MV=PT , Irving Fisher and economics oversimplified.

R.Prechter has now for the longest time argued that we are going into a “deflationary depression”. In his latest “Theory”, a misnomer for his monthly publications, he uses a chart from the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank , a public database known as FRED which I will also use but in a slightly different way.

MV=PT is the mathematical brainchild of Irving Fisher. He used the formula to explain the debt deflation that he thought was the cause of the Great Depression. Later, of course it was extensively used to provide the monetarist theories of the likes of Milton Friedman et al. with a mathematical framework.

The M stands for money / bank reserves. V is velocity , turnover or by extension the multiplier if you wish. P is the price level and and T is the volume of transactions , trade, or GDP. We will not get into the detailed definitions as that is beyond the scope of this didactic exercise.

Friedman and all monetarist, of course , believe that all inflation is monetary, always the result of too much money chasing too few goods. This is why everybody and their brother are now absolutely certain that the few trillion or so that the Fed and other Central Bankers have thrown into the pot, is certain to cause runaway inflation. This consensus exists despite evidence to the contrary, just a years ago the FED was fearful of deflation, and appeared so scared that it prompted QE2. The thing that the FED does not want to acknowledge, certainly not through “helicopter Ben”, is that there is such a thing as a “liquidity trap” best explained by the vernacular term “pushing on a string”.

Here is how it works . You load up the system with cash which flows to the banks (except for what they deposit back to the Fed) who then lend the money out which multiplies like rabbits depending on what fraction is used in the fractional reserve system ( presently 0 so the multiplier could theoretically approach an infinite value) Here is the M and the V (multiplier);

money base 2 multiplier

Both courtesy the Fed. They can be enlarged by clicking on them. Since about 2008 the monetary base has gone from 900 to 2800 or roughly threefold. The multiplier has gone from 1700 to 700 or roughly 2.4 times in the opposite direction. If further adjustments are made for banks deposits at the FED that sort of bypass this process the growth in reserves is , for the most part negated by the implosion of the velocity, as we know that GDP  (the T) has not grown much over past few years. The result is that inflation , the CPI, (the P)has not budged;

cpi sept 2011

It keeps going up for 40 years now at a rate of 3% or so (my guess) but has not accelerated recently. Even gold, as Prechter has pointed out many times, has over compensated for this inflation at least when measured from the $36 or so at the time Nixon (1971) did away entirely with convertibility. On the other hand. measured from the highs in 1980 it may be undervalued, so you get to pick your poison depending on what camp you want to be in.

As the latest (Sept 5) copy of Bloomberg/Business week points out, tongue in cheek, a better hedge might be stock in Sturm Ruger. These guys have done very well according to this publication, especially in the “concealable handgun” segment. The implication is that you do not need to own gold or food if you have the means to take it away from your neighbor. Perhaps the next economist has to figure out how the F for force fits into the formula.

rgr 

A sell, obviously. Target at around $17.50 for lower trend-line, wave 4 of prev. degree and 62% retracement.

FVI, Fortuna.

fvi sept 19 2011

Fortuna is an example in point. % waves may be complete, but then they may not be. If the sequence is complete we are looking at a B-wave that makes the stock double-top about where it is now. However is a simple 5th wave is in progress we could go all the way to the upper trend-line. Between those two is a triangle ( in blue) or a wedge (in red). Other counts may apply but they are not readily visible so , probable do not exist. Ergo if you short this now, or stay short, chances are 10 to 1 that the stock will trade back at least to $4.5 (triangle and wedge) or $3.5 (wave 3 of 3?) or even $3 (62%). In the end much lower levels may apply given enough time. In short you are almost guaranteed a return of at least 30% even if you are wrong by being too early.

NFLX, Netflix Inc.

Netflix was clearly, and without a doubt , in a bubble early this year. The problem is, like Keynes said, the market can stay at ridiculous levels longer than you can stay solvent. However, EW gives you some certainty even in the event that you might be too early, which invariable happens when using common sense when the market does not. Here are the charts then and now;

nflx mar 2011 nflx sept 19 2011

You may miss count a wave or two but in the end , after 5 waves are done the stock typically drops 62% or to the 4th wave, either of the entire sequence of of wave 3 itself! This is invariable a lot lower than where you sell short. This is not to say that it might not be a good idea to get out every now and than, provided you keep getting back in at higher levels. Fundamentally there never was any justification for this stock to trade at above $100 , let alone at $300.

In any event we were clearly too early with our recommendation to sell at around $225. But even if you had, and even without getting in and out, you would today be up nearly 30% in half a year. The stock should go lower yet. 62% is just under $125, the 4th of 3 is around $100. c=b of this zig-zag in progress at around $125. So $125 seems to be a reasonable target for the downside, initially. After the dust settles much lower levels could be reached.

CL , update

cl sept 17 2011

Colgate is doing every possible trick in the book to delay the inevitable. Even if we are a few dollars higher the story just becomes even more compelling. From the lows of $74 the stock has traced out a near perfect expanding diagonal triangle, always a 5th wave and always retraced entirely. There is even alternation between 2 and 4 as well a some degree of overlap, something that cannot occur other than in these specific structures. The puts should be even cheaper now. This favors the 4-5, 4-5 alternative interpretation  discussed in the previous blog.