The game is changing
Dette er episode 206 av Tid er penger.
Denne episoden handler om markedene rundt påske, en i Goldman med "a bad feeling", hvordan man kan bruke posisjonering for investering og en gjennomgang av store geopolitiske endringer mange nok har gått glipp av.
Automatisk transkribering av episoden:
[00:00 - 00:34] Velkommen til episode 206 av podkesten Tid av penger. En podcast med Peter Warren. I dag skal vi snakke litt om påskeukas vinner og taper. Og litt om markedet som det har ikke vært så mye å handle sammen med i vanlig uke, men det har vært ganske mye å innlede oss som en inngang fra Goldman Sachs som har a bad feeling.
[00:34 - 00:53] Eller skal Peter snakke litt om posisjoneringen som skjer i markedet. Det er mye interessant å lese der. Og hvis man hadde fulgt posisjoneringsdata tidligere, så hadde man tjent bra. Også er det snakk om geopolitikk. Det er mye som har skjedd der. Det er veldig mye som skjedde i AI-verdenen også, men fordi vi vet at det er mange som ikke vil høre om AI,
[00:53 - 01:10] som i seg selv er interessant, så har vi valgt å gjøre det som en egen episode på Patreon. Så kommer det ut et par dager på Patreon, så vi tar opp rett etter episode. Så tror jeg vi bare går i gang med episode 206. Det er vel siste dagen på Påskefjell, og du har akkurat kommet hjem igjen.
[01:10 - 01:30] – Ja. Valgt å dra ned i går. – Var det mye trafikk? – Nei, det var noe trafikk. Altså, Google visste noe trafikk på, altså nå var jeg oppe i Gullbrottsdalen,
[01:30 - 01:54] nemlig på Mosetterhåpen, for øvrig, mens jeg var inne på det. To ting som er interessante er, det ene er den vanvittige utbyggingen som skjer i fjellet. Det skjer samtidig med at eiendomsmeglere registrerer 5-10 prosent nedgang i hyttepriser siden i fjor.
[01:54 - 02:21] Når vi vet hvor rentene er og kostnader er, så tror jeg at her kommer det til å bli et visst ytterligere nedsalg. En annen ting var at det var veldig fint å ski inn og ski ut på et leilighetskompleks der oppe.
[02:21 - 02:37] Dette var noe som heter Mosetterhåpen, som er i Havfjellområdet. En annen refleksjon var at når jeg så på arkitekturen av bygningen hvor disse leilighetene var,
[02:37 - 02:53] så var det ganske åpenbart for meg at narkotikaproblemet ikke kun tilhørte byene, for å si det på den måten, storbyene. For det så merkelig ut, men leilighetene var fine, det skal sies.
[02:54 - 03:10] Så det var bra. Kan jeg gi en shoutout til en person som antagelig ikke hører dette, men det var Martine på Havfjell Kvitfjell Booking, som da hadde noen utfordringer, fikset det der utrolig bra.
[03:10 - 03:28] Så det var bra service, det må jeg si. Var det mye dansk i fjellet nå også? Danske, svensker og språk som jeg aldri har hørt, som jeg regner med er... Norsk! Det kunne vært. Det er så lite norsk at det... Nei, men det var veldig mye utlendinger.
[03:28 - 03:44] For øvrige til, jeg vet ikke hva, til Vålkredd, så fikk jeg ropt etter meg tid av penger i går på skituren til Lillehammer. Så det var jo hyggelig det da.
[03:44 - 04:03] Jeg har lyst til å starte episoden med et sitat fra en analyse som kom i helgen fra Goldman. Det er Bobby Mollavi i Goldman Sachs som skriver sånn... Han har en liten frirolle. Så her startet da en økonomisk analyse.
[04:03 - 04:21] En tøy i kjesten, et dårlig følelse. Noe dårlig kommer på denne måten. Eller ikke. Markedet har vært veldig ulike. Fra uke til uke må vi ta hand om noe annet. Om det er bankkriser og bankruppser, ratene, volatilitet, finanspress, og så en bredere volatilitet.
[04:21 - 04:40] Basis-blåsing og degrossing har fanget alt. Så, uten mye grunn og rationell, går vi til min. Hvis ekonomivalget er til, ser vi en uke som en lang rally. Og hvis headlines var å være trodde, så var det som om ingenting skjedde.
[04:40 - 05:00] Så, i sammenheng, en annen uke som høyre høyre. Fokus rester på USAs regionale bankrum, og om vi er på slutten eller begynnelsen, samt den større bekymringen om økonomien. Det føles mer og mer som om maskinene driver bussen i teknisk direksjon og i daglig valg.
[05:00 - 05:19] Antallet av aktive fjell føles mindre enn det bør være, givet hele dagen. Det føles som om det var risiko for degross fra ekstremt laget i januar, og så en aggressiv degross rundt SVB-CS-kjøringene.
[05:19 - 05:39] Nå ser vi en lang som fortsetter å råte kass, og råter inn til megakap, kvalitet og likviditet. Hedjebøkene har tilbakegråst, men bare ved å gå tilbake til kort og å kjøpe noe eller lage nett. Og så tørter han inn på kunstig intelligens, som han har satt og legget med selv.
[05:39 - 06:02] Og så oppsummerer han hele analysen med noen få ord. Uansett, spillet forvandler. Ja, jeg er enig med deg. Goldman er jo ikke alene om dette. City har kommet ut med en analyse nylig, hvor de sier at europese eiendomsverdier ikke har tatt innover seg renteøkningen på noen måte.
[06:02 - 06:24] Og de forventer at eiendomsverdier kan falle opp til 40 prosent innen utgangen av 2024. Så det er jo ting som skjer. Når Goldman sier at flowene kommer fra maskiner og ikke fra mennesker,
[06:24 - 06:48] må vi også huske at investorer har trukket 34 milliarder dollar ut av amerikanske aksjefond hittil i år. Den positive flowen er inn i europese fond, men den har bare vært på tilsvarende 10 milliarder dollar.
[06:48 - 07:05] Så 24 milliarder dollar har forsvunnet ut av aksjemarkeder. Det betyr også at det blir mindre aktivitet generelt i markedingen. Mindre markedingsaktivitet. Alt blir mindre.
[07:05 - 07:27] I forrige uke reduserte Federal Reserve balansen sin. Man har strammet inn med 73,6 milliarder dollar. Mens de har pumpet penger inn i systemet, virker det som om bankene som hadde akutt behov for likviditet,
[07:27 - 07:46] hadde fått inn den likviditeten, og Federal Reserve går tilbake til å trekke inn likviditet fra markedet. Den likviditetskvisen som vi nettopp så, som startet med Silicon Valley Bank,
[07:46 - 08:02] ser man ut til å være forbi oss. Man har demmet opp for den, og det ser man også fordi bankene trakk opp vanvittig beløp for å være sikre på at de hadde det. At de hadde tilgjengelig likviditet.
