to grab you by the shirt collar like my coach did, but I'm confident you'll find this "lecture" worth reading.

1. Cut the financial cord with your children. All parents have one basic responsibility: to equip their children to survive on their own, both emotionally and financially.
   
   Retirees are often the wealthier members of an extended family, or they are perceived as such. But having money does not make you a bank. If a family member needs money, let him or her borrow it elsewhere. The wealth you've accumulated has to last you the rest of your life. The best way to remind your family and yourself of this simple fact is to simply say "no."
   
   Of course, some accidents and disabilities cannot be prevented, and there are times to rally behind family members truly unable to put a roof over their heads or food in their bellies. But for every truly unavoidable catastrophe, there are dozens more instances of parents enabling a freeloader.
   
   You've worked too hard to sacrifice your financial independence and give up your golden years. Even if you have enough to support two generations indefinitely, being the "Bank of Parents" won't help anyone in the long run.
2. Be your own "pension fund" manager. Independence is the real goal of retirement. That means listening to experts, but also learning to make savvy financial decisions for yourself.
   
   Today, pensions are virtually nonexistent in the private sector. Soon they won't exist in the public sector either. So all of your retirement, including saving, investing, debt reduction, tax planning, estate planning, is up to you.
   
   There's a lot to learn, but the information is there for the taking. I've known too many people who retired with a large chunk of change only to panic because they had no clue how to manage it. These folks were afraid, rightly so, because their lack of financial know how made them vulnerable.
   
   Give yourself a financial education while you're accumulating wealth so you can enjoy that wealth once you retire. Otherwise, you might leave a high stress job for a high stress retirement.
3. Maximize your tax-preferred retirement savings. Only 10% of those eligible for employer-sponsored 401(k) programs maximize their contributions. There are real financial benefits to contributing to your 401(k), and it's a mistake to turn down that free money, especially if your employer will match all or part of your contributions.
   
   In that same vein, tapping into retirement accounts to pay off bills is almost always a mistake. Unless you absolutely need the money for basic survival, you're much better off leaving your retirement money alone. Like many things in life, once you tap those funds, it gets easier and easier to do it again.
   
   Before Congress passed the first Social Security Act in 1935, retirement was for a wealthy few. Since then, Social Security has fostered the illusion that we need not worry about money and that retirement doesn't require a large personal nest egg. Reality is far harsher.
   
   I know people who've tried to live on their Social Security alone; now they are all back at work. A happy retirement rarely comes for people who choose to worry about retirement later.
4.  Get out of debt. Many retirees are drowning in debt. It's a topic we touched on in The Reverse Mortgage Guide when discussing why seniors are turning to reverse mortgages at an increasingly younger age.
   
   Independence is pretty hard when you don't have any money. And don't fool yourself: if you have a million dollars in your brokerage account and a million dollar mortgage, you're broke. Forget all the fancy formulas. When you stop paying people to rent their money, that's when real wealth building can start.
5. Get some professional help. Even if you have a small nest egg, I strongly recommend going to a professional certified financial planner (CFP) for a regular checkup. I don't mean pay someone to manage your money, although that is an option. Much like an annual physical, however, we can all benefit from an independent, qualified professional assessing where we are and how to stay (or get) on course.
   
   The checkup might cost a few hundred dollars, but it's money well spent. Retirees cannot afford to be penny wise and pound foolish.
6. Get in synch with your spouse sooner rather than later. During your working years, you trade time and expertise for money. For most folks, the goal is to save enough so that they don't have to work full time to survive. Then, during retirement you trade money for time to pursue other interests. Sad to say, many people struggle to pinpoint what those interests are once they get there. One spouse might want to travel while the other is a homebody, etc.
   
   Retirement is no fun if only one spouse is living their dream. Happier couples talk and plan how they want to spend their time long before retirement day.

As someone in or approaching retirement age, you've lived long enough to be a mentor in some area of life. So you already know that mentoring is about telling people what they need to hear, whether it's on the baseball field, in the boardroom, or at the kitchen table (where most life lessons are learned).
I urge you to pass your own "secrets to success" on to the next generation; they will thank you for it… eventually.

In addition to our regular weekly and premium monthly issues, we've been hard at work producing a series of special reports on need to know retirement topics: financial advisors, reverse mortgages, income-producing stocks and low-fee ETFs, to name a few.

You can download each of these timely special reports individually; or, if you really want to kick start your financial education, you can begin your Money Forever premium subscription now and receive access to all of our special reports, our current issue, and the Money Forever archives.


Here's our complete FREE Trading Webinar Schedule

Mid Week Market Summary for Wednesday December 11th

The S&P 500 closed lower on Wednesday. The low range close sets the stage for a steady to lower opening when Thursday's night session begins trading. Stochastics and the RSI are neutral to bullish signaling that sideways to higher prices are possible near term. If March renews this year's rally into uncharted territory upside targets will be hard to project. Multiple closes below last Wednesday's low crossing at 1774.80 are needed to confirm that a short term top has been posted. First resistance is November's high crossing at 1805.50. Second resistance is unknown. First support is last Wednesday's low crossing at 1774.80. Second support is the reaction low crossing at 1769.00.

Crude oil closed lower due to profit taking on Wednesday as it consolidated some of the rally off November's low. The low range close sets the stage for a steady to lower opening when Thursday's night session begins. Stochastics and the RSI are overbought but remain neutral to bullish signaling that sideways to higher prices are possible near-term. If January extends the rally off November's low, the 50% retracement level of the August-November decline crossing at 99.87 is the next upside target. Closes below the 20 day moving average crossing at 95.16 would confirm that a short term top has been posted. First resistance is today's high crossing at 98.75. Second resistance is the 50% retracement level of the August-November decline crossing at 99.87. First support is the 20 day moving average crossing at 95.16. Second support is November's low crossing at 91.77.


The single biggest advantage System & Quant traders enjoy and the fatal mistake it helps them avoid 

Natural gas closed sharply higher on Wednesday and above the 62% retracement level of this year's decline crossing at 4.307 as it extends the rally off November's low. The high range close sets the stage for a steady to higher opening on Thursday. Stochastics and the RSI are overbought but remain neutral to bullish signaling that sideways to higher prices are possible near term. If January extends the rally off November's low, the 75% retracement level of this year's decline crossing at 4.487 is the next upside target. Closes below the 20 day moving average crossing at 3.902 would confirm that a short term top has been posted. First resistance is today's high crossing at 4.340. Second resistance is the 75% retracement level of this year's decline crossing at 4.487. First support is the 10 day moving average crossing at 4.082. Second support is the 20 day moving average crossing at 3.902.

Gold closed lower as it consolidated some of on Tuesday rally but remains above the 20 day moving average crossing at 1250.50. The low range close sets the stage for a steady to lower opening when Thursday's night session begins trading. Stochastics and the RSI are bullish signaling that sideways to higher prices are possible near term. If February extends Tuesday's rally, the reaction high crossing at 1294.70 is the next upside target. If February renews the decline off August' high, June's low crossing at 1187.90 is the next downside target. First resistance is Tuesday's high crossing at 1267.50. Second resistance is the reaction high crossing at 1294.70. First support is last Friday's low crossing at 1210.10. Second support is June's low crossing at 1187.90.

Silver closed higher on Wednesday as it extended the rally off last Wednesday's low. The low range close set the stage for a steady to lower opening when Thursday's night session begins trading. Stochastics and the RSI remain bullish signaling that sideways to higher prices are possible near term. If January extends this week's rally, the reaction high crossing at 20.805 is the next upside target. If January renews the decline off October's high, June's low crossing at 18.615 is the next downside target. First resistance is today's high crossing at 20.430. Second resistance is the reaction high crossing at 20.805. First support is last Wednesday's low crossing at 18.900. Second support is June's low crossing at 18.615.

The U.S. Dollar closed lower on Wednesday as it extends the decline off November's high. The mid range close sets the stage for a steady to lower opening when Thursday's night session begins trading. Stochastics and the RSI are oversold but remain neutral to bearish signaling that sideways to lower prices are possible near term. If March extends the decline off November's high, October's low crossing at 79.35 is the next downside target. Closes above the 20 day moving average crossing at 80.82 would confirm that a short term low has been posted. First resistance is the 20 day moving average crossing at 80.82. Second resistance is November's high crossing at 81.73. First support is today's low crossing at 79.87. Second support is October's low crossing at 79.35.

The Japanese Yen closed higher due to short covering on Wednesday. The mid-range close sets the stage for a steady opening when Thursday's night session begins trading. Stochastics and the RSI are diverging but are neutral to bearish signaling that sideways to lower prices are possible near term. If March extends the decline off October's high, weekly support crossing at .9640 is the next downside target. Closes above the 20 day moving average crossing at .9857 are needed to confirm that a short term low has been posted. First resistance is last Thursday's high crossing at .9845. Second resistance is the 20 day moving average crossing at .9857. First support is Tuesday's low crossing at .9678. Second support is weekly support crossing at .9640.

Coffee closed lower on Wednesday. The low range close set the stage for a steady to lower opening on Thursday. Stochastics and the RSI are turning bullish signaling that sideways to higher prices are possible near term. Closes above the reaction high crossing at 11.29 are needed to renew the rally off November's low. If March renews last week's decline, November's low crossing at 10.41 is the next downside target.

