FT : John Lewis boss declares France is ‘finished’

John Lewis, that most British of retail institutions, has refused to apologise for comments by its managing director, describing France as “finished” as a country and Gare du Nord station in Paris as the “squalor pit of Europe”.
In a speech in which he advised entrepreneurs with assets in the country to “get them out quickly, Andy Street described the nation as “sclerotic, hopeless and downbeat” adding: “I have never been to a country more ill at ease . . . nothing works and worse, nobody cares about it.”

The comments, first reported by The Times, were made at an awards dinner in Canary Wharf on Wednesday night, after Mr Street was delayed coming back from a conference in Paris on the Eurostar.
“You get on the Eurostar from something I can only describe as the squalor pit of Europe, Gare du Nord, and you get off in a modern, forward looking station [St Pancras],” he said, adding that he though the food and drink at the London event were better than those he had received in Paris.
On Friday, John Lewis said that Mr Street would not be issuing an apology for the comments, which it said were “made in a tongue-in-cheek context”.
“He was delayed and had a rather poor experience coming back through the Gare du Nord,” a company spokesperson added.
The retailer, a favourite of the British middle classes, has no stores in France but has plans to launch a French website denominated in euros.
Mr Street has worked for John Lewis ever since he graduated from Oxford university in 1985 and became managing director in 2007. He is also the chair of Birmingham and Solihull’s Local Enterprise Partnership.
The comments prompted a storm of tweets, though some were supportive of Mr Street’s view. Michael Fabricant the Tory MP for Lichfield in Staffordshire, tweeted: “Anyone travelling on the filthy, graffiti covered Paris Metro will agree with the boss of John Lewis”.
Speaking at the World Retail Congress in Paris on Wednesday, Mr Street said that the retailer had “no plans” to take stores on the Continent despite its continued strong growth in the UK.
The critique from Mr Street comes after Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal, launched a scathing broadside against the business culture of Europe. He told the FT that Europe was a “slacker with low expectations”, held back by the poor work ethic of its people and run by politicians that strangle technological progress with regulations.

(theEconomist) Oil and trouble

Oil and trouble
Tumbling resource prices suggest the world economy is slowing


GIVE commodity markets credit: they are anything but boring. Between 2000 and 2011 broad indices of commodity prices tripled, easily outpacing global growth and stoking Malthusian hysteria. Jeremy Grantham, a wealthy financier, noted at the time that it was not so much “peak oil” that would undo humanity but “peak everything else”. Yet since then commodity prices have slumped by about a quarter, and roughly 11% since June alone. That is not, however, an unalloyed good.
This reversal of fortunes, naturally, is much better news for net importers of resources than for net exporters. For consumers, a drop in the price of natural gas or rice is like a tax cut: it leaves households with more disposable income. Rising oil prices often tip importing countries into recession, and can put pressure on currencies as current-account deficits widen. The cheap resources of the 1990s, in contrast, helped to buoy real wages in the rich world.
Advertisement

Producing countries, many of which are relatively poor, suffer when prices drop. The last great bust, which began in the late 1970s, was a drag on developing economies for two decades (while the commodity boom of the 2000s was a big contributor to fast-growing incomes in the developing world). Low prices can mean financial turmoil for governments that relied on high ones to fund generous spending. A big enough bust could rattle financial markets around the world.
Just how much trouble to expect depends on the scale of the drop. In the short term commodity prices are a function of shifts in expectations of global demand, along with passing interruptions in supply. When the financial crisis took hold in late 2008, the price of raw materials plummeted. Oil, for example, fell from a high of $144 a barrel in the summer of 2008 to $33 a barrel in December of that year. Yet by late 2010, as global growth recovered on the back of rapid expansion in emerging markets, the price was nearing $100 again.
The current, gentler slide in prices also reflects a weakening world economy. Since 2010 global GDP growth, measured on a purchasing-power-parity basis, has slipped from more than 5% a year to just over 3%. The Chinese economy expanded at a double-digit pace in 2010 but may struggle to grow by 7% this year.
Global trade is decelerating too (see chart 1). In 2010 it made up lost ground from the recession, expanding by 12.8%. It has since slowed, to 6.2% in 2011 and to 3.0% in 2013. The World Trade Organisation (WTO) had forecast growth of 4.7% this year but revised that figure down to 3.1% in September. One of the main culprits, it reckons, is weak growth in imports in commodity-exporting countries, due to their straitened circumstances.