[08:02 - 08:25] Så om du vil, synes jeg at krisen er avblåst. Det neste som man må stille spørsmål ved er solvents. Hvor er forskjellige virksomheter solvente nå?
[08:25 - 08:49] Likviditetskrisen tror jeg er midlertidig løst. Men det har skjedd kraftige fundamentale endringer i markedet. I og med disse, blant annet sentralbankingripen, men også på grunn av posisjonering som ble avdekket,
[08:49 - 09:05] vi la ut selv en grafe fra Financial Times som viste urealiserte tap på banker, og dette er amerikanske finansinstitusjoner som er forsikret av FDIC.
[09:06 - 09:24] Hvor store urealiserte tap de har på den delen av porteføljen som skal være holdt til maturitet. Og det er syv ganger størrelsen på tap i forhold til hva man opplevde under finanskrisen.
[09:24 - 09:44] Så det er betydelig beløp vi snakker om. Vi snakker mye om makro. Kan jeg lese en til tekst? Jeg bruker klomser like mye denne gangen. «Laid off and can't pay mortgage. Hi all. Last year I bought a 1.5 million home in the Queen Anne area in Seattle.
[09:44 - 10:02] My monthly payment is around $8,500. The unexpected happened a few months ago when I was laid off from my job at Meta where I was a staff level engineer. I really need help because I depleted most of my cash in the down payment for my house and I can't afford a monthly anymore without a job.
[10:02 - 10:21] I've applied to more than 50 companies and I've put out more than 500 applications, but I can't get an offer for the life of me. Next month will be the first month that I won't be able to make my mortgage payment, and I'm terrified. I've thought about selling my house and moving in with friends, but I've lost so much money and house value I can't justify it.
[10:21 - 10:38] The last three words are awful. Please help me. Wow. It's obviously tough. And that's what it is. We have an insane amount of negative effects that people take for granted,
[10:38 - 11:06] that don't come because some indicator points the right way. For example, headline inflation numbers. But this is a big deal. It's not done in a day. Last week we saw most of the stock markets, Norway was one of the exceptions, it was so-so, but most of the stock markets were weakening.
[11:06 - 11:27] I think that at that moment, Fed is withdrawing some of the liquidity again. When we remember that you had a strong liquidity withdrawal that happened last year. And at the beginning of this year, it was reversed with almost two thirds.
[11:28 - 11:50] Then Silicon Valley Bank, the problems for the bank system started, the liquidity crisis we're talking about. And as soon as they start to reduce their balance again, make withdrawals, the market weakens.
[11:51 - 12:07] It's quite interesting to see that in relation to positioning and all this, but we can take things in a chronological order and see what was moving last week. Shall we do that? We can do that.
[12:07 - 12:25] Then you have again these European carbon certificates, now represented by the ETF. There is an ETF for this, or there are several actually. At least it was up 5% last week, even though it went up 4%.
[12:25 - 12:41] What is the ETF? Many people wonder how to trade this. Wait, I'll tell you what this ETF is called. Give me a moment. Wisdom Tree Carbon, was it? Yes, I think so.
[12:42 - 13:03] This is the ticker code CARB. There are many who have ETFs on this. What you have to do is two important things.
[13:03 - 13:19] One is to see which carbon credits are included here. Are they European, global, or regional? It's okay to know. I heard one who had clearly gone wrong there.
[13:19 - 13:35] One of the other is of course costs. It's also worth wondering, you need to have a provider where there is good market making. If you want to come out, don't spread it.
[13:35 - 13:56] So you give away a large part of your profit on the fact that you have an illiquid ETF. Interesting that this is so easy to trade. This is something that many Norwegian stock funds can probably own.
[13:57 - 14:13] Yes, absolutely. This is a way to get exposure to all kinds of stuff. There is gold, which is called GLD, which is not in dollars.
[14:13 - 14:34] There is for sale, there is for oil, there is for all kinds of stuff. But again, you should know what you are doing. Especially in oil, where you have forward curves that can go from being contango to backwardation. Where the forward curve is either contango, which means that the future price is higher than the daily price,
[14:34 - 14:56] and backwardation, which means the opposite. You need to follow these things to understand them. If you have a financial instrument, such as a stock, then you know that the future price will be adjusted for the exchange rate and interest rate.
[14:56 - 15:12] It's not more hocus pocus than that. But when you have a raw material, there may be things that happen in the future. For example, you expect a higher price, if it was oil.
[15:12 - 15:29] That you will get a much higher oil production, let's say in six months or something like that. And that the demand at that point, because it is in a month where there is naturally less demand for oil,
[15:29 - 15:48] then you can get situations where the future price is significantly below the price today. We have seen this for a long time in oil. And we still see in some of the long oil contracts that it is like that.
[15:48 - 16:05] Some of it may be that you believe that you will phase out oil afterwards and so on. But then you can't count on the oil price today and the interest rate in the period, and think that this is below, because it must be wrong price in the one I go and buy.
[16:05 - 16:24] No, you have to take other factors into account. And the same applies, for example, to wheat. Many of these agricultural products will also have periods where they are very sought after. And other periods where it is not. And that means that they can either get a steep contango,
[16:24 - 16:44] that is, the future price is much higher than today's price. Or a steep back variation where it is below. And then you can say that why don't you buy and keep it for delivery if you can, for example, earn 6% in 4 months or something like that.
[16:44 - 17:00] And then you have to take into account what it costs to have it in a approved warehouse. It's not your warehouse, it's a stock exchange warehouse that you want to be approved for. And then you pay for the warehouse rent, insurance and all these things. And then you pay the cost of the money.
[17:00 - 17:17] So there are a few things you have to take into account. I hope I didn't give you too much. – No, I was just curious. It was just interesting to know more details when you touched on carbon and said it was an ETF. Then it was great to go into the details. – Yes, absolutely.
[17:17 - 17:38] – You have talked a lot about carbon credits, but for most people, now IG is one such product you can get exposure for carbon credits. But it's not that common to invest in, so many people don't know how to do it. – No, and someone sent me some stuff where you were supposed to issue tokens on this.
[17:38 - 18:00] And it was apparently some people from Cryptospace who wanted to participate in this. So there are all kinds of options around it. But the trade is where it is most liquid, to put it that way. By the way, the ETC we are referring to is up 16% this year.
[18:00 - 18:18] So it has been a good investment for years. Otherwise, on the list, sales were up 4% last week. And then the third place was divided between Biotech ETF, Investment Grade ETF,
[18:18 - 18:34] which has investment grade obligations, raw material ETF, I can check which one it was after, and TLT, which is 20-year American state obligation.
[18:34 - 18:54] They were all up 3% last week. So it was actually a relatively active week. It was, by the way, Invesco's raw material ETF.
