Fine-tuning my BP model

About two weeks ago I stated to exit “between $45 to $50/share”, but there have been a couple significant events between now and then and the price response I’ve judged – one is the departure of the CEO (which was to be expected for his very lackluster performance in this whole matter – he did not care, and won’t be caring after a massive severance package payout) and the accrual for the project (approximately $32 billion dollars) which was roughly what I had expected (my estimate was $40 billion). Note that this amount is not a cash amount, but rather it is an accrual expected to be paid out in the future. If the oil spill is less damaging than expected, they will reverse this in the future and take a gain.

Because of income tax provisioning, the after-tax cost to shareholders will be less than this.

Also you can be sure that other, less performing projects will be thrown under the bus – this is always something to be aware of when companies make massive charge-outs. Tech companies doing mergers back in the internet boom were infamous for doing this, and was a reason why such financial statements looked better – if you keep on taking “one time charges”, your continuing operations will look great!

Since predicting the price of BP has been much more of a political game than financial, I believe being able to compile both sectors into a blended decision is one of my competitive strengths in the marketplace. Upon retrospection, I believe my initial price estimate for BP was high, and will now lower my exit parameters to “$42 to $47” per share. I would hazard a guess that it will get into this range by year’s end as the public consciousness fades onto other issues – such as the impending war in the Middle East (due before Obama’s exit in 2012) and how the US Congress will end up making themselves look like even bigger fools in a mis-guided attempt to save their collective skins in the November mid-term elections. The collateral damage that both events will leave should erase the BP oil spill from our short-term memories.

Since the price target is not materially above BP’s existing share price, the risk/reward ratio is not tremendously good. Obviously back a couple months ago when oil was still gushing in the Gulf, the risk was much higher. The “emotional” feel of this story is a fairly good lesson on the rule of the stock market – you don’t see low prices without risk. If you see what you think is a low price, but can’t see what the risk is, then chances are there is a hidden risk out there you are not aware of. Find out what it is before buying.

Finally, on the issue of collateral damage, Anadarko (NYSE: APC) and Transocean (NYSE: RIG) which had a 25% residual interest in the project and the drilling contractor, respectively, have both gotten killed in this crisis. They both look like better risk/reward ratios than BP is at the moment.

Income trust conversions and RRSPs

On January 1, 2011 there will be a slew of Canadian income trusts that will be converting to corporations. In addition to these, all other income trusts that are not related to real estate will have their distributions taxed. Either way, the dividends or distributions will be considered eligible dividend income for a Canadian investor.

This means that for those investors that have these instruments in an RRSP that what was previously given off as income will now be heavily favoured with respect to taxation, and will be relinquishing the tax benefit by keeping these securities. The obvious action would be to swap these securities with equivalent cash at the beginning of 2011. You can then populate the RRSP by purchasing the relevant income-bearing securities when the market timing is convenient.

A middle-income bracket investor in BC (between $41k and $72k) that is able to shift $1,000 of dividend income from the RRSP to a non-registered account, and swapping into the RRSP $1,000 of straight income will be saving approximately $284.10 at tax time.

It is worth thinking about this procedure throughout the second half of 2010 and see if one can purchase income-bearing instruments if/when the market conditions are appropriate. It is also a good time to think about portfolio balancing.

What is making life difficult for most income investors is that income investing (such as going for dividends or securities with larger-than-GIC yields such as preferred shares) is coming back in vogue with the retail investing arm. Such securities are being purchased without consideration of underlying value in the company’s ability to pay such income. An example would be the equity of Rio-Can, which is the largest Canadian REIT; although I believe their income payouts (6.88% on a $20.05 unit price at present) is stable, in terms of valuation, investors are purchasing something that appears to be more than fully valued and will likely not provide material upside on income payouts.

If/when the debt market seize up again, such securities will look significantly more attractive than they are today. Chasing yield when the going is good involves much more risk than chasing yields in the middle of a crisis.

Why RESPs are not a popular product

I extensively analyzed RESP’s in an earlier post, coming to the conclusion that a person is likely better to wait until the last moment that they are convinced their children will be heading to upper-level education before opening one.

The Globe and Mail is reporting how RESPs are having a rather lacking participation rate and goes into detail why this may be the case. I believe the explanation is simpler than this, and it boils down to two reasons:

1. People do not have disposable income to invest in an RESP, and are choosing to allocate it elsewhere for more immediate priorities;
2. Opening up an RESP leads to potential losses, and people would not want to lose money on their children’s education fund compared to their own investments – ergo, they will be sticking to extremely safe fixed-income products, and given the interest rates available, it is not really worth it at the moment.

There are plenty of scholarship funds out there that try to prey on people that fall under category #2; unfortunately for those that read the fine print, they will likely be throwing away their money on these conceived structured products that are designed to enrich the scholarship fund managers.

The government is trying to promote RESPs to lower income individuals by offering significant incentives to putting money in them. For example, if you earn less than $40,970 in a year, you will qualify for the Canada Learning Bond, which is a “free” $500 plus $100/year that your income is below that level into the RESP. If your income is less than $38,832/year, your contributions will be eligible for a 40% match by the government for the Canada Education Savings Grant, as opposed to the 30% or 20% brackets if you make more income.

Many lower income individuals are usually too busy working to pay attention to any of this and thus will not be taking advantage of money of these benefits. This is even assuming they are not falling under category #1, mainly that they do not have enough disposable income to be thinking about RESPs for their children.

Bank of Canada raises rates a quarter point

The Bank of Canada, to nobody’s surprise, raised interest rates by 0.25% today. Key parts of their statement:

Economic activity in Canada is unfolding largely as expected, led by government and consumer spending. Housing activity is declining markedly from high levels, consistent with the Bank’s view that policy stimulus resulted in household expenditures being brought forward into late 2009 and early 2010. While employment growth has resumed, business investment appears to be held back by global uncertainties and has yet to recover from its sharp contraction during the recession.

The Bank expects the economic recovery in Canada to be more gradual than it had projected in its April MPR, with growth of 3.5 per cent in 2010, 2.9 per cent in 2011, and 2.2 per cent in 2012. This revision reflects a slightly weaker profile for global economic growth and more modest consumption growth in Canada. The Bank anticipates that business investment and net exports will make a relatively larger contribution to growth.

Given the considerable uncertainty surrounding the outlook, any further reduction of monetary stimulus would have to be weighed carefully against domestic and global economic developments.

The take-home message is that growth projections have moderated to a “business as usual” type of economy after the 2008 calamity and the Bank of Canada is reserving all rights to not committing themselves to future rate increases. It is likely the global situation, rather than the domestic situation, will have significant influence over the decision to continue to raising rates.

As of today, the target rate is 0.75%, and I expect a rate of 1.00% by years’ end.

The only implication of this decision is that short-term corporate paper and inter-bank lending rates will correspondingly increase. People with variable rate mortgages will see interest increases, but this will not be affecting the longer-term fixed rate mortgage rates. The other subtle implication for most people is that financial institutions such as ING Direct might be willing to offer better rates on short-term savings and/or short-term GICs.

Bank of Canada Interest Rate Projections

On July 20, the Bank of Canada is very likely to increase the overnight target interest rate from 0.50% to 0.75%; this has already been baked into the marketplace. The Prime Rate is likely to correspondingly increase from 2.5% to 2.75%.

In terms of what lies ahead in the future, we look at the only financial product in Canada that one can use to predict such rate changes, the 3-month Bankers’ Acceptance Futures:

Month / Strike Bid Price Ask Price Settl. Price Net Change Vol.
+ 10 JL 0.000 0.000 99.045 0.030 0
+ 10 AU 0.000 0.000 98.960 0.030 0
+ 10 SE 98.875 98.880 98.880 -0.005 10612
+ 10 DE 98.700 98.710 98.710 -0.010 20474
+ 11 MR 98.540 98.550 98.540 0.000 17714
+ 11 JN 98.350 98.360 98.360 0.000 10038
+ 11 SE 98.140 98.150 98.140 0.080 2281
+ 11 DE 97.890 98.110 97.890 0.080 209
+ 12 MR 97.580 97.700 97.680 0.000 341
+ 12 JN 97.370 97.490 97.430 0.090 0

What we see is a 3-month future rate of 1.12% in September; and by years’ end we have a 1.29% rate.

There are four more meetings left in 2010; July 20, September 8, October 19 and December 7.  Right now, the market is speculating that there will be 0.25% increases in two of these meetings, leading to a year-end target rate of 1.00%.  It is possible that after September 8, that the Bank of Canada will leave short term rates unchanged for the duration of the year.

In 2011, the market believes that the short term rate will increase by about 0.75% above this; to 1.75%, still a very low rate by historical standards.

Presumably after its July20 statement it will change the language which will sufficiently guide the marketplace to adjust its prices.

Of note is the impact on mortgage rates; only variable-rate mortgages will be going up as a result of these short-term rate increases.  The reason is because longer-term rates are set by the marketplace, and these have gone down over the past quarter.  A 5-year government bond yields 2.49% currently; this was as high as 3.2% back in April.