The WTO forecasts a rebound in growth and trade next year. Yet a return to the heady growth rates of the 2000s is unlikely, and risks abound, from conflict in Ukraine to Ebola in west Africa. The rich world’s recovery is anything but assured; the euro zone, which accounts for 13% of global output, is once again teetering on the brink of recession. China, an almost insatiable consumer of raw materials in recent years, is perhaps the biggest risk. The authorities there are trying to rebalance growth away from commodity-intensive investment in housing and other infrastructure. They also want to stem credit growth. If they overshoot and undermine growth, commodity prices will fall further.
Meanwhile, the investments in new supply initiated when prices were at their peak are finally coming to fruition. America’s oil production, for instance, has grown by 4m barrels a day since 2008 thanks to the fracking revolution.
Finding new mineral deposits or new land to cultivate takes time, and once new supplies have been identified, bringing them to market can take years as mines, wells and canals are dug and infrastructure is built. As a result, prices may rise for several years before the anticipated new supply materialises. Once it does, however, markets can become saturated and prices then fall for a prolonged spell.
This pattern is commonly called the commodity-price super-cycle. A few times, notes David Jacks of Simon Fraser University, the cycles for several different commodities have become synchronised during episodes of broad global growth—such that wheat, oil and nickel, say, all seem scarce at the same time. During such booms fears inevitably proliferate that the world will run out of essential raw materials. During the last great commodity wave, in the 1960s and 1970s, Paul Ehrlich, a biologist at Stanford University, published “The Population Bomb”, which gave warning that the world could not provide for its growing number of inhabitants. In 1980 Mr Ehrlich bet an economist, Julian Simon, that a basket of metals would rise in price over the next ten years. Mr Simon won, as supplies grew while consumers became better at conservation.
Production of most commodities has risen sharply over the past decade. The world’s output of iron ore, for example, has roughly tripled since 2000. Supply growth has begun to outstrip rising consumption for some commodities (see chart 2). With the world economy growing less frenetically than in the 2000s, lower commodity prices are inevitable.
The most worrying possibility is that lower prices may feed on themselves. Emerging markets were a big driver of global GDP growth in recent years; if commodities can no longer be counted upon to provide a tailwind, growth might sputter. Slower global growth could then feed back into weaker commodity demand. The cycle might be amplified by financial havoc as firms and governments in commodity-producing countries find their budgets stretched by tumbling prices and their balance-of-payments stressed by the reversal of capital flows.
Some commodity exporters are better equipped to manage a slowdown than in the past. A few used the boom to fill sovereign-wealth funds, to build stockpiles of foreign-exchange reserves or to pursue broader economic reforms. Colombia, Indonesia and Peru, for instance, have put themselves on a sounder economic footing as commodity prices have risen. In other countries, such as Russia and Venezuela, the bust is revealing the extent of the rot. The lower prices go, the more mismanagement will be laid bare.

(Economist) The Germans are coming, again

The Germans are coming, again

Why German firms are on the rampage across the pond

AMERICA’S German roots are rich and strong. From California to New York, 48m people claim German ancestry, which would make them the country’s biggest diaspora. But when it comes to owning businesses in America, Germany has punched below its weight, with only 8% of the stock of foreign direct investment (FDI) there. It ranks 7th, behind France, Britain and Japan, among others. British and Japanese firms are especially prone to megalomaniac episodes in which they seek, and fail, to conquer America. German firms have been more cool-headed.

This year, however, things have changed. German giants such as Siemens, SAP, Bayer and Infineon have been on a spree, so far spending more than $65 billion on American firms. Of all the American companies receiving foreign bids this year, a fifth were from German buyers, measured by value. And of all the cross-border takeovers worldwide led by German firms, 60% were for American firms.

One explanation is macroeconomics. German firms’ investment at home has waned, because of high labour costs and the dim prospects for the euro zone, says Michael Heise, an economist at Allianz, an insurer. Partly because of its strong exports, Germany runs a current-account surplus of about $250 billion-$300 billion a year that must be recycled abroad. Emerging markets have slowed and China is being less hospitable to foreign firms. America is growing fast, and has relatively cheap labour thanks to stagnant wages and cheap energy because of its fracking boom.

German firms’ FDI is still dwarfed by the huge chunk of savings by Germany’s thrifty households that its banks and insurers invest on foreign financial markets. Earnings from these indirect investments provide a large proportion of Germany’s current-account surplus. However, German industry’s contribution to the surplus should grow as a result of its purchases of profitable American firms with a global reach. The seven American firms worth more than $1 billion bought by German ones this year make 65% of their sales outside America in aggregate.

Thus, Infineon is buying International Rectifier, which is based in California but makes half of its sales in Asia. ZF Friedrichshafen, a car-parts firm, is buying a Michigan-based rival, TRW, which makes two third-of its sales outside America (and its biggest customer is highly globalised Volkswagen). Siemens is snapping up Dresser-Rand, which makes equipment for the oil and gas industry: it has Russian, Chinese and Saudi Arabian clients, factories in Europe, Brazil and India and makes just a third of its sales in America.

Rather than experiencing a sudden infatuation with America, German firms are arguably continuing the steady globalisation that they have pursued for two decades: building market shares in specialised industries, expanding into adjacent businesses and building out global supply chains and customer bases. This pattern began with the opening of factories in eastern Europe in the 1990s and tilted towards emerging markets in the past decade.

Painful reminders
Hitherto German firms have preferred “greenfield” investments abroad—building factories and other facilities from scratch rather than making acquisitions. They have amassed a stock of $50 billion of FDI in China without a single big takeover. In India British companies have embarked on giant takeover deals to dismal effect, while their German counterparts have built up successful production hubs.

There was a good reason for this. In the few instances in which German firms did buy big American ones, things went badly. Daimler’s $43 billion purchase of Chrysler, in 1998, was a fiasco and was undone in 2007. Deutsche Telekom’s $33 billion purchase in 2000 of Voice-Stream, an American mobile operator (now called T-Mobile US), was a financial mess from which it is still extricating itself. Such cases have led some to argue that German firms have such strong cultures that they are unable to integrate acquisitions easily.

Germany’s new taste for acquisitions is, therefore, risky. But the buyers seem to have learned the lessons about overreach from Daimler and Deutsche Telekom. Two are simultaneously offloading peripheral assets, indicating their discipline. In May Bayer bought the over-the-counter-drugs business of Merck & Co of America (not to be confused with a similarly-named German firm). Bayer now plans to spin off its own coatings and plastics business. Siemens sold out of a joint venture with Bosch at the same time as it bought Dresser-Rand on September 22nd. The top seven deals involve almost $1 billion of cost cuts and none of the buyers is taking on excessive debts.

Those cost-cutting targets will make American employees nervous. But compared with the average foreign investor in America, German firms are typically more financially secure and spend more of their revenues on pay. Many offer good, German-style apprenticeships. There are worse things than working for an American firm that has been schnapped up.

(DBK) Global Mining & Commo : The potential threat from Ebola

Potential impact on commodities and miners in West and Central Africa
Given recent commentary from world health bodies regarding the risk and
likelihood of exponential growth in Ebola cases, we believe the effect of the
outbreak on global commodity balances as well as the individual operations of
mining companies must be considered seriously. We aim to provide some
facts and raise awareness of the potential risks since West Africa, the region
impacted currently, is a major producer of commodities across the energy,
metals and agricultural sectors.

Assessing the risk to miners, commodities and trade flows
In this note we explore the potential risks to mining companies and overall commodity markets from a further deepening of the Ebola crisis in West Africa. We assess the risks to mines and commodities from a worsening of the crisis in countries where the disease has already occurred – Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone – plus the risk of a spread of the disease across borders into Mali, Cote d'Ivoire and Senegal, and further afield into Ghana, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, Niger, Chad and Cameroon. We also set out the extent of mined output of major commodities in the DRC and Zambia.

An exponential rise in Ebola cases now predicted
The World Health Organization (WHO) and Imperial College London last week announced that unless measures were taken to control Ebola in W. Africa then cases of the outbreak will continue to rise exponentially. Since the outbreak was first identified in Guinea at end 2013, the number of cases today is more than double the entire incidence of the disease in previous outbreaks since 1976. The WHO predicts the number of cases is in danger of rising from just under 6,000 currently to more than 20,000 by early next month.

Most “at risk” commodities are cocoa and gold
So far the impact on global commodity markets has been relatively contained. This most likely reflects the fact that Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea combined represent less than 2% of global production/exports of cocoa, coffee, cotton, rubber and palm oil. However, a more widespread outbreak to other countries in the region would hold significant implications for cocoa production since West Africa accounts for over 70% of world production. Meanwhile Ghana (#10 gold producer globally) and Mali (#15) account for 5.1% of global gold output and 2.5% of world exports of iron ore come from Sierra Leone, Mauritania and Liberia combined. DRC (#6 copper producer globally) and Zambia (#7) supplied 9.4% of the world’s copper in 2013.

Gold miners most exposed; some iron ore exposure, plus aluminium and oil
14 of the miners under our global coverage have current operations or projects in the 16 countries we survey in this note. The majority of operations are gold mines. There are also numerous iron ore projects. Oil, copper/cobalt and aluminium would also be at risk in the wider region. There has been no direct impact on assets to date. With 100% of NPV and production from 4 of the 16 countries, Randgold is the most exposed to any escalation of the outbreak. Nordgold and Anglogold are also exposed, with 57% and 53% of NPV from W.Africa respectively. Arcelor Mittal’s Yekepa’s iron ore mine in Liberia contributes c. 6.5% of group iron ore and represents c. 5% of group value. Of the UK listed majors, BHP Billiton and Anglo American have no exposure.