[18:54 - 19:11] On the downside, Tesla has a drop of 11% compared to British natural gas, down 10%, and American natural gas, down 7%. Natural gas, we know, is notoriously volatile.
[19:13 - 19:29] So it went on. Last week it was not a quiet week, but it was a relatively quiet week for the share price at the Oslo Stock Exchange, represented by the Oslo Stock Exchange Index. Can we talk about something that gives more of the same feeling
[19:29 - 19:45] as Goldman Analytics we started with? And that is the relationship between interest and the share price of the day. I have, from an intuitive standpoint, when you sit and look at something every day, you get a feeling of how it should go.
[19:45 - 20:04] I think it's a bit difficult to squarely track what's going on in the relationship between the share price and the level of the stock price, and the state obligations at the moment, as a risk-free rate description.
[20:04 - 20:22] The starting point for me is that, on the one hand, we have increased risk premiums, we see a lot, interest has fallen back, but we see on days when interest rises, which means that risk-free interest rises, which means that the arch of the rain
[20:22 - 20:43] for an analyst who is evaluating a young growth company, will change quite dramatically. And we see, just like often now, that the share price rises while the interest price rises. Those types of growth stocks. Is there something that has gone out of gear?
[20:43 - 21:00] Is there a new epoch we are in, or is it just a coincidence that things seem to go out of beat? I think that when we look at this, when we zoom out and see what's happening now,
[21:00 - 21:21] once in a while, when we zoom out and see this, it will just be a mess, we won't care about it. But I also react to that, that there is no logic behind the increase in interest and the rise in shares that only have a possible future interest.
[21:21 - 21:38] I totally agree. And another thing, so these two things don't go together, but from time to time the markets move because of flows, and now we have just had a significant intervention in the interest markets,
[21:38 - 21:54] which then had an effect along the entire curve. Again, back to the Silicon Valley Bank, I think this is something of the adjustments that follow. But we see that the money that comes out of the stock market,
[21:54 - 22:10] among other things, goes to, and comes out of banks, goes to the money market fund and goes to bonds. Then we have another thing at the moment, and that is that the risk premium that you were talking about just now,
[22:10 - 22:27] and that is what you can expect to get in return from shares, against insurance obligations, is at the lowest level since October 2007.
[22:27 - 22:46] The risk premium is at the lowest level, is that what you said? Yes, the risk premium is at the lowest level. What is the logic there? You can say that, and that is exactly what the Wall Street Journal pointed out last week, and they meant that shares have not been less attractive since 2007.
[22:46 - 23:07] Wow! If you go well over 100 years back, 90% of the time, the value of the stock has been lower in terms of revenue than it is today.
[23:07 - 23:32] So, shares are extremely high priced, and the risk premium on S&P is 1.59%, and as I said, it is the lowest you have seen. How do you manage that? In relation to the yield on bonds, you take the yield on shares in relation to the yield on bonds.
[23:32 - 23:48] And you can say that what is the risk premium? Is it direct yield? Is it exchange? Yes, correct. So direct cash in the stock? Yes, just right, deducted from the state bond interest.
[23:48 - 24:10] The point here is that shares are more volatile, and therefore you will be paid more to sit on shares than to sit on bonds. And at the moment you will only be paid 1.59% more to sit on shares.
[24:11 - 24:30] And there are many who believe that this is not satisfactory for an active class that fluctuates with a vote of 12-20% per year, then the risk premium is lost in a moment, right?
[24:31 - 24:51] So, there are many such factors that make institutions and others, and apparently people who have invested in the US stock exchange, have chosen to withdraw their money and rather have it standing, for example.
[24:52 - 25:08] So, Fed funds, you get around 5%, or directly deducted, it's 4.8% to sit in Fed funds. So you can say that if you give your money to the American money market fund,
[25:08 - 25:28] which then again puts loans out to the Federal Reserve, puts them in Fed funds, then they get 4.8%. And then you have taken some risk. So, other than in the US, if you will. So that makes many people think and say,
[25:28 - 25:44] is this so smart? At the moment, am I compensated for the risk I take? And it can also be one of the things that the head of the Folder fund, Nikolaj Tangen, has pointed out,
[25:44 - 26:03] when he says that he expects the withdrawal in the future to be very low for the stock market, and that we expect a very low withdrawal. And it speaks diametrically to almost all stock market fund managers in Norway,
[26:03 - 26:19] the world's largest stock market fund managers versus the other parties, who then believe that it will be easy to get a two-digit withdrawal and that there is no way to do it. It's a bit funny, because all these managers are in awe,
[26:19 - 26:41] have a sense of honor when it comes to Nikolaj Tangen and what he has achieved. He has achieved a lot, but at the same time they are not willing to listen to him when it comes to their own economy, and their own economy is just affected by the fact that they get a lot of money from the administration.
[26:41 - 27:00] I just think back to a Norwegian analyst, or Norwegian finance person, he is not an analyst, who concluded very strongly with a, I wonder if it was a copy number or something, and said that the recession will never come,
[27:00 - 27:18] and it's just bullshit that implicitly appears in the media or something. And when you look at his personal balance sheet, you look at his personal profit of whether the market goes up or down, you see that this person who is super competent,
[27:18 - 27:38] is of course disappointed by the idea that if the market were to turn down, it would make him lower in salary, of course. Because he is made to rise, but that's what's so scary about that we have an entire industry that is built on rising in Norway,
[27:38 - 27:55] but we have as good as zero who have other ways of making money than things are going up in value. Yes, the government has gone far to exclude all other possibilities
[27:55 - 28:15] to invest in, and that is reserved for professional actors or those with high interest rates, unfortunately. At the same time, I can fully understand that some of the alternatives are complicated,
[28:15 - 28:36] but you have a duty to enlighten yourself more than anything else. And it is clear that investors, you should not lure investors into products they do not understand. So either the investor must, but that in my opinion applies to all products.
[28:36 - 28:54] That's how it should be for all products. Instead, you have not done it like that. You have made the threshold very low for some and extremely high for others. Instead of saying that you know what, you have to meet this requirement, everyone has to meet it. That's how it should be. Could you have set up an ESG fund in Norway?
[28:54 - 29:21] A bank-based fund? An ESG fund that owns a lot of this carbon credit you were talking about. Or is it just simple, you do too little work to earn? Yes, you can say that most people want to, and there are probably many funds that could buy,
[29:21 - 29:40] or at least some funds can probably buy this type of carbon certificate if they want to. A stock fund? Yes, a stock fund would probably be able to buy carbon certificates, but a stock fund could buy a share in one of these companies or another fund for that matter.
[29:40 - 29:59] But I meant that there was direct exposure to carbon credits. What's nice about carbon credits is that, now we have limited data on it, it's a new product relatively, but ... It has been here for a few years. Yes, but we do not have a hundred years of history, and we do not have a recession and so on in history.
