prev

Money Talks: Donation Trends as a Leading Indicator for the 2012 Presidential Election

Conclusion:  While Obama has a clear edge in polls, indicators, and electoral college math, he has a less decisive edge in fundraising and is trailing his 2008 performance. 


As we’ve been writing in recent political notes, the outlook for President Obama’s re-election odds currently look very positive based on a number of indicators.  The first and foremost for us is likely our own proprietary indicator, the Hedgeye Election Index (HEI).  The indicator currently has President Obama’s chances of re-election at just over 59.3%.  The HEI is based on a number of real time economic indicators that correlate closely with Obama’s performance in conventional polls.

 

Money Talks: Donation Trends as a Leading Indicator for the 2012 Presidential Election - chart1

 

On InTrade, the world’s largest predictive market, