|
March
29, 2008
Pink
Slips in a Bloodbath
by Gary North, Ph.D.
Something
in the range of 34,000 pink slips -- "You're fired"
-- have been handed out by Wall Street firms over
the past nine months.
Firms laying off the employees include
Citigroup, Lehman Brothers Holdings, and Morgan
Stanley. These are major investment banks. They are
closely linked to the housing market.
The last time that the economy produced this
level of firings was in 2001, a recession year.
That was the year following the peak in the stock
market indexes (March, 2000). Stocks fell until
mid-2003. During that period, Wall Street lost
90,000 jobs.
- "This crisis is much worse than 2001 and we
don't know how long it's going to last," said Jo
Bennett, a partner at executive search firm
Battalia Winston International in New York. Job
cuts "could be more than 100,000 in a few
years."
These layoffs are more serious for some firms
than others. Citigroup has cut 1.7% of its work
force, while Lehman has fired 18%. Morgan Stanley
has laid off over 6%, while Merrill Lynch has cut
4.5%.
We see the Dow Jones Industrial Average bouncing
up and down between 11,700 and 12,700. It does not
break out of this trading range for long. Investors
are divided as to whether to stock market is
heading into bull market territory or bear market
territory.
I think the pink slips tell us where the stock
market is headed: down. If Wall Street firms'
managers were convinced that this is the bottom,
they would not be firing workers. It will be
expensive to enter the job market and find
replacements. The new people must be trained, which
is expensive. If there were any way financially not
to let existing people go, management would not let
them go.
THE FINANCIAL SECTOR
We are seeing the early stages of a decline in
demand for the services of people in the financial
industry. The first people to be hit are those in
the real estate mortgage sector. The layoffs began
last July because of rising delinquencies by home
owners. This was an early warning signal of the
international credit crisis that hit in August. In
August, investors began to sense danger in the
subprime mortgage markets. That danger soon proved
to be real.
When Bear Stearns' stock fell from $68 (Monday,
March 10) to $10 (Friday, March 15), this sent a
message to Wall Street: the leverage factor can be
devastating. The CEO told the public on Monday that
there was no liquidity problem with the company.
The stock rose from $60 to $68 that day. By Friday,
the firm faced bankruptcy.
The TV crews on Friday showed Bear Stearns
workers loading up their cars with boxes of papers
taken from their offices. They were the initial
victims. By Sunday, the New York FED and J. P.
Morgan arranged to sell Bear's shares to Morgan for
$2 a share, with the FED guaranteeing Morgan a $30
billion line of credit to cover write-downs.
Lesson: watch the early pink slips for signs of
more bad news to come.
Anyone who suggests that Bear Stearns was an
anomaly, and that there will not be another Bear
Stearns event, is singing the same song that Bear
Stearns' then-CEO was singing two weeks ago: "No
problem!" I suggest that you pay zero attention to
all such assurances for the next year, and maybe
two years.
If these people knew what they were doing, we
would not have seen the financial carnage that
began last August. The experts did not see this
coming. Some of them have been fired, although
after receiving huge bonuses. There will be more
firings to come.
Pink slips get handed out to lower-level people
before the crisis hits a company. After it hits,
the CEO gets his pink slip. So far, six CEO's,
eight presidents or other officers, and at least 19
division heads have lost their jobs as a result of
the subprime meltdown.
What about the firms' revenue? Standard &
Poor's released an estimate on March 21 that
revenue is likely to fall by 30% in 2008. This
would be a major hit. Very
few firms can suffer that kind of loss and not lay
off workers.
That 90,000 workers get laid off is indicative
of the general direction of the financial world,
but it is not a disaster by itself. The problem is
that the capital markets are at the heart of the
economy. When the financial sector is hit with
falling revenues, this means that investors are
being hurt by the investments that the financial
sector created and then recommended to its
clients.
When clients' investments are falling, clients
move into other, less creative, less risky, more
traditional sectors of the financial world. These
sectors generate lower returns. They also provide
lower revenues for the financial sector.
So, my assessment of the economy is that it is
in the early stages of a recession. This recession
will escalate.
FIRST THEIR PINK SLIPS, THEN
YOURS
In most recessions, most people keep their jobs.
If they are married and have five years of tenure
with a firm, they are safe. I don't want to spread
fear where the risks are relatively low. But risks
do rise, and income does fall. Companies fire newly
hired people first. Then they fire people who don't
work on commission. They keep commissioned salesmen
because the market tells management exactly how
much these employees are worth. Their income falls
when sales fall. So, they keep their jobs, but they
suffer lower income.
If you are salaried, and you have been with the
company for five years, you are comparatively safe
unless your company gets bought by a rival. In a
merger, the people at the swallowed firm are at
risk. Consider Bear Stearns' employees. J. P.
Morgan is a competing firm with its own staff and a
separate corporate culture. Senior managers at
Morgan will fire Bear Stearns' employees before
they fire Morgan employees.
It is important for you to be aware of the
operational condition of your employer. You may be
high on the totem poll in your department, but your
department may be expendable.
One major risk is the company's line of credit.
In a recession, banks cut lines of credit to
companies that have become dependent on these
credit lines. This can be devastating for the
company that is dependent. Its managers scramble,
looking for alternative sources of funding. This
happens at a time when lots of companies are
scrambling.