[30:00 - 30:16] What's nice about that is that you get uncorrelated disbursement, where it does not depend on how fast the currency rises, in a stock fund. Yes, we know ... Given that it is allowed by mandate, I do not know.
[30:16 - 30:33] I think you could probably get a carbon certificate set up. What the authorities want to be aware of is that it is safe, right? What you invest in is safe. These certificates are traded on a stock exchange,
[30:33 - 30:52] and there is a clothing store involved, so there is security for the transaction. But that is among the things that the authorities are concerned about. And then there should be regular pricing, i.e. daily pricing, and that is not a problem either.
[30:52 - 31:11] But then you have to have someone with the knowledge. But if you were to go to Norway and, let's say you wanted to set up such a fund, then there is no broker who would help you get investors for this. Because there are no emissions for brokers, there is nothing they can make money on.
[31:11 - 31:30] So they would not do a job for you to get investors. I did not know that it was like that, that you got investors for the fund, to be honest. Yes, but it is a stock fund, right? Then the stockholders would be interested in you, because they get a cut and they can sell their products and all these things.
[31:30 - 31:52] But if you do not have anything, then it is almost a threat to the stockholders, because then some of their investors may want to place money with you, and then you do not get any cut and you do not get this. So it is very much controlled, everything is controlled by where the income for the brokers comes from.
[31:52 - 32:10] And it is only the most institutional and professional investors who know where they should turn to abroad to achieve what they want. Because then they do not go through the Norwegian brokerage system.
[32:11 - 32:33] And that's how it is, but that's how it has always been. The brokerage companies are a sales organization and they want to sell their products. And emissions have been the biggest income generator. So when they can not manage to get emissions out of this, it is difficult to build up interest.
[32:33 - 32:57] That's just how it is. When we are talking about emissions and the things that compete with each other, there was an interesting article I read, also in the Wall Street Journal, where they speculate that reverse repo, that is, people park assets on Fed's balance sheet overnight
[32:57 - 33:16] to get a little extra interest, that can increase, now they are at a fairly high rate, $ 2 trillion a day, largely, that is parked. And that can further increase the pressure on the banking system as a whole.
[33:16 - 33:36] I thought it was interesting, because I have never heard of it. Yes, it can. In the same way you can argue, right? Because that's really what the money market funds do. So the money market funds get money from, that is, investors who do not trust the banks,
[33:36 - 33:57] take out their money from the banks, place it in the money market fund, which, for example, places it again in Fed funds or the US state or directly at Fed. For those who can. And of course that takes liquidity out of the market.
[33:57 - 34:19] And it was that liquidity that had to be re-established. And this was done by the banks, which then had a heavy loss of their obligations, were allowed to deposit the obligations, even if they had perhaps been 70 cents on the dollar,
[34:19 - 34:39] and then they got to borrow a dollar from them. So yes, I respond to this with the repo market or the reverse repo market. Yes, it gets worse, but then you have taken it off this one-year program,
[34:39 - 34:58] where you borrow out to a party, even if you have secured the market security on what you have secured, is much lower.
[34:58 - 35:14] But yes, it is clear that it draws in liquidity. Is this the same dynamics that we see in the Sofer volume, which is now the highest level of the times, I have a graph on line 40 in the rain area. Yes, I saw it.
[35:14 - 35:30] So it goes above all-time high for Eurodollars. And it's an overnight too. Yes, correct. It's the money market, so is that also an indication of stress?
[35:30 - 35:50] Yes, it is an indication of stress. I agree that it is. But when this started rolling, you got credit Swiss and everything that happened, so ECB also reacted in connection with this.
[35:50 - 36:11] I was, by the way, very happy to see that the Swiss National Bank, they have, in that it had to go in with money, because then you cut out, you zeroed out a type of account that Credit Swiss had.
[36:11 - 36:32] So this alternative tier 1 account was then zeroed out and not the share capital. But at least the central bank has set a limit on what can be taken out as a bonus by a certain credit employee.
[36:32 - 36:49] It should not be a bonus at all, but at least they have made it, and it applies to 1000 employees, and then get their bonuses cut instead of the authorities,
[36:49 - 37:06] that is, the rescue packages should go directly to those who have worked in these banks, and those who may have been responsible for the situation.
[37:06 - 37:26] You find yourself in a similar situation to what was done in the US during the financial crisis, where the top banks were allowed to get bonuses from the rescue packages. It's absolutely incredible. So I'm glad to see that the Swiss are more credible in that way.
[37:26 - 37:45] Should we say something about positioning? Because it's a little exciting, you mentioned this with the bond market, and what is interesting is that the positioning, the net short of the US 10-year bond market,
[37:45 - 38:02] and if you go short, it's because you think the interest is going up. The net short is the highest since 2018, was up 32% last week. And that's pretty significant. How did you short? You shorted the futures contracts.
[38:02 - 38:18] You shorted the futures, so you sell the futures contracts? Yes, if you sell the futures contracts short, it's because you think the interest is going up. But it's possible to short the bonds directly as well, like the stock market? Yes, you can do that.
[38:18 - 38:34] It's not a problem, you can either do it in swap or repo form or something like that, but you can definitely do that. What about CDS? CDS goes up and sells the bonds. So you can say that...
[38:34 - 38:55] That's a good point, that was a very good point. Plus that you're dependent on a committee to get the money out. Yes, in the state. To get a credit event. Can you explain a little about the different things? Because the state regulation is the US mechanism to get money.
[38:55 - 39:15] To borrow money, not to be dependent on the banks, but the global market and largely its own central bank. And then you have different types, you can trade the state regulation directly. You can trade different durations, different advance times, everything from,
[39:15 - 39:31] I don't know exactly the next day, but all the way up to 30 years, I think it is now. Yes, correct. And then you have instruments that are linked to, that derive their value from this.
[39:31 - 39:50] And then you have futures. Yes, so the futures contracts are moving in relation to interest. The only thing is that if you buy a state obligation through a futures contract, then you don't get, a state obligation pays you interest, right?
[39:50 - 40:10] A yearly interest, you don't get that paid out in a futures contract, but it will be in the price. So you get it in a way, but it will be in the price. The options are calculated directly from the futures or from the state obligation?
[40:10 - 40:27] From the futures. So futures is the financialization of the state obligation, right? Yes, that's correct. So it should be possible to trade to create volume, to even out the top and bottom.
[40:27 - 40:46] Yes, and you can say that a futures contract is created by the fact that there is a buyer and seller of it, and it doesn't need to be linked, other than that it is linked in relation to the duration of a state obligation, then it is not directly linked to the state obligation.
[40:46 - 41:02] So you can say that we create a new futures contract, every time a trade is made, and therefore the volume of the futures contract can be higher than the underlying volume of the obligations. It is entirely possible.
[41:03 - 41:22] So again, in the worst case, you can get a situation where the tail is wagging the dog, if there are very big movements in the futures and there is a very big open balance of futures. But basically, this contributes to a super equal market, both for the underlying obligation and for the futures contract.
[41:22 - 41:41] Because you will be a trader there all the time, if you see that a futures contract is trading too high in relation to what is mathematically correct for the state obligation, then, in general, actors such as banks will sell the state obligation, buy the futures, or do the opposite.
[41:41 - 41:57] So if the futures is trading too high, you will short the futures and buy the obligation. While products such as TLT, which is the stock exchange-noted fund, they have direct exposure, I just had to go and check the documentation here, they have direct state obligations. That is correct.
[41:57 - 42:15] And they will then have a somewhat, you have to think of this as 20 years, but probably the duration is shorter than that, but they will then have the need to sell the shortest state obligations they have
[42:15 - 42:33] and replace them with longer state obligations. Because it should then be around 20 years in the course of time. So that's how it's done. So it has that as the underlying obligation. But there are a lot of arbiters driving here, and you were talking about options,
[42:33 - 42:51] and options go on the futures contracts. Options and futures are declared by a clearing house every single day. So there is a calculated security margin. Why do you want to trade the state obligation directly? What is the motivation for that?
[42:52 - 43:10] Long or short? Do you mean the paper or what? Yes, directly. Because it's a bit interesting from a stock exchange point of view, because you also have, the last thing is private derivatives, such as via our sponsor IG, for example, which also offers exposure for that. And then you have the stock exchange-noted fund, and then you have the options, and then you have the futures.
[43:10 - 43:28] Why do you choose the different instruments other than availability, of course? Why the state obligations directly? State obligations in the first place, why are you interested in that? Because you have an opinion about the interest rate, that the interest rate should either go up or down.
[43:28 - 43:44] That's the reason you do it. Otherwise, you may get state obligations to use it as security against something else, against another loan or something like that. There are many reasons why you do it. And as a banker, they used the state obligations because they wanted to,
[43:44 - 44:01] they borrowed cheaply once, they borrowed to zero, and then they could place it to state obligation, 10 years state obligation, at 0.5% interest. And then they got 0.5% interest this year, and as long as they borrowed to zero, they netted 0.5% this year.
[44:01 - 44:23] But then the problem was that you started setting up the interest, and then the loans suddenly became much more expensive than they had already borrowed out to. Because if you have bought a 10-year state obligation, then you have placed, you have borrowed short and placed long.
[44:23 - 44:42] But futures, in a way, here, because now we are starting to go out more of the macroeconomic analysis, I thought as a trading instrument. Why choose futures? Why trade futures instead of futures? Super liquid, there is a very high liquidity in it. You can say that if you are going to trade the state obligations,
[44:42 - 45:03] then you have to trade, it is a more circular process if you are not a professional actor. If you are a bank, then you are used to trading, all banks trade this in between. But if you are a different type of actor, then futures can be easier for you to trade.
[45:03 - 45:24] So if you have an interest rate view, then it is very good to trade futures, and then it depends on what you think will happen with the interest, and where it will happen on the curve. Is it the 2-year interest rate you expect to move? Is it 10 years? Is it 20 years? Is there something in between? And then it may be that you have, as many had, a view of the difference between,
[45:24 - 45:44] for example, the 2-year and 10-year interest rate. At the moment, it is 3-year and 10-year interest rate. I think it went to, it inverted a long time ago. But I think the difference is similar to the new record now. So some have opinions about that too, right?
[45:44 - 46:00] How that interest rate curve looks. How important is the gearing factor with the choice of futures? It is a product that is linked to a lot of reward in the position.
[46:00 - 46:17] How important is that for a trader? You can say that you get better use of your capital, if you can put up some interest to trade something, because then you can always put the rest of your capital on a bank account
[46:17 - 46:38] or use it for something else. So it has something to do with liquidity, but you can say that if you use it too much, it will be like this, that if this just moves a little towards you, then you have to settle for more money. And then you have a very short time to do that, so it is an extra stress moment. There are probably some who do it because of the gearing,
[46:38 - 46:56] but it's not these phantom gears that you sometimes hear inside crypto, and sometimes inside CFD where you hear completely crazy gears. It's usually not that. Most of the actors don't go that far to say it that way.
[46:57 - 47:19] But you see now, even historically skilled actors in March lost a lot of money on American state bonds, simply because they were on the wrong track when the central bank stepped in to save Silicon Valley Bank and the other banks.
[47:19 - 47:38] What about options? Why do you choose options? I would choose options because I get expressed. First of all, if you do a future, you have a linear development. It would be exactly the same as if you bought a future on a stock index or something like that.
[47:38 - 47:59] It's a completely linear development. I would choose options to get a non-linear development, either to get more bang for my buck, and then I buy a call or put option, or because I don't want to take that much risk,
[47:59 - 48:17] to the downside, that I think it's okay with the premium, or I think it should be a limited movement, so I buy one option and put another one, and then I want to make money on what happens between the two lines, and I have less exposure and I have less risk.
[48:17 - 48:37] And then there are those who trade options because they have a view on the volatility, and we have seen that it exploded completely in state-obligation options, and those who have shortened the volatility, PIMCO in its time was the biggest shortener of options on state obligations,
[48:37 - 48:56] but that was while Bill Gross was there. I don't know what they do today, but it wouldn't have been nice in March this year, I can assure you that, for those who shortened that type of option, because the volatility went through the roof and forced many to lose.
[48:56 - 49:16] So you use options because you can express exactly what you mean by options. You don't have to take more risk than you know you're taking, than you feel comfortable with, and you can go to bed knowing that when you wake up in the morning,
[49:16 - 49:32] at worst, you have lost the premium on those options, and you wouldn't have lost those overnight either, for that matter, because if the option was in, let's say, two-three-month options, then you would have a reduction in the premium, but you wouldn't have lost everything.
[49:32 - 49:51] Or over a weekend or something like that, something happens out there, then it's much more comfortable to own options than to be linearly exposed, where you know that every percentage that falls, if you are long, you lose, and every percentage increases, you earn,
[49:51 - 50:09] but with options you can have a floor, and as I said, you can adjust what you do very, very precisely. So there are many possibilities you have through options, you can make an option where you say that I think it will be calm this week,
[50:09 - 50:27] but the week after I think there will be movements, there you can make an option strategy that makes money on the fact that it is quite calm this week and moves the week after. So you have a lot of options, several options,
[50:27 - 50:43] but they are more complex, so you have to learn options, and it doesn't go a week without someone asking me some options questions, and it doesn't go a week without me telling people
[50:43 - 50:59] that they have to learn about options before you start trading them, and not while you have a position on it that you don't understand why it moved the way it did. Do you remember we talked about an option when I had a trade on
[50:59 - 51:17] the podcast, and you suggested making a rather complicated trade, I had a very successful trade, and I said I wouldn't do it because I didn't understand it. What do you think about their move?
[51:17 - 51:37] I think it's completely correct, exactly the trade I suggested for you would have been extremely easy for me to draw up for you, because you owned a put that was deep into the money, because it had gone in your favor, and I would have protected it
[51:37 - 51:59] with something called a risk reversal, where you would have bought, which would not have cost you any money, because you would have put a put further down, and that's not a risk for you, because you already own a put, so if it continued further down, you would have gotten a slightly lower profit,
[51:59 - 52:15] but you already had a very high profit, and you put it out, and you used what you got from that put option to buy a buy option, which would then protect your profit if it went against you. But what do you think the reasoning was?
[52:15 - 52:33] That I didn't have the opportunity to learn about it. So the reasoning was, I don't understand it, I don't want to do anything with options where I don't 100% understand it, because if I do something wrong, for example, say I put an option out or something that goes against me, I have an infinitely low chance of winning.
[52:35 - 52:53] And the choice was, despite the fact that I trusted your reasoning, I chose not to do it, precisely because I wanted to keep it simple and learn it step by step. Is it your fault? No, it's never wrong. I think it would be wrong if you did something you didn't understand.
[52:53 - 53:14] You could just ask me to draw up the chart, and you would have understood it right away. But then it wasn't a possibility. No, it's not wrong. It would be wrong to do something you don't understand the consequences of. And if you, as you just mentioned, in the worst case,
[53:14 - 53:34] could have lost a lot more because you didn't understand it, then it's clear that you shouldn't do that. You shouldn't do that. So it's important that you understand exactly what is happening if I do this. And then it's like, choosing the right introductory courses,
[53:34 - 53:50] the right prerequisites, all these things have to be in place. So you have to understand it. You shouldn't do anything, be optional, futures, stocks for that matter, if you don't understand it. Not at all.
[53:50 - 54:06] Yes, and that's what happens when we start looking at the documentation on ETF. Is it an ETF, is it an ETC? Now, that's not a very big difference from the other way, but it's incredibly important to understand it. And when we talk about it, now it was a bit casual that we brought it up.
[54:06 - 54:23] In oil, remember, I said that oil was at its lowest since 2011, so the speculative position in oil. That was the same day that oil rose. Now it's just long, at the highest, for four weeks.
[54:23 - 54:40] But still, it's a low historically. So you can say that now the oil price has risen, it has risen by almost 20%, doesn't it, from that bottom? It has then, so now the speculators are starting to come back into oil.
[54:40 - 54:58] They were long, but there was a very low share of speculators who were long. Now it's the highest, it's been for four weeks, but it's still very low. If you look at S&P, Nasdaq and Russell, S&P which is the 500 largest companies,
[54:58 - 55:16] Nasdaq which is mainly technology, and Russell which is smaller companies, then the common case is that the speculators are short and they have increased. So the rise that has been now, they have increased on the shorts.
[55:16 - 55:35] It is such that we do not know if this is because they are bearish, or if this is a hedge against, for example, shares. But net, there are quite strong shorts on in the, within the shares and share indexes.
[55:35 - 55:52] So for S&P, it's actually, what was it I saw? I think it was the highest level, or was it Nasdaq, Nasdaq I think has had the highest level of shorts since November 2011. Very often in such situations, people try to get along,
[55:52 - 56:08] but here people are more against. It can also be, speaking of if you are long, it can also be an advantage that many are short, because if it goes long, then you will naturally some of these shorts will need to cover themselves,
[56:08 - 56:28] if they are not pure hedges. When it comes to gold, there are the speculative speculators. There we were also very low, I mentioned it on Sølv for a while ago, but now it is completely clear to open the balance of those who go long gold,
[56:28 - 56:45] of speculators who go long gold, it is on its way up, completely marked, but it was higher in both 2019-2020, 2021 and 2022. So you can say that despite the strong rise we have seen both in silver and gold,
[56:45 - 57:05] the share of speculative positions is not particularly high. So it's interesting to see there. In dollars, you increased longs last week,
[57:05 - 57:25] they increased by 11%, so more have become positive to American dollars. And it should be said that when you got that decrease in the dollar index last year, it was a signaled, it had in front of it the speculative interest to be long.
[57:25 - 57:47] You saw a marked fall in it two months before the dollar itself began to fall. So you got a message that people took advantage of the win. When it comes to VIX, the market has been net short since 2019,
[57:47 - 58:05] so they sat net short through the whole of last year and were not particularly punished for it. So it's worth saying that the short position in VIX increased last week,
[58:05 - 58:21] but it's not extreme. But more interesting, and I think I mentioned the cobra a while back, and that is that the cobra has gone from the speculator being short to long, it has just turned from short to long.
[58:21 - 58:38] And it may happen that it is related to Chile's cobra production being at its lowest in five years.
[58:38 - 58:55] So there it has actually happened now. So it will actually be, the cobra later this year can be very exciting. So we'll see what happens there.
[58:55 - 59:11] When it comes to... – The cobra is a target of the economy as a whole. – Yes, exactly. Exactly, it is the most important industrial metal. – Are you going to start tearing the cobra out of the walls now?
[59:11 - 59:27] – No, I have... – You have the right to do so. – For the time being, it is safe in your wall, so you can either tear it out if the cobra price goes up. But cobra production is, that is to say that the storage will be low,
[59:27 - 59:49] so it is a vulnerable situation there, so it can be a little exciting. The same you see on the sell, where you have Mexico and China, Peru, which are the largest producers, and Peru, where production has gone down significantly.
[59:49 - 01:00:09] And when you think of the sell being used for battery production, and what they call solar cells or something like that, that is a little interesting in itself. – China is a bit of a joker with earth metals at the moment.
[01:00:09 - 01:00:27] – Yes, absolutely. – In English it is called... – Rare earth minerals? – Yes, but they are not that rare. – No, they are not. – It's just the name. – Yes. – It's about the whole earth body, but the earth metals from China are an eternal political chip.
[01:00:29 - 01:00:45] It is also interesting that China has become, during the corona, that someone has made a mark on the world's largest car manufacturer. Now I am in the middle of nowhere in North Norway, in a cabin, and there are a lot of Chinese cars on the road here. Isn't that a bit strange?
[01:00:45 - 01:01:01] – What type are you looking at? – No, all those different B, I, D and... – Yes, because I actually made a mark on a lot of B, I, D's on the road yesterday. – They are bigger than Germany now, in two years. – Wow. – From zero point, by the way.
[01:01:02 - 01:01:19] I think that a certain American car manufacturer who has established itself in China, it's a good risk to expose their technology to China when they are so eager to produce cars. On the other hand, it's a good risk for China to do what they do,
[01:01:19 - 01:01:36] and they have to flirt with the Russians, when they are going to export these electric cars to the whole world. I don't know, there is a lot at stake now that is unresolved. – That's a good point, absolutely. – I just feel that the world has a lot of unresolved things,
[01:01:36 - 01:01:54] and then you have, on the technology side, you have artificial intelligence. Think of this meta-engineer who is looking for a job everywhere and doesn't get one. I see the very first actors who have started talking about replacing programmers with chat GPT,
[01:01:54 - 01:02:11] who have incorporated it. I have heard programmers say that they are waiting to be replaced. Actually. – Yes, we have. We are going to have an AI special on Patreon,
[01:02:11 - 01:02:29] where we will go through everything that has happened in the last 10 days. There has been an extreme amount going under the radar now. It's going so fast now. Just to tease that Patreon, I think that the guy who wrote chat GPT, find me money.
[01:02:29 - 01:02:45] And it did. – Yes, I saw it. – He wrote the name and personal number. The guy who wrote it, has made a plugin, he knows this is possible, but still, he found fucking 2000 NOK as the state was paying him.
[01:02:45 - 01:03:02] – Wasn't it 230 dollars or something? – 200 and something dollars. – Yes. – 2000 NOK. AI find me money. Isn't that crazy? – Yes, it seems so.
[01:03:02 - 01:03:19] It seems like Oslo municipality is doing the same thing. When I look at the property tax, I think they have used it. But I don't know. – Shall we talk a little about geopolitics? It's big things every week.
[01:03:20 - 01:03:36] – Yes, it is. It's very big things. – Should we start with China? – Yes, I thought we could start with... If we can start a little closer, with Saudi compared to Iran. – That was interesting.
[01:03:36 - 01:03:54] I would like to learn more about that. – Yes, Saudi and via Russia, as I understand it, have met... Russia has opened up for this contact.
[01:03:54 - 01:04:11] In a short time, Saudi and Iran have surrounded each other, two bitter enemies. And will start passenger air traffic between Riyadh and Tehran.
[01:04:12 - 01:04:28] And resume diplomatic relations which was broken up for... What will it be now? Is it seven years ago or something like that? But this is coming... – But it's a conflict that has been going on since 1979 that has been solved.
[01:04:28 - 01:04:48] – I don't know if it's solved, but... – Say Assuni. This goes as far as you can go. – It does, doesn't it? And you can say that Iran has been very active in relation to...
[01:04:48 - 01:05:04] Iran controls the Hezbollah militia in Libya and the Houthi militia in Yemen. And the Houthi militia has fired a number of rockets against Saudi Arabia,
[01:05:04 - 01:05:20] which has been picked up by American Patriot missiles. At least most of them. Saudi has then bombarded Yemen, supported by a whole bunch of other countries,
[01:05:20 - 01:05:36] including South Sudan. It's completely crazy who has been involved. Yemen has been used as a weapon test area for many countries. It's a conflict. If they had a drop of oil,
[01:05:36 - 01:05:53] the world would have been looking at them. But because Yemen is a poor country, no one cares a damn about the humanitarian... No one is to be exaggerated. But the humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen. But anyway,
[01:05:53 - 01:06:11] it hasn't happened overnight, but Saudi, first, has the oil production cut, which was a blow to the face of the United States.
[01:06:11 - 01:06:28] And the next thing you see, is that another of the United States' sworn enemies, namely Iran, has now tied a friendship bond, or Saudi has tied a friendship bond to them. I don't know how many remember,
[01:06:28 - 01:06:47] but the last thing was, and this happened during Trump, where Qasem Soleimani, I don't remember if he was general, or had an even higher title, but at least the head of this coup force, which is part of the revolution guide in Iran,
[01:06:47 - 01:07:03] and was the one who was involved in sabotage, and murder and much more. At least during Trump, this was in January, the beginning of January 2020, Soleimani was killed
[01:07:03 - 01:07:19] by Trump and Kaye firing drones and two Hellfire missiles, which hit the car quarters.
[01:07:19 - 01:07:36] There were two subs, where Soleimani was in the first one, and the second one was blown up in small pieces, both subs were blown up, when they left the airport in Baghdad.
[01:07:36 - 01:07:55] He arrived there very incognito, and the United States decided to take his life. But the relationship between the US and Iran
[01:07:55 - 01:08:11] became much more tense during Trump, when he went back to the nuclear agreement, where Iran was obliged to not develop nuclear weapons, against lifting sanctions,
[01:08:11 - 01:08:28] and then Trump withdrew without any evidence, at least the foreigners never had any evidence, that Iran did not keep their part of the agreement, and this created further poverty in Iran,
[01:08:28 - 01:08:46] and further bad sentiment between the two countries. But at least, as far as I'm concerned, Saudi Arabia has been a sworn enemy of Iran, among others, as you mention, and the Sunnis in Saudi Arabia, and the Shiites, the Muslims in Iran,
[01:08:46 - 01:09:03] now they have suddenly found the way, and this comes out of the blue. And then, the next thing that happens, is that Macron, the French president,
[01:09:03 - 01:09:21] travels to... What do you say? He sells himself. Yes, right. 150 flights or something. 150, he flies to Beijing, and sells his soul to China, to see at the top of the whole statement,
[01:09:21 - 01:09:38] that they had to reduce the dependence of the US. And one thing is that the US reacts, but the rest of the EU does as well, on this statement. But Macron, he has wished to be a player,
[01:09:38 - 01:09:55] in the geopolitical arena, there is no doubt about that. He has been to Moscow a number of times, and had meetings with Putin, but I must say that he is... Now he has really raised the bar.
[01:09:55 - 01:10:11] So geopolitics will come to... Will get more attention, also in the financial markets. Yes, but it affects the finance, because there was the deal we talked about in the last episode,
[01:10:11 - 01:10:27] with the liquid gas, LNG, that Total Energy bought... No, sold to China, was it? Bought, sold, the deal. Bought from. And it was priced in Chinese currency. Correct.
[01:10:27 - 01:10:47] And that is very controversial, but it hit me what could be the trigger, because you remember the Australian submarines. Yes, I remember the one where they suddenly turned away, where France was suddenly pushed out of the deal. Yes, so France... No, Australia for some reason uses French submarines,
[01:10:47 - 01:11:03] and would then buy a lot more. And probably as an insurance against China or something, goes over to the Americans instead. And there was met with extreme aggression from the French side when they did it.
[01:11:04 - 01:11:20] I could understand that at the time. It seemed extremely unkind, and it came at the last... I understand Australia too. Yes, at the last moment, I understand Australia, they did not have a particularly good explanation, I felt,
[01:11:20 - 01:11:36] on why they had... They had... From the French side, it was believed that they had been led astray, and it was of course also about French jobs, and French technology and development and so on.
