TCK.B , Teck and FCX , Freeport.

Back in January we recommended this stock be sold when it was trading just under $64. The target then was at least $32 but perhaps a lot lower. Here is the chart, now and then;

TCK.B June 2011 tck 2011 1

Should the stock drop just a little further overlap will occur making it almost a certainty that the leg up from the lows was indeed a B-wave, the lower target of $3 will then become more plausible.

If correct one would expect Freeport to look rather similar, it does,now and then.

FCX june 2011 fcx 2011

See previous blogs. Overlap will occur at $45 or under.

RY, Royal Bank

 

RY June 2011

After trying for about ten years or so to make a go of it, the Royal Bank has capitulated to the reality that it could not  run a retail banking franchise profitable in the US , despite the large numbers of “snowbirds” living there. For the Royal that sees itself as almost invincible to the point of being downright arrogant, the admission must come as a psychological shock that , if possible, would no doubt register as a 10 on the Richter scale. The reason , officially , is the lack of scale which “bulking up” could not solve, which begs the question how a few thousand much smaller US banks manage to eek out a living.

The sale will result in proceeds of 3.6 bln , mostly cash but also some PNC shares. A write down of goodwill to the tune of about 1.6 bln will be needed but this is, of course, a non-cash item. The deal will become accretive after a year. Proceeds may or may not be used to expand wealth management opportunities.

Above I have a chart of the Royal showing one possible EW count. I am by no means wedded to this specific one, a good alternative would put the top at the recent high and change the B-wave to a 5th wave. For the immediate future the difference is immaterial as in both cases a return to the $25 level , or worse, is called for.

For Canadians the thought of the Royal (and other banks) trading down to 1/2 of their present value is inconceivable, but forget about EW and look at the fundamentals.

1. Back in the 90-ties interest rates were about 10%, now they are 2%. Over-simplifying things a little the “discount factor” is roughly the inverse of the interest rate and consequently this change alone arguable accounts for at least 1/2 of the share increase from $5 to $60. Should the market distorted rates ever revert to “market” that gain would presumable vanish.

2. In the US it was Glass-Stegall , here it was the 5 pillars , abolished or watered down to become meaningless. This allowed banks to start doing mortgages of which they now have the lions share. It allowed them to become investment dealers (all the big ones were gobbled up), and it allowed them to make substantial inroads in the insurance , wealth management and trust business. This is not going to continue at this pace, some things may even be reversed if some degree of common sense returns to the market.

3. Popular resistance to the nickel & diming approach, for instance on credit cards etc. etc. is increasing and it is hard to see how profitability can be increase further without clashing with usury laws.

So now that the Royal has turned its back on geographic expansion where is the growth going to come from? Without that the banks could be in trouble and a stock price of , say, $25 is not that far-fetched, just look at the chart.

This is not something that is unique to Canadian banks. Below is Wells Fargo. For the last 5 years or more the patterns are slightly different but identical in their meaning ;

wfc june 2011

MON, Monsanto

mon june 2011

Monsanto looks a lot like Microsoft, both have an extended consolidation period at the lower end of their range and both have underperformed much to the surprise and chagrin of their respective investors who , no doubt, thought it was a slam-dunk. For Monsanto this is all the more surprising since peak-oil is fast finding its counterpart in peak-food and half the world is Googling Malthus to find out what that fellow had to say about the matter a few hundred years ago.  I think the chart is very instructive in what it has not done. If there was any truth in any of this it is rather remarkable that the stock has only regained about $20 to date after a drop of $100 . This has been dead money and given the many ambiguities the chart presents it may just be smart to step aside.