If your employer is a publicly traded firm, it
has published an annual report on its overall
condition. If you can read a balance sheet, do so.
If you can't, hire an accountant for an hour and
have him look it over. Ask him to look for credit
lines. Then sit down with him and talk over any
problem areas that he sees. This will cost you
anywhere from $100 to $300. When your career is at
stake, this is money well spent. Not many employees
ever do this.
There is an old rule of thumb: the longer the
disclaimer posted by the accounting firm, the more
risky the condition of the audited company.
Another major risk is the sector of the economy.
Does it sell something that is essential? If so,
your risk of getting fired is low. If it's part of
people's discretionary income, you may have a
problem. If it sells to poor people, this is risky.
If it sells to middle-class people, it's less
risky. If it sells to newly rich people, no
problem. There will always be newly rich
people.
It's safer to be in retail sales than in capital
equipment. The more specialized the capital
equipment, the riskier it is if the industry that
buys such equipment is connected to discretionary
spending. So, a company in the restaurant equipment
business is in a high-risk sector. A company that
sells medical equipment that is used in
non-discretionary surgery is much safer. No one
passes up a heart bypass operation just because the
economy is in recession.
I suggest that you get an interview with an
old-timer who went through the 1991 recession. He
may still be with the company. If not, can you find
out who was on staff back then? What you are
looking for is advice on how to maintain your
income in a recession. If your income does not
fluctuate with buyers' demand, find out what things
you can do to move to the top of the "don't fire"
list. When your income isn't directly determined by
the market, then your job is at risk in a downturn.
It becomes a target of cost-cutting. The
inflexibility of payment makes it an all-or-nothing
target on the accounting department's list of
sacrificial lambs.
I return to this theme often. What have you done
in the last three months to make you too important
to fire? This need not be something spectacular. If
your department is doomed, then you need something
on your résumé to make you stand out.
If your department is vital, not every employee is
equally vital to the department. You must take
steps to persuade the person who draws up the list
on "no-fires" to put you on it.
THE LENGTH OF THIS RECESSION
In a March 17 interview with billionaire
investor Mort Zuckerman, he speculated that this
recession will be deep and long: maybe two years.
He thinks it will be the worst one in his
career.
The investing public is not prepared for
anything like this. The last recession lasted 6
months and was overcome by inflation by the Federal
Reserve. It did not frighten anyone much, yet the
stock market had already begun its decline over a
year earlier. The S&P 500 declined by almost
50%.
Investors are unprepared to deal with any
recession that lasts two years. Neither are
consumers. They will not be able to tap into home
equity to maintain their spending habits.
The upward moves of the stock market are telling
us that there is not going to be a recession at
all. The best investment minds say that the worst
is behind us. Then it turns down again. The
inability of investors to decide which way this
market is going reflects their confusion about the
state of the economy.
The FED is maintaining a tight-money policy. The
FED's decision makers are not taking steps to
inflate their way out of a falling stock market.
They are adopting alternative strategies, most
notably the swap of Treasury debt for the banks'
piles of mortgage debt.
Either they think this recession will be much
milder than the 2001 recession, when the FED
inflated, or else they do not believe in Ludwig von
Mises' perspective on the boom-bust cycle, namely,
that a prior boom will turn into a bust when the
fiat money creases to grow. Maybe they believe
both.
My position is that the FED policy has
subsidized debt on a massive scale, and that there
is uncertainty built into the capital markets on an
unprecedented scale. A company can be solvent on a
Monday and be bankrupt a week later, or else owned
by a competitor. This is the lesson of Bear
Stearns.
This may seem far-fetched, but the speed of Bear
Stearns' demise sent a message that the stock
market's best and brightest do not take
seriously.
I am persuaded that tight money has long-term
effects. It forces a reallocation of capital that
had been invested unwisely during the FED's
expansion phase.
The leverage of contemporary finance is greater
than ever before. What is called counterparty risk
is extremely high. Promises cannot be fulfilled,
and solvent companies can topple within days
because of margin calls.
CONCLUSION
The extent of the damage under Greenspan's FED
is appearing in front-page headlines.
Today, liquidity is crucial. Those who have it
will be able to buy at distressed prices over the
next two years. This is a time for patience.
This is also a time for going the extra mile for
your boss. Fund out what he expects and do
more.
Be aware of his position, too. Don't go down
with his ship.
Gary
North Archive
Dr.
Gary North earned a Ph.D. in history and is one of
America's keenest economic analysts and
commentators. He supports the Austrian school of
economics and is a previous assistant to
libertarian congressman Dr. Ron Paul. Visit his
website at http://garynorth.com.
To
subscribe to Gary North's Reality Check go to
http://www.dailyreckoning.com/sub/GetReality.cfm
If
you enjoyed this essay and would like to read more
of Gary's writing please visit his website at
http://www.garynorth.com
or http://www.freebooks.com
Articles
& Essays Index
Because
The Radical Academy publishes essays and articles
on its website does not imply acceptance or
approval of the comments or opinions expressed by
the author of the material. Nor is the Academy
responsible for any misrepresentation of the facts
included. It is your job to be a critical
reader.
|