Get our "Gold and Crude Oil Trade Ideas"

Mish's Mid Week Market Minute $SPY $IWM $DIA $QQQ

Michelle "Mish" Schneider gives a quick run down of this market like no one else can. Here's her Free Market Minute for Wednesday....

Flat has several meanings. 1. Smooth and even, without marked lumps or indentations. I wonder how many can say that about their equity after Tuesday’s session? 2. Lacking interest or emotion; dull and lifeless. That’s a yes! 3. In or to a horizontal position. Describes the market internals or McClellan Oscillator.

The S&P 500 is flat. Flat as a word has several more urban definitions; but I will leave that to your own curiosity to look up online. Speaking of, Google (GOOG), far from flat, did make new highs.

Volume equally flat with an exception to the small caps, Russell 2000s, which posted a rather small distribution day. Remember, when you’re flat on your back, everything looks up!

S&P 500 (SPY) Held the fast moving average, which by the way, is flat.

Russell 2000 (IWM) Broke the fast moving average with 111 an important support level

Dow (DIA) Closed just shy of the fast moving average but also on support. Also have to mention that IWM SPY and DIA did not make new highs recently while QQQs did

Nasdaq (QQQ) Marginally worked off overbought conditions

XLF (Financials) Volcker rule announcement had an impact. Sitting on support

SMH (Semiconductors) Holding the runaway gap

XRT (Retail) With a 6 day correction, 85.60 is pretty much the risk should this start to turn up

IYT (Transportation) Marginally held 128.40

IBB (Biotechnology) Held 219 and still digesting

IYR (Real Estate) 63.20 is the place to hold now

XHB (Homebuilders) Floundering around above the 50 DMA

GLD Gapped up so that reversal candle was good after all-now, 122 great resistance

USO (US Oil Fund) Cleared the 200 DMA-and baby, it’s cold outside!

XLE (Energy) 2 inside days-good one to focus on for range break

TBT (Ultrashort Lehman 20+ Year Treasuries) TLTs doesn’t believe taper talk it seems

EWG (Germany) 30.33 is the low of the island top to clear to negate that pattern


Click here...To Get Michelle's Market Minute in your inbox every morning.


Get our "Gold and Crude Oil Trade Ideas"

The Correction Isn’t Over, But Gold’s Headed to $20,000

By Louis James, Chief Metals & Mining Investment Strategist

In April of 2008, Casey International Speculator published an article called "Gold—Relative Performance to Oil" by Professor Krassimir Petrov, then at the American University in Bulgaria, now a visiting professor at Prince of Songkla University in Thailand. He told us he thought the Mania Phase of the gold market was many years off, which was not a popular thing to say at the time:

"In about 8-10 years from now, we should expect the commodity bull market to reach a mania of historic proportions.

"It is important to emphasize that the above projection is entirely mine. I base it on my own studies of historical episodes of manias, bubbles, and more generally of cyclical analysis. In fact, it contradicts many world renowned scholars in the field. For example, the highly regarded Frank Veneroso and Robert Prechter widely publicized their beliefs that during 2007 there was a commodity bubble; both of them called the collapse in commodity prices in mid-March of 2008 to be the bursting of the bubble. I strongly disagree with them.

"I also disagree with many highly sophisticated gold investors and with our own Doug Casey that the Mania stage, if there is one, will be in 2-3 years, and possibly even sooner... Although I disagree that we will see a mania in a couple years, I expect healthy returns for gold."

It turned out that Dr. Petrov was right. Five and a half years later, here's his current take on gold and the metal's ongoing correction…...

Louis James: So Krassimir, it's been a long and interesting five years since we last spoke… Gold bugs didn't like your answer then, but so far it seems that you were right. So what's your take on gold today?

Krassimir Petrov: Well, most gold bugs won't like my answer again, because I think we are still between six to ten years away from the peak of the gold bull. We are exactly in the middle of this secular bull market, and a secular bull market is usually punctuated or separated by a major cyclical bear market. I think that the ongoing 24-month correction is that typical big major cyclical correction—a cyclical bear market within the context of the secular bull market.

Thinking in terms of behavioral analysis, most investors are very, very bearish on gold. People who are not gold bugs overall still dismiss gold as a good or even as a legitimate investment. That, too, is typical of a mid-cycle. So as far as I'm concerned, we are somewhere in the middle of the cycle, which may easily go for another 10 years.

