@ Supply Chain Management

No sooner than I had posted yesterday: ‘Scuse me but who sprung the volatility back?, than I saw this little tidbit:

Geithner plans trip to Britain and Germany

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner will confer with finance officials in Britain and Germany next week about ways to restore global confidence in the financial system on a trip.

The Treasury Department announced the trip Thursday after a rough day on global financial markets. The Dow Jones industrial average fell 376 points, its biggest point drop since February 2009.

Investors are concerned that the debt problems in Greece and Portugal will spill over to other countries in Europe and threaten to derail the economic recovery in the United States and elsewhere.

Investors are not concerned that the debt problems in Greece and Portugal will spill over to other countries in Europe as much as they’re aware that the debt problems in their own countries will be shoved into the spotlight sooner or later. Right now, sooner is pulling ahead of later and that is cause for panic. None of these administrations have the spine to deal with these debts. Why? Because these debts cannot be paid without causing a global disruption of some sort or worse a collective default.

So what now? The Euro zone is going to engage in quantitative easing aka debasing the euro – the time honored way of keeping up appearances.

Only pathos grows as small men squeeze farce out of tragedy. Remember, that the powers that be have managed to keep the sun shining for nearly a year and a half, they can and will keep the moon shining for at least half as much.

It’s time to save the moon.

I’m about as far as anyone can get from the professed purpose of this blog i.e. Supply Chain Management. However, there is a method to this peripatetic diversion that is biased to anything but Supply Chain Management. The truth, according to me, is that it really doesn’t matter whether you’re sourcing in China or India, or whether faulty gas pedals are being found in the Lunar Rover now or how Cadmium and Miley Cyrus’s jewelry came together and made their way hand in hand onto Walmart’s shelves.

What does matter though is the fire that is being stoked in the world’s markets? And the world of the supply chain is very tightly linked to this world market but one link removed.

Think for a minute in the sense that the world financial markets didn’t exist and we only had the physical market at hand. It would be an easy tell about the interconnectedness of the supply chain and the physical exchange and transfer of goods over the counter. But back to the real world, the financial markets act as an intermediary in the financing of production and transportation of goods (and of late services) all over the world and their direction to markets all around the world, valuing everything from the debt of governments as well as the stability of firms engaged in the very production of goods and so on. And right now, there is an epic battle being waged as to the control of these markets. And not for one minute are the powerful parties in this struggle disinterested parties to the outcome. The three parties to this struggle are the financial firms and banks that control (at the behest of their clients of course) huge amounts of capital, governments that supposedly represent their citizenry and control enormous tax receipts and perpetual debts or the general public that have their retirements and houses on the line here. The truth is that only the last party to this struggle has but a squeaky voice in all of this and is also the weakest link.

Yet, in all our theoretical supply chain hokum, it is the consumer that is the main driver of everything – and here in lies the troubling dislocation. The consumer is in dire straits and without a rebounding job market or ever rising asset class that can spring some liquidity, there’s just not enough juice to keep all of the supply chain links functioning.

I’m laughing right now (false bravado, really) but I posted the below graph to the day (See my blog post on April 27th: Two conflicting reports: Who decides?) of what must have been the sunniest day this side of the great recession. Compare the two charts of volatility, one from the last post and one from today.

April 27th, 2010	May 20th, 2010

And a close up of what has transpired in the last thirty days set against the recent past, below is the VIX from the beginning of the year:

That is nothing short of an explosion of fear in the financial markets. Do you feel the fear yet in the supply chains? It is coming.

And a quote from the previous post:

“I’m certainly interested in spending now that the stock market seems so relaxed,” said Dan Schrenk, an information technology consultant, as he stood outside a Best Buy store in the Portland suburb of Beaverton.

I wonder how Dan Schrenk is feeling today?

And how does my consequent statement look like:

As the left side of the above chart shows, complacency can last quite a long time and so cannot be read to indicate that something altogether violent and volatile is impending.

Well, I was wrong because something violent and volatile was brewing and it just made a first visitation. Now, we get to see how those Animal spirits will hold up. We also get to see, what this administration has in store for us and also what their allies in power all over the globe as well. I can hazard a guess, they will double down, even triple down their reckless attempts to save us (and their ill-gotten and ill-deserved gains). But given how far they’ve held up the sun, you can almost be sure that they can hold up the moon for at least half as long.

Now as for supply chains, you can be sure that if you’re not tabling business continuity plans that take into account financing, transportation and manufacturing disruptions, political games, street riots, tariffs, protectionism and the like, you’re about to get a rude awakening. I thought I’d never say this but Inventory is about to be king and the customer, well, he’s a serf now.