[01:11:36 - 01:11:54] It was a strange thing, and it may be that something like that is in it, I do not know. But it makes it more relevant, in relation to the question we got last time about the dollar,
[01:11:54 - 01:12:10] and how they are now trying to move away from the dollar as a reserve currency, and whether China can become the new reserve currency. You are making an attack on the dollar,
[01:12:10 - 01:12:27] you are undoubtedly doing that, but I stand by what I said last time, I do not think that this is something that has a chance to happen in the short term. Just think about how little free Chinese currency is moving,
[01:12:27 - 01:12:44] you can not have that as a reserve currency. Politics is very much about symbolism, and even though the order of magnitude of these parts is small, and as you say that the structure of ONE is so complicated, of course it is difficult,
[01:12:44 - 01:13:01] but it is the symbolism that this has been tried to do since 1945, actually becomes the one country reserve currency. It is the little drop that can make the big impact, that is what is interpreted here.
[01:13:01 - 01:13:19] But I think it is important not to hang so much on status quo right now. Now there are many things happening at the same time, and China has probably changed dynamics as a country. I agree with you, I think a lot is at stake here,
[01:13:19 - 01:13:35] and I think that the development this has taken is a little scary in the short term, and then there is that, suddenly among your friends there are some who turn away from you,
[01:13:35 - 01:13:53] and I experience that France is doing things on its own, that is also a scary development for me. Isn't it funny that Støre goes to France when he is bothered by Norwegian media, and then he goes down to be praised because Norway has so much gas and so on,
[01:13:53 - 01:14:20] and when Macron is bothered in France, he goes to China to be applauded. Yes, it is... He has a lot of trouble at home, to put it that way. Yes, exactly. But it is clear that these countries are doing a lot of things driven by Russia,
[01:14:20 - 01:14:37] and are working hard, and in a way you can understand Russia, because they experience that the West is strongly against them, and so that Russia will try to beat back,
[01:14:37 - 01:14:54] that is really just to wait, but it can turn into insecurity in the financial market as well, that is a possibility. Are there any other geopolitical things that are relevant?
[01:14:54 - 01:15:14] You have the new weapon for Ukraine, which is starting to appear on the stock market, they look very impressive, these tanks, compared to those small Russian veteran cars. Yes, it is quite powerful,
[01:15:15 - 01:15:34] but over a year, think about those who are in this, and when the Russians claim that they are liberating Baku, and you see it completely destroyed and bombed,
[01:15:34 - 01:15:50] then you can wonder what they are liberating. But if we take weeks, it will come quickly, there is a lot of macro, on Tuesday came the Chinese inflation figure, which you probably didn't believe, is to put forward retail sales,
[01:15:50 - 01:16:08] I saw that we have a calendar, tidar-penge.no-calendar, where you can get what is important, you can follow that when you need to know what is happening today, and they pointed out that EA's short-term energy outlook is very important,
[01:16:08 - 01:16:24] so it can be important to follow on Tuesday, I don't feel very good about that. On Wednesday, the US puts forward incredibly important inflation figures, just make sure they get a lot of focus, and are interpreted and misinterpreted and interpreted. The Canadian central bank puts forward a tax deduction,
[01:16:24 - 01:16:41] and the incredibly important minutes, that is, summaries of what is said at the last central bank meeting in the US, is put forward on Wednesday late at night. Historically, it has had quite a big market impact. On Thursday, British BNP, German KPI,
[01:16:41 - 01:17:03] American jobless claims, and on Friday, American retail sales. That will also be a very big focus on that, I think. A lot is happening. A lot is happening. Do you want to get into the tidar-penge side? Yes, we have changed how we build up tidar-penge.no,
[01:17:03 - 01:17:20] so we have changed CMS to that, and the reason we did that is so we could have more open source research. We have not used tidar-penge.no to much yet, other than to store the episodes, but what we do is that we put out the content that is important,
[01:17:20 - 01:17:37] so there is a bit of communication between us that produces it. And then there is a bit of a summary of some of the news that have come, and research, and various things that are relevant to follow the market, from our perspective. There is absolutely no news on that,
[01:17:37 - 01:17:54] and there is no journalism that is done there, but it is more like... We have used Regner for many years, but it is not so complete, plus the listeners do not have access to it. For the time being, this is how we do it, and you can follow it on tidar-penge.no.
[01:17:54 - 01:18:14] We will make a newsletter specifically so you can get updates on it, so you do not have to follow it. But follow our Tidar-account and you will get it at least. Or just go to tidar-penge.no regularly, and you will see. Yes, here you will also be able to see... Sometimes we refer to numbers, or backgrounds, or graphs, etc.
[01:18:14 - 01:18:30] And here you will often be able to see the graphs, and the numbers that are published. Plus maybe get a little more meat on the bone than what we mention in the broadcast.
[01:18:30 - 01:18:47] Yes, that's fine. But it's not... We will see what happens. We will do it a day at a time, and no promises about something absolutely fantastic, but the idea is to give the podcast a little more breadth and depth, and maybe be a little more continuous,
[01:18:47 - 01:19:04] not just once a week, so you can follow things there. Yes, absolutely. Should we round off and start our recording with an AI summary, or do you have anything else in mind? No, I think it's pretty good.
[01:19:04 - 01:19:24] I think, by the way, if I can take a quote from the week that I had found, and it comes from Statkraft, and it's given to DN, where they say that a lot of the trade happens through algorithms driven by pre-controlled data programs. This is the power trade that Statkraft operates with.
[01:19:24 - 01:19:40] When I read that quote, I thought it was exactly the same that the banks do in the currency market. Namely, they are not really setting prices themselves. It's algorithms that do it,
[01:19:40 - 01:19:57] and the algorithms are based in the currency market, and then they take the prices to the five largest players in the market, and then they put their buying course and selling course over what is in the others, and then they send it out to customers.
[01:19:57 - 01:20:15] But in addition to that, or what I suspect, is that the banks continue to give bonuses to the traders, which they didn't really do anything, because it was data programs that did this security
[01:20:15 - 01:20:32] and did the whole job. And it was data programs that the banks had already paid for and used. But still, of course, the traders continued to get bonuses as if they created the results. And when I saw that statement from Statkraft,
[01:20:32 - 01:20:52] I thought that if it's algorithms, pre-controlled data programs that they themselves say are, then I wonder why they pay so high bonuses if they have already paid for the data programs that are supposed to do this job.
[01:20:52 - 01:21:09] But I don't think I get an answer to that either, to put it that way. But it's an attempt. But then we'll come back with an AI special this week on Patreon, and then we might come back with more if we have anything more, and if not, we'll be back next Monday.
[01:21:09 - 01:21:15] Have a nice week. Drive carefully down the mountain, if you continue on.