![]() |
|
January 20, 2010 Money Magazine Still Hates Gold, So, Buy It! Over the last decade, it would have been possible for investors to make lots of money doing exactly the opposite of what Money Magazine has been telling their readers to do and one of the best examples of this can be found in their very consistent advice about gold.
Note that, in addition to the new black line representing an investment in gold, full-year data for 2009 has been added to the chart that includes all the mutual funds from Vanguard that the magazine's editors feel should be part of your investment portfolio. Coming down with gold feverReally? A 27-pound gold bar would cost almost a half million dollars. Do they stock half-million dollar gold bars at Harrod's and, if so, how do you get them out of the store? Well, apparently they do stock them, but you won't find the gold next to the bed linens. What's interesting here is the tone, right from the start - "sold like candy" and early comparisons to the housing bubble make you realize early on that Stephen hates gold. Once of interest mainly to central bankers, Swiss jewelers, and folks who are convinced the Trilateral Commission runs the planet, gold is now the world's "it" investment. The question for you: If you buy now, are you getting in on the precious-metal equivalent of Microsoft and Intel circa 1986, or a Miami condo circa 2007?Here we have conspiracy theory jab #1 (I've owned gold for about ten years and just learned what the Trilateral Commission is a couple months ago) and the first bit of spin about where we are in the current bull market. We're obviously not at the beginning. It's more a question of whether we're half way through, 75 percent, 90 percent, or 100 percent, however, those weren't the options presented to the reader - it was either Microsoft in 1986 or condos in 2007. It's funny how the last decade was one in which the magazine was a relentless promoter of buying stocks regardless of whether they may have just ended a 20 year bull market run, a fact that is only now dawning on the magazines' editors ten years too late. Investors have turned to gold for centuries in times of trouble, and as panic over the global financial crisis took hold in late 2008, gold prices started heading up from around $700 an ounce. While panic has abated, fear remains -- of inflation building in the global economy, of an armageddon for the U.S. dollar, of Armageddon, period.Uh ... that would have been pretty good advice in the last decade as demonstrated in the chart above (particularly when compared to what the magazine was advising) and my guess is that a two-thirds weighting of gold bullion in this decade will do pretty well too. The author almost immediately reveals his emotional commitment to his position that gold is not a good investment despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Some people just have a "gold block" in their head that they can't seem to get around despite facts that are obvious to most everyone else. Some people just hate gold... That's not so surprising. "When something goes up as quickly as gold has, the main thought is, Why am I not in it? And how can I get in it quickly?" says behavioral economist Dan Ariely, author of Predictably Irrational. "That's the same thing that happened with housing."Housing, gold - the same thing, apparently - a common theme for many who will probably just hate the metal even more the higher the price goes. Of course, owning gold goes against everything that the mainstream financial media has been taught over the last thirty years - a classic case of cognitive dissonance. Let's get into the details... Tale No. 1: Inflation is a looming threat, and gold offers you better protection than stocks or bonds.Yeah, that's more great investment advice - wait until there are unambiguous signs that rip-roaring inflation is here before you buy gold. This will allow millions of other investors to go out on a limb a little bit ahead of you, buying precious metals at much lower prices and bidding up the gold price. Will we see high inflation in the future? We'll find out in a couple years, but, more than at any other time in the past thirty years, the potential for high inflation is now with us and, given the amount of money printing that is being done around the world, the threat is certainly not receding. Gas, for instance, costs less than it did a year ago.No, gasoline actually costs about 50 percent more. So does a gallon of milk -- down about 20%. A Big Mac costs a bit more, but not by much. You get the point. Prices on a number of consumer goods peaked in the summer of 2008 and have been falling or stabilizing ever since.It's "hoarding gold", not "investing in gold", and a classic case of "data-picking" in the performance comparison of gold vs. small-company stocks. The gold price reached a high of $850 an ounce in January of 1980, then plunged to around $500 in - surprise! - April of 1980 before rebounding. In all of 1980, the gold price averaged $612 and, without checking, my guess is that you could make any number of comparisons that would have gold bettering the performance of small-company stocks by a much wider margin than 4 percentage points, but, naturally, that would be unsupportive of the case being made here. And over a much longer period -- since the end of 1974, when the federal government permitted U.S. households to own gold as an investment for the first time since the Great Depression -- even the S&P 500 index has whipped inflation by a wider margin than the metal has.The end of 1974 also happened to be the low for the 1966-1982 bear market in stocks, so, once again, the dates were selected to favor the point being argued, in this case, disguised as somehow being chosen to be helpful to gold. That's some pretty impressive spin being employed here... The reason gold may have been such a popular inflation hedge in the '70s was that there were few alternatives for small investors back then. Not only was that before the rise of low-cost stock index funds, it was decades before Uncle Sam came out with a class of bonds -- Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities, or TIPS -- that are guaranteed to keep pace with rising prices.You hear that a lot - buy TIPS instead of gold if you want "protection" from inflation. What you don't hear a lot is that buying "insurance" from the government to "protect" you from inflation that the government creates is a lot like buying "protection" from the mob. There should be no need for such insurance, but there is. And, yes, "gold bricks in your living room" elevates