Supply chains, especially those that have become enormously complex over long distances don’t have to exist – it is not an iron clad feature of human experience. In fact, it might even be a bug – it hasn’t existed in human history but for the brief blip that has been this three decade or so experiment as well as the Silk Road but that had quite a different structure altogether.

Say it aloud, these supply chains don’t have to exist. And that’s the truth. Maybe, a different sort of supply chain will spring up – local and short instead of global and long. Or something else entirely.

So in the big picture, this sophistication in supply chain structure, technology and management is relevant because the scale and scope has been expanding these last thirty years and at a tremendous pace. As the need to understand, manage and control has grown, so has the need been met in this particular fashion. The promise of future continuing growth in both scale and scope is premised on reaching the unwashed masses – or those who are yet to attain to our supposed state of development. Yet, there is not any universal law of progress that dictates that it should be so – we could head in the other direction i.e. devolve to the state of underdevelopment of those we planned to grown to envelop.

So this is very much like a locomotive that is running at break neck speed on a track that is only being laid as the engine rolls forward with a lever attached to the locomotive itself. What’s more, we find that the need for speed has been met only by burning up the coaches that were once attached to the locomotive. Very soon, there will only be an engine running on inertia towards a track that is at an end.

This is a story coming out of India – out of US Sec of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to India : India to Resist U.S. Pressure on Carbon Emission Caps.

India will resist pressure from the Obama administration to accept legally binding caps on its carbon emissions, the South Asian nation’s environment minister told visiting Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“There is simply no case for the pressure that we, who have been among the lowest emissions per capita, face to actually reduce emissions,” Jairam Ramesh said at a meeting today with Clinton in Gurgaon near New Delhi, according to a statement he issued to reporters. “And as if this pressure was not enough, we also face the threat of carbon tariffs on our exports to countries such as yours.”

Clinton is on a state visit to India meant to showcase trade and security ties and seek common ground on climate change and arms control. India has said it will reject any new treaty to limit global warming that makes it reduce emissions because that will undermine the country’s energy consumption, transportation and food security.

The climate-change bill that passed the U.S. House on June 26 calls for carbon-based tariffs if countries like China and India don’t adopt their own greenhouse gas controls by 2020. The U.S. said its push for higher environmental standards is not aimed at limiting the economic progress of nations, including India.

And,

“Legally binding” emissions targets won’t be acceptable for India, Ramesh said. “It’s going to be impossible to sell in our democratic system.”

Clinton said she is confident that the U.S. and India can devise a plan that changes the way energy is produced, consumed and conserved, helping to create additional investments and jobs. The two countries must also expand the use of renewable energy in India, especially for rural electrification.

Well, that’s one down. And the remaining player for large scale emissions out of a developing country is China – one country that has significant leverage over the US by way of financing its debt. I’d think that the only thing that one would hear out of the US Sec of State along this line in China is a short peep.

Now, harken back to the expectation set by the retail consultant in the earlier post:

"Suppliers are going to have to absorb the cost increases," retail industry consultant Burt P Flickinger III said Wednesday.

Just what is this expectation based on?

Mentioned in the above news item is a provision in the climate-change bill that calls for carbon-based tariffs on countries like China and India that don’t adopt greenhouse gas controls by 2020. Well, we’ve got till about 2020 to return to growth over here or junk the over-the-top sanctimoniousness of the climate-change bill because the last time that tariffs were raised during a sustained contraction, the resultant was not a pretty sight.

Besides, destroying the planet is an equal opportunity thing – destroying one’s economy is a national choice.

More quickly that it began, the Banking crisis is over screams the headline from this Time article. You might as well believe it now that the experts journalists have declared it over:

But, the great banking crisis of 2008 is over. It began last September 15 when Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy and bottomed when Citigroup (C) traded below $1 last month. Most analysts believe that mortgage-backed securities which included packages of subprime home loans failed when mortgage default rates went up and housing prices raced down. That is only partially true. Banks made a tremendous series of ill-advised loans to private equity firms, hedge funds, commercial real estate holders, and the average man with a credit card balance which he cannot pay.

Yes, those are pretty much all the actors in this saga. However, what the article fails to deliver is why despite identifying these actors, it doesn’t explain how the crisis has indeed passed i.e. it is high on events and actors but low on rationale – it reminds me of cherry picking the evidence. For example,

Wells Fargo (WFC) indicated that it made about $3 billion in the first quarter of the year and declared its buyout of the deeply troubled Wachovia to be a success. Wells Fargo (WFC) said that the low cost of money from the government combined with a surging demand for mortgages was all the medicine that it required.