I expect that this secular bull market for gold will last a total of 20 to 25 years, dating back to its beginning in 2000. Some people like to date the beginning of this secular bull market at the cyclical bottom in 1999, while others date it at the cyclical bottom in 2001. I prefer to date it at 2000, so that the secular bottom for gold coincides with the secular top of the stock market in 2000.

L: That's interesting. But I'm not sure gold bugs would find this to be bad news. The thing they're afraid to hear is that the market has peaked already—that the $1,900 nominal price peak in 2011 was the top, and that it's downhill for the next two decades. To hear you say that there is a basis in more than one type of analysis for arguing that we're still in the middle of the bull cycle—and that it should go upwards over the next 10 years—that's actually quite welcome.

Petrov: Yes, it's great news. But we're still not going to get to the Mania Phase for at least another two, but more likely four to six years from now.

Now, we should clarify what we mean by the Mania Phase. Last time, it was the 1979 to early 1980 period. It's the last phase of the cycle when the price goes parabolic. Past cycles show that the Mania Phase is typically 10% or 15% of the total cycle. So it's important to pick the proper dates for defining a gold bull market. I prefer to date the previous one from 1966 as the beginning of the market, to January of 1980 as the top of the cycle. That means that the previous bull market lasted 14 years, and it's fair to say that the Mania Phase lasted about 18 months, or just under 15% of the cycle.

So I expect the Mania Phase for the current bull cycle to last about two to three years, and it's many years yet until we reach it.

In terms of market psychology, we still have many people who believe in real estate; we still have many people buying and believing in the safety of bonds; we still have many people who believe in stocks. All of these people still outright dismiss gold as a legitimate investment. So, to get to the Mania Phase, we need all of these people to convert to gold bull market thinking, and that's going to be six to eight years from now. No sooner.

L: Hm. Your analysis is a combination of what we might call the fundamentals and the technicals. Looking at the market today—

Petrov: Let's clarify. When I say fundamental analysis, I mean strictly relevant valuation ratios. For example, according to the valuation of gold relative to the stock market, i.e., the Dow/gold ratio, gold is extremely undervalued, easily by about 10 times, relative to the stock market.

Fundamental analysis can also mean the relative price of gold to real estate—the number of ounces necessary to buy a house. Looked at this way, gold is still roughly about 10 times undervalued.
Thus, fundamental analysis refers to the valuation of gold relative to the other asset classes (stocks, bonds, real estate, and currencies), and each of these analyses suggests that gold is undervalued about 10 times.
In terms of portfolio analysis, gold today is probably about one percent of an average investor's portfolio.

L: Right; it's underrepresented. But before we go there, while we are defining things, can you define how you look at these time periods? Most people would say that the last great bull market of the 1970s began in 1971, when Richard Nixon closed the gold window, not back in 1966, when the price of gold was fixed. Can you explain that to us, please?

Petrov: Well, first of all, we had the London Gold Pool, established in 1961 to maintain the price of gold stable at $35. But just because the price was fixed legally and maintained by the pool at $35 doesn't mean that there was no underlying bull market. The mere fact that the London Gold Pool was manipulating gold in the late 1960s, before the pool collapsed in 1968, should tell us for sure that we already had an incipient, ongoing secular bull market.

The other argument is that while the London Gold Pool price was fixed at $35, there were freely traded markets in gold outside the participating countries, and the market price at that moment was steadily rising. So, around 1968 we had a two-tiered gold market: the fixed government price at $35 and the free-market price—and these two prices were diverging, with the free price moving steadily higher and higher.

L: Do you have data on that? I never thought about it, but surely the gold souks and other markets must have been going nuts before Nixon took the dollar completely off the gold standard.

Petrov: Yes. There have been and still are many gold markets in the Arab world, and there have been many gold markets in Europe, including Switzerland. Free-market prices were ranging significantly higher than the fixed price: up to 10, 20, or 30% premiums.

There's also a completely different way to think about it: in order to time gold secular bull and bear markets properly, it would make the most sense that they would be the inverse of stock market secular bull and bear markets. Thus, a secular bottom for gold should coincide with the secular top for stocks. And based on the work of many stock market analysts, it is generally accepted that the secular bear market in stocks began in 1966 and ended in 1980 to 1982. This again suggests to me that it would make a lot of sense to use 1966 for dating the beginning of the gold bull market.

L: Understood. On this subject of dating markets, what is it that makes you think this one's going to be a 25-year cycle? That's substantially longer than the last one. We have a different world today, sure, but can you explain why you think this cycle will be that long?

Petrov: Well, based on all the types of analyses I use—cyclical analysis, behavioral analysis, portfolio analysis, fundamental analysis, and technical analysis—this bull market is developing a lot slower, so it will take a lot longer.

The correction from 1973 to 1975 was the major cyclical correction of the last gold bull cycle, from roughly $200 down to roughly $100. Back then, it took from 1966 to 1973—about six to seven  years—for the correction to begin. This time, it took roughly 11 years to begin, so I think the length of this cycle could be anywhere between 50 and 60% longer than the last one.

Let's clarify this, because it's very important for gold bulls who are suffering through the pain of correction now. If we are facing a 50-60% extended time frame of this cycle and the major correction in the previous bull market was roughly two years, we could easily have the ongoing correction last 30 to 35 months. Given the starting point in 2011, the correction could last another six, eight, or ten more months before we hit rock bottom.

L: Another six to ten months before this correction hits bottom is definitely not what gold investors want to hear.

Petrov: I'm not saying that I expect it, but another six to ten months should not surprise us at all. A lot of people jumped on the gold bull market in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and these people haven't given up yet. Behaviorally, we expect that these latecomers—maybe 80-90% of them—should and would give up on gold and sell before the new cyclical bull resumes.

L: Whoa—now that would be a bloodbath. Can we go back to your version of fundamental analysis for a moment and compare gold to other metrics? You mentioned that gold is still relatively undervalued in terms of houses and stocks and some things, but I've heard from other analysts that it's relatively high compared to other things—loaves of bread, oil, and more.

Petrov: Let's take oil, for example. We have a very stable long-term ratio between oil and silver, and that ratio is roughly one to one. For a long time, silver was about $1.20, and oil was roughly $1.20. At the peak in 1980, silver was about $45, and oil was about $45. Right now, silver is four to five times undervalued compared to oil, so in terms of oil, I would disagree for silver. The long-term ratio of gold to oil is about 15 to 20, depending on the time frame, so gold may not be cheap, but it's not overvalued relative to oil either.
But suppose gold were overvalued relative to other commodities—which I doubt, but even if we suppose that it's correct, it simply doesn't mean that gold is generally overvalued. The other commodities could be even more—meaning 10, 15, 20 times—undervalued relative to the stock market, or real estate, or bonds.

There is no contradiction. In fundamental analysis, it is illegitimate to compare gold, which is largely viewed as a commodity, to other commodities. We should compare it as one asset class against other asset classes.
For example, we could compare gold relative to real estate. By this measure, it is easily five to ten times undervalued. Separately, we could evaluate it relative to stocks. When you compare gold to stocks in terms of the Dow/gold ratio, it's easily five to ten times undervalued. Separately again, we could evaluate it relative to bonds, but the valuation is much more complicated, because we need to impute a proper inflation-adjusted long-term yield, so it's better not to get into this now. And finally, we could evaluate it separately against currencies. More on that later.

Now, I believe that when this cycle is over, we are going to reach a Dow/gold ratio far lower than in previous cycles, which have ended with a Dow/gold ratio of about 2:1 (two ounces of gold for one unit of Dow). This time, we are going to end up with a ratio of 1:2—one ounce of gold is going to buy two units of Dow. So, if the ratio right now is about 8:1, I think gold could go up 16 times relative to the stock market today.

L: That's quite a statement. Government intervention today is so extreme and stocks in general seem so overvalued, I can believe the Dow/gold ratio could reach a new extreme—but I have to follow up on such an aggressive statement. What do you base that on? Why do you think it will go to 1:2 instead of 2:1?

Petrov: If I remember correctly, we had a 2:1 ratio during the first bottom in 1932; the Dow Jones bottomed out at $42 and gold was roughly about $20 before Roosevelt devalued the dollar. That was also the beginning of the so-called "paper world," when we embarked on the current paper cycle.

The next cycle bottomed in 1980; gold was roughly 850 and the stock market was roughly 850, yielding a ratio of 1:1. Now, if we look at it in terms of the "paper" supercycle, beginning in the early 20th century and extending to the early 21st century, you can draw a technical line of support levels for the Dow/gold ratio. If you do this, you end up with Dow/gold bottoming at 2:1 (in 1932), then at 1:1 (in 1980), and you can project the next one to bottom at 1:2.

Another way to think about it is that we are currently in a so-called supercycle—whether it's a gold supercycle or a commodity supercycle—and this supercycle should last 50 to 70% longer than the previous one. It will overcorrect for the whole period of paper money over the last 80 years.

From a behavioral perspective, I could easily see people overreacting; we could easily see that at the peak we're going to have a major panic with overshooting. I expect the overshooting to be roughly proportional to the length of the whole corrective process.

In other words, if this cycle is extended in time frame, we would expect the overshooting of the Mania Phase to be significantly larger. It should be no surprise, then, if we get a ratio of 1:1.5 or 1:2, with gold valued more than the Dow.

L: That's a scary world you're describing, but the argument makes sense. How many cycles do you have to base your cyclical analysis on, to be able to say that the average Mania Phase is 15% of the cycle?

Petrov: Well, gold is the most complicated investment asset. It is half commodity, and it behaves as a commodity, but it's also half currency. It's the only asset that belongs in two asset classes, properly considered to be a financial asset (money) and at the same time a real asset (commodity). So, even though gold prices were fixed in the 20th century, you can get proper cycles for commodities over the time period and include gold in them. If you look into commodity cycles historically, there are four to five longer (AKA Kondratieff) commodity cycles you can use to infer what the behavior for gold as a commodity might be.

L: So would it be fair, then, to characterize your projections as saying, "As long as gold is treated by investors as a commodity, then these are the time frames and the projections we can make"?

Petrov: Right.

L: But if at some point the world really goes off the deep end and the money aspect of gold comes to the forefront—if people completely lose confidence in the US dollar, for example—at that point, the fact that gold is a commodity would not be the main driver. The monetary aspect of gold would take over?

Petrov: No, not exactly, because you will still have a commodity cycle. You will still have oil moving up. Rice will still be moving up, as will wheat, all the other commodities pushing higher and higher, and they will pull gold.

Yet another important tangent here is that in commodity bull markets, gold is usually lagging in the early stages. In the late stages of a commodity bull market, as gold becomes perceived to be an inflation hedge, it begins to accelerate relative to other commodities. This is yet another very good indicator that tells me that we are still in the middle of a secular bull market in gold. In other words, because gold is not yet rapidly outstripping other commodities like wheat, or copper, or crude oil, we're not yet in the late stages of the gold bull market.

L: That's very interesting. But if I remember the gold chart over the last great bull market correctly, just before the 1973-1976 correction, there was quite an acceleration, such as you're describing—and we had one like it in 2011. Gold shot up $300 in the weeks before the $1,900 peak.

Petrov: Absolutely correct. This acceleration before the correction is exactly what tells me that the correction we're in now is a major cyclical correction, just like in the mid-1970s. The faster the preceding acceleration, the longer the ensuing correction. This relationship is what tells me that this correction will be very long and painful. Yet another indicator. Everything fits in perfectly. All of these indicators confirm each other.

L: Could you imagine something from the political world changing or accelerating this cycle? If the politicians in Washington are stupid enough to profoundly shake the faith in the US dollar that foreigners have, could that not change the cycle?

Petrov: Yes, that's a possibility. This is exactly what a gray swan is; a gray swan is an event that is not very likely, that is difficult to predict, but is nonetheless possible to predict and expect. One example of a gray swan would be a nuclear war. It's possible. Another could be a major currency war, à la Jim Rickards. There are a number of gray swans that could come at any time, any place, accelerating the cycle. It's perfectly possible, but not likely.

Now, going back to your question about monetizing or remonetizing gold—the monetary aspect of gold taking over that you mentioned. The remonetization of gold wouldn't short-circuit the commodity cycle; the commodity cycle would continue. Actually, you'd expect the remonetization of gold to go hand in hand with a commodity bull market.

You also need to understand that the remonetization of gold would not be a single event, not a point in time. Remonetization of gold is a process that could easily last five to ten years. No one is going to declare gold to be the monetary currency of the world tomorrow.

What will happen is that countries like China will accumulate gold over time. Over time, gold will be revalued significantly higher, and there will be global arrangements. The yuan will become a global currency, used in international transactions. Many institutional arrangements need to be in place around the world, including storage, payments, settlements, and some rebalancing between central banks, as some central banks have way too little monetary gold at the moment.

L: I agree, and see some of those things happening already. But I don't expect any government to lead the way to a new gold standard. I simply expect more and more people to start using gold as money, until what governments are left bow to the reality. I believe the market will choose whatever works best for money.

Petrov: Indeed, and that's a process that will take many years. Getting back to gold in a portfolio context, relative to currencies, gold is extremely cheap. Historically, gold will constitute about 10-15% of the global investment portfolio relative to the sum of real estate, stocks, bonds, and currencies. Estimates suggest that right now gold is valued at roughly about one percent of the global investment portfolio.

L: That implies… an enormous price for gold if it reverts to the mean. Mine production is such a tiny amount of supply; the only way for what you say to come true is for gold to go to something on the order of $20,000 an ounce.

Petrov: Correct. $15,000 to $20,000. That's exactly what I'm saying. In a portfolio context, gold is undervalued easily 10 to 15 times. On a fundamental basis, gold is undervalued relative to stocks 10 to 15 times, and relative to real estate about 10 times. When we use the different types of analyses, each one of them separately and independently tells us that we still have a lot longer to go: about six to 10 more years; maybe even 12 years. And we still have a lot higher to rise; maybe 10-15 times.

Not relative to oil, nor wheat, but gold can easily rise 10 to 15 times in fiat-dollar terms. It can rise 10 times in, let's say, stock market terms. And yes, it can go 10 to 15 times relative to long-term bonds. (We have to differentiate short-term bonds and long-term bonds, as bond yields rise to 10 or 15 percent.)

So, portfolio analysis and fundamental analysis tell me that we still have a long way to go, and cyclical analysis tells me we are roughly mid-cycle. It tells me that from the beginning of the cycle (2000) to the correction (2011) we were up almost eight times, from the bottom of the current correction (2013-2014) to the peak in another six to ten years, we are still going to rise another 10 times.

Whether it's eight years or 12, it's impossible to predict; whether it's eight times or 12, again, impossible to predict; but the order of magnitude will be around 10 times current levels.

L: You've touched on technical analysis: do you rely on it much?

Petrov: Well, yes, but in this particular case, technical subsumes or incorporates a great deal of cyclical analysis. It's very difficult to use technical analysis for secular cycles. We usually use technical analysis for daily (short-term) cycles, or weekly (intermediate) cycles, or monthly (long-term) cycles. We use them as described in the classic book Technical Analysis of Stock Market Trends by Edwards, Magee, and Bassetti.

If we apply technical analysis to our current correction, it doesn't appear to be quite over yet. It could still run another three to six months, possibly nine months. But when we talk about the secular cycle, we need to switch from technical to long-term cyclical analysis.

L: Okay. Let's change topic to the flip side of this. Can you summarize your view of the global economy now? Do you believe that the efforts of the governments of the world to reflate the economy are succeeding? Or how does the big picture look to you?

Petrov: The big picture is an austere picture. Reflation will always succeed until it eventually fails. The way I see it, the US is going down, down, and down from here—the US is a very easy forecast. The UK is also going down, down, and down from here—another easy forecast. The European Union is going to be going mostly down. However, most of Asia is in bubble mode. Australia is in a major bubble that's in the process of bursting or is about to do so; it's going to go through a major depression. China is a huge bubble, so China will get its own Great Depression, which could last five to ten years. This five- to ten-year China bust would fit within my overall 10-year forecast for the remainder of the secular bull market in gold.

I see a lot of very inflated and overheating Asian economies. I was in Hong Kong in January, and the Hong Kong economy is booming to the point of overheating. It's crazy. I was in Singapore just three months ago, and the Singapore economy is clearly overheating. Last year I was teaching in Macao for a few months, and the economy is overheating there as well—real estate is crazy; rents are obscene; five-star hotels are full and casinos crowded.

Right now I'm teaching in Thailand. It's easy here to see that people are still crazy about real estate—everyone's talking about real estate; we still have a peaking real estate bubble here. Consumption is going crazy in the whole society, and most things are bought on installment credit.

Another easy forecast is Japan; it too will be going down, down, and down from here. Japan has nowhere to go but down. It's been reflating and reflating, and it hasn't done them any good. Add all this up and what I actually see is a repeat of the 1997 Asian Crisis, involving most Asian countries.

L: So your overall view is that reflation works until it doesn't, and you believe that on the global scale we're at the point where it won't work anymore?

Petrov: Not exactly. We're at the point where reflation doesn't work anymore for the US, no matter how hard it tries. It doesn't work for the UK; not for most of Europe; not for Japan—no matter how hard they try. But reflation is still working in China. Reflation is still working for most of Asia and Australia. As I see it, Asia is overheating significantly, based on that global reflation.

Even the Philippines was overheating when I was there two years ago. Malaysia is overheating big time—consumerism at its finest—and I'm hearing stories about Indonesia overheating until recently as well. Maybe we have the first sounds of that bubble bursting in countries like India, Malaysia, and Indonesia. The Indian currency is weakening significantly; so is the Malaysian currency. If I remember correctly, the Indonesian currency is weakening significantly, and I know well that their money market rates are skyrocketing in the last few months.

So we may have now the beginning of the next Asian Financial Crisis. Asia is still going to be able to reflate a little longer, another year or two, maybe three. It's very hard to say how long a bubble will last as it is inflating. The same thing for Australia; it will continue to reflate for a few more years. So for Asia and Australia, we are not yet at the point when reflation will no longer work. Very difficult to say when that will change, but we're there for the US, UK, Europe, and Japan.

L: Why won't reflation work for the U.S. and its pals?

Petrov: Reflation doesn't work because of the enormous accumulated economic distortions of the real sector and the labor market. All the dislocations, all the malinvestments have accumulated to the point where reflation has diminishing returns.  Like everything else, inflation and reflation have diminishing returns. The US now needs maybe three, four, or five trillion annually to reflate, in order to work. With each round, the need rises exponentially. The US is on the steep end of this exponential curve, so the amount needed to reflate the economy is probably way more than the tolerance of anyone around the world—confidence in the US dollar won't take it. The US is at the point where it is just not going to work.

L: I understand; if they're running trillion dollar deficits now and the economy is still sluggish, what would they have to do to get it hopping again, and is that even possible?

Petrov: Correct. The Fed has tripled its balance sheet in a matter of three to four years—and it still doesn't work. So what can they do? Increase it 10 times? Or 20 times? Maybe if they increased it 10 or 20 times, they could breathe another one or two or three years of extra life into the economy. But increasing the Fed's balance sheet 10 or 20 times would be an extraordinarily risky enterprise. I don't think that they will dare accelerate that much that fast!

L: If they did, it would trash the dollar and boost gold and other commodities.

Petrov: Yes, that's clear—the bond and the currency markets would surely revolt. That's a straight shot there. The detailed ramifications for commodities, if they decide to go exponential from here, are a huge subject for another day. For now, we can say that they have been going exponential over the last three to four years, and it hasn't worked.

Also, we know well from the hyperinflation of the Weimar Republic that they went exponential early on, and it stopped working in 1921. For two more years, they went insanely exponential, and it still didn't work. I think the US is at or near the equivalent of 1921 for Weimar.

L: An alarming thought. So what happens when Europeans can no longer afford to pay the Russians for gas to heat their homes? Large chunks of Europe might soon need to learn Russian.

Petrov: Not necessarily, but Europe is going to become Russia's best friend and geopolitical ally. The six countries in the Shanghai Co-op are already close allies of Russia. So is Iran. So Russia has seven or eight very strong, close allies. European countries will, one by one, be joining Russia. Think about it from the point of view of Germany: why should Germans be geopolitical allies of the US or the UK? Historically, it doesn't make any sense. It makes a lot more sense for them to join the Russians and the Chinese and to let the Americans and British collapse. So that's what I expect, and Russia will use all its energy to dictate geopolitics to them.

L: Food for thought. Anything else on your mind that you think investors should be thinking about?

Petrov: Well, it's fairly straightforward. First, I do expect that the stock market is going to lose significant value over the next five to ten years. Second, I believe that real estate is still grossly overvalued; as interest rates eventually rise, real estate will fall hard—overall, it will not hold value well. Third, I also believe that bonds are extremely overvalued and that yields are extremely low. I expect interest rates to begin to rise and bond prices to fall, so I strongly discourage investors from staying in bonds. Finally, I expect that governments will continue to inflate, even though it doesn't work, and that currencies will devalue.

I strongly encourage investors to stay out of all four of these asset classes. Investors should be staying well diversified in commodities. They shouldn't ignore food—agriculture. They shouldn't ignore energy. But their portfolios should be dominated by precious metals.

L: That's what Doug Casey says, and that the reason to own gold is for prudence. To speculate for profit, we want the leverage only the mining stocks can give us.
Thank you very much, Krassimir; it's been a very interesting conversation. We shouldn't let this go another seven years before we talk again.

Petrov: [Laughs] Okay. Hopefully a lot sooner. Hopefully you'll be prepared when the gold bull market reaches the Mania Phase… and hopefully you are taking advantage of the low gold price to stack up on your "hard money" safety net.

Find out the best ways to invest in gold, when to buy, and what to watch for—in Casey's 2014 Gold Investor's Guide. Click here to get your free special report now.


Get our "Gold and Crude Oil Trade Ideas"

The Market You Trade Is Not Random

The use of cycles is perhaps the most misunderstood areas of technical analysis. And is widely miss used within automated trading systems. This is because there are a wide variety of approaches ranging from magnetic, to astrology to time based cycles.

The purpose of this tutorial on cycle analysis and implementation into automated trading systems is to present a logical perspective on what cycles and how they enhance your technical analysis studies.

Originally I was attracted to cycle analysis back in 2001. Back then, there was very little information about cycle analysis and even less on how to identify them within financial instruments. Cycles can be somewhat measured using conventional indicators such as RSI, stochastics and moving averages.

But, better yet is a custom cycle analyzer indicator I created to make cycle identification and implementation automatic within my trading strategies and my fully automated trading system.

Read the entire article > "Here is how the moving average can help spot cycles"


Get our "Gold and Crude Oil Trade Ideas"