the level of the discourse Tale No. 2: Unlike stocks, gold is real and tangible. So it will hold its value.OK, another not-so-subtle housing bubble-gold bubble tie in, which, if I were writing an anti-gold piece, I'd probably go for too. What's funny is that Money Magazine was so late to warn their readers about the housing bubble, yet so early to warn of a gold bubble. Very odd... Can it get any more stupid than "The truth is, no one really needs gold"? Then why the heck does it cost $1,100 an ounce? Is every single holder of the world just plain nuts? Central banks too? What is most irksome about all the historical gold vs. stocks comparisons is that you can make whatever argument you'd like depending upon what time periods you pick and, while I'll be the first to admit that gold was great in the 70s, horrible in the 80s and 90s, and now great again, you'll never read in Money Magazine that stocks were horrible in the 70s, great in the 80s and 90s, and bad for the last ten years ... advertisers like Vanguard probably wouldn't be pleased. Tale No. 3: Despite its spectacular run, gold is still cheap by historical standards.Hello... People are rushing to buy Nasdaq stocks and Las Vegas houses. Okay, but is gold at least attractively valued? A common tool used to determine if an asset is cheap is its price/earnings ratio, which takes what an asset is trading for and divides that by the profits it produces. But because gold doesn't generate earnings, that's impossible to ascertain.Granted, buying gold at $400 an ounce a few years ago was a much better idea than buying it at over $1,000 today, but, trying to "value" gold is a fools' game. Moreover, trying to value gold by looking at the P/Es of the biggest gold mining companies is even worse since changes in the gold price directly affect the 'E' in 'P/E'. Assessing the relative value of the primary input to a company's bottom line by looking at how investors value the company's shares? You can't get there from here. And, as we learned back in 2008, gold and gold stocks are two entirely different things - valuing the former using the latter is about the dumbest thing I've ever read. Tale No. 4: As the world sours on the U.S. dollar, the demand for gold will take off.Yes, like many others in the world, China would like to buy a lot more gold but is a bit put off at the rising price - a common dilemma these days. It would have been helpful to note that, while they don't like the rising price, they do like the metal, having announced purchases last year in the amount of 400 tonnes with reports of future buying expected to be in the thousands of tonnes. Some think recent shifts in the global economy's balance of power are what's causing gold prices to spike.Kudos for mentioning this very important factoid. But the fear that gold is going to replace the dollar as the world's store of value is largely unfounded. The fact is, governments don't act like pure currency speculators. They hold dollars for economic and political reasons that go beyond the day-today value of the buck. Even with its recent purchases of gold, China still holds 20 times more of its reserves in the greenback than in gold.Yes, and they'd like to get that ratio much, much lower, down to less than 10-to-1... And as this metal gets more expensive, central banks are becoming price-sensitive. A deputy governor of the Bank of China in early December said higher prices might slow that country's gold purchases.Everybody wants to get a good deal and the Chinese central bank is no exception. What would you expect them to say as they contemplate the purchase of another 9,000 tonnes of gold, "We think gold is under-valued so we're buying more?" It's more than a little interesting to note that, in addition to being the word's number one holder of U.S. dollars, China is now the world's number one producer and consumer of gold. If they could trade many more of their dollars for gold without causing the global financial system to collapse, they probably would. If you fear the dollar's slide, there are far easier (and cheaper) ways to wager against it. "The U.S. economy is in some serious trouble down the road, but I'm not going to pay this much for insurance," says Steve Leuthold, chief investment officer for the Leuthold Group.Buying foreign stocks makes sense, but it's not an either-or decision - you can own both and, as we saw not long ago, gold can be quite resilient when foreign stocks are falling to pieces. Tale No. 5: The "smart money" is buying gold. So you should too.OK, I haven't really been keeping track - this is at least conspiracy theory reference #2... But before you join this movement, consider who these converts are. Paulson made money betting correctly that tens of thousands of mortgage loans would go bust in 2007 and 2008. As for Einhorn, he's best known as a short-seller -- someone who wagers that stocks are going to go down. In other words, it's really Wall Street's version of the same doomsday crowd that's caught the gold bug. It would be different if, say, Warren Buffett was buying up this stuff. He isn't.Don't get me wrong, I like Warren Buffet a lot but it's worth remembering that he bought about $100 million in silver back in the late-1990s for $5 an ounce and then sold it almost a decade later at $7 or $8 an ounce, less than half its current price. He's not exactly the go-to guy when it comes to investing in precious metals and neither is Nouriel Roubini who, like most economists, probably has an aversion to the yellow metal because of the mere fact that the stuff selling for over $1,000 an ounce makes him lay in bed sometimes late at night wondering whether he wasted seven years of his life studying something that, not only has failed the world so miserably in recent years - contemporary economic theory where "sound money" is not required - but could be fundamentally wrong. So you'd do well to heed the warning of economist Nouriel Roubini, who was ahead of the pack in predicting the credit crisis. People who argue that there's economic justification for gold prices continuing their rise, he wrote recently, "are just talking nonsense."What is really "nonsense" is the idea that you can keep saying that stocks are a good investment and gold isn't for an entire ten year period when it should be obvious to the most casual observer that the opposite has been true. Money Magazine, it's been a great ten years (for me, but not for you) and, with this, I bid you a fond farewell - I'll seriously consider restarting my subscription in three to five years when the next bull market in stocks begins. |