(BFW) KPN May Team With Vodafone or Liberty to Bid for Tele2 NL: UBS


KPN May Team With Vodafone or Liberty to Bid for Tele2 NL: UBS
2014-10-03 06:38:10.804 GMT


By Sam Chambers
Oct. 3 (Bloomberg) -- Having received EU5b following
completion of E-Plus sale, KPN may seek to acquire Tele2
Netherlands, UBS says.
* UBS: KPN would likely need to partner with another co. in
the bid as 25% of Tele2 NL serves enterprise customers,
meaning competitive issues could arise
* Vodafone and Liberty Global are both potential partners,
although Liberty may be restricted until its Ziggo
acquisition is cleared, expected early Nov.
* Tele2 NL may be worth ~EU1b and deal synergies could
reach EU150m-EU200m/yr
* Reiterates buy rating on KPN with PT of EU3 (24% upside)
* Reiterates buy rating on KPN with PT of EU3 (24% upside)</li></ul>
* Jan.: Berenberg said Tele2’s Dutch business is valuable to
Vodafone/KPN and breakup of co. is likely
* Nov. 2013: Tele2 said it was considering selling its Dutch
fixed-line business
* NOTE: Breakdown of Dutch mobile mkt here


For Related News and Information:
First Word scrolling panel: FIRST<GO>
First Word newswire: NH BFW<GO>

To contact the reporter on this story:
Sam Chambers in London at +44-20-7673-2021 or
schambers7@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
James Ludden at +44-20-7673-2645 or
jludden@bloomberg.net
Andrew Rummer

(BofA-ML) The Flow Show : Risk-Off, Bounce-On

Asset class flows
- Equities: $10.1bn outflows (largest outflows in 8 weeks; majority via ETF’s – SPY, QQQ, XLE, RTY) (Table 1)
- Bonds: $9.1bn inflows (largest in 6 weeks) (Caveat: PIMCO’s fund flow activity not captured in EPFR’s weekly database so magnitude of overall bond inflows is very likely overstated)
- Precious metals: $0.4bn outflows (6 straight weeks)

Equity flows
- EM: ekes out small $79mn inflows (only region to see inflows) (Table 2)
- Europe: $1.9bn outflows (5 straight weeks)
- US: $9.6bn outflows
- Japan: $0.5bn outflows
- By sector, huge $2.2bn out of Energy funds

FICC flows
- 41 straight weeks of inflows to IG bond funds ($10.4bn) (Chart 4)
- 5 straight weeks of outflows from HY bond funds ($3.7bn) (largest in 8 weeks)
- 12 straight weeks of redemptions from floating-rate debt ($1.2bn) (largest in 8 weeks)
- First outflows in 6 weeks from EM debt funds ($0.4bn)
- 12 straight weeks of inflows to MBS funds ($1.6bn)

* "Risk-Off" but not "Panic-On": inflows to Bonds ($9bn), outflows from Stocks ($10bn); rotation rather than carnage within Fixed Income (though weekly flow data do not account for PIMCO outflows); investor sentiment more bearish but not Max Fear according to BofAML Bull & Bear Index (5.2 is mid-range – Chart 1); fits with European client feedback this week...cash has been raised, beta has been cut, and "buy on dip" mantra for risk assets morphing into "sell into strength"

* "Junk-Off", "Quality-On": big $3.7bn outflows from High Yield, but outflows not larger than the 2014/2013/2011 capitulations (Chart 2); and bigger inflows to Investment Grade & MBS indicate rotation within bonds rather than a "credit event"

* "Oil-Off": largest weekly outflows ever from Energy funds on absolute terms ($2.2bn – Chart 3); capitulation as rip in US dollar forces oil prices down; oil prices biggest victim of lower liquidity-lower growth scenario (increasingly discounted by
investors as shown by collapse in US/EU inflation expectations).

(BArcap) Italian Luxury feedback

Italian Luxury feedback
We recently spent time with 7 Italian luxury companies just after the profit warning
from Prada, commentary on weaker trading from Richemont and Swatch, and poor
data from Swiss watch exports and Global Blue. The key feedback is that trading is
very volatile with little obvious causality. Overall, the Americas appear to be the
best region with Europe weak due to poor tourism trends. Asia is mixed with the
smaller brands outperforming the more mature brands - China has stabilised, Hong
Kong is in decline, which we expect to continue given the political unrest, while
Korea and Japan are good. We have previously laid out our view that we see a risk of
continued earnings downgrades and a de-rating across the space - we have seen
evidence of this to date but with the sector still trading at a 21% premium to the
market there is little to change our view following the trip. Following the meetings,
we remain Overweight on Ferragamo, which is performing well, we have increased
confidence that Luxottica’s management changes will not materially affect
performance while remaining Underweight on both Tod’s and Prada. In this note we
provide company descriptions and take-aways from our company visits to two noncovered
names, Bruno Cucinelli and Yoox, in order to provide additional insight into
trends affecting the Italian luxury names under our coverage.