So where is this surging demand for mortgages coming from? Mortgage applications surge 30% and that’s just for the week of March 20. But,

The Mortgage Bankers Association said its seasonally adjusted index of mortgage applications, which includes both purchase and refinance loans, increased 32.2% to 1,159.4 for the week ended March 20. Refinancing accounted for 78.5% of all applications.

Now, putting just these two data points together, one would hazard a guess that a stabilization of home prices is not what this points to. What about housing inventory and also the prices of homes given the current conditions? You can get the data from the National Association of Realtors Statistics: Existing Home Sales and Sales prices of Existing Homes.

The inventory (in terms of months of supply of existing homes) is unchanged from 1 year ago and as we enter the season for home sales, we shall have to see how it goes.

However, what should be noted from the two tables above is that for virtually unchanged supply of homes, the average home prices have decreased 15.5% nationally. So what belies this sort of optimism? But Ian MacIntyre is talking about the crisis and not whether the residential real estate is about to improve. But what if this is but a temporary floor which soon gives way – wouldn’t the banks be back in the doghouse then? On a side note, perhaps, the best indicator of the fact (some time in the future) that the housing market has stabilized will be an onslaught of “How to get rich through foreclosures” schemes. I’m not trying to be funny here but honey to be had does bring bees.

So what does this have to do with the supply chain for crying out loud? Take a look at the consumer confidence which is at the lowest level since it was instituted as a measure.

The road to recovery looks like a long and winding one.

We’re in the show your cards stage of the shell game that we’ve been playing for a while – the greater part of more than a decade. It feels like we’ve been played but that’s only because we’re not really the players – we’re the pawns in a high stakes game.

Consider one of the players – China. Now, note how the headlines changed in a matter of weeks:

Jan 8, 2009 – U.S. debt is losing its appeal in China

At first glance, the declining Chinese appetite for U.S. debt -apparent in a series of hints from Chinese policy makers over the past two weeks, with official statistics due for release in the next few days – comes at an inopportune time. On Tuesday, the U.S.president-elect, Barack Obama, said Americans should get used to the prospect of "trillion-dollar deficits for years to come" as he seeks to finance an $800 billion economic stimulus package.

Feb 11, 2009 – China to stick with US bonds

Mr Luo, speaking at the Global Association of Risk Management’s 10th Annual Risk Management Convention, said:

For what it

A glimmer of sense starts filtering through… Banks still tightening loan standards

The article suggests

Many banks have made it harder for borrowers to obtain all kinds of loans over the last three months despite a $700 billion federal bailout program and a flurry of other bold moves to stem the worst financial crisis to hit the country since the 1930s.

yet brimming within you had to have detected the hardly restrained despair over the perceived double cross – It reads, “They (banks) take our money and refuse to lend it out…”. Expect the nonsense to get a whole lot more shrill just as sense was beginning to take hold.

This vindicates the following: Sense is as delicate as nonsense is compelling.

As bankers return to the norm (after that last mania has died), the question that remains really is what is the norm for a politician? Draw that norm and you have made some distance in setting the expectation of how bad this mess is going to get. There is a plethora of danged and damned danged stuff out there that form the repertoire of a seasoned interventionist (You might appreciate that the US government, and every other government in the world as well, is in full interventionist mode) – Price controls, wage controls, nationalization, funky money, funkier money, generic stimulus, targeted stimulus, “Dang, I hope this works” stimulus, quotas, protectionism, tariffs, Buy American – (What is American anymore?), unemployment, adjusted unemployment, severely one time adjusted unemployment, “we just stopped counting” – unemployment, war, senseless wars, senseless wars made sensible… In short, there is nothing sensible when it comes to politicians or the government.

So what does that mean to the supply chain at large. I can think of two possible impacts immediately.

1. Increased pace (perhaps tending to the frenetic) of lobbying efforts – When the government enters the playing field (and as of now, it is hovering and peddling influence at the periphery) as I expect that it will, firms up and down the supply chain will have to expend considerable lobbying influence to either keep the playing field as is or towards favorable terms. Naturally, the firms with deep pockets will benefits immensely from this whereas the smaller players in the supply chain (be it services such as 3PLs or carriers or actual suppliers of raw materials or intermediary products) will lose out unless they get their collective pockets together. Of course, frantic money encircling government begets not efficiency of investment (perish the thought) but beggars scandal – expectation of many money scandals is now firmly on my screen.

2. Stimuli – Can anyone put forth the reasoning behind the stimulus? Why stimulate anything in the first place and why does the government have to do the stimulating? The second part first – only the government has the “magical ability” to create something out of nothing – in other words, when the government says, “Let there be money.” Poof!! “And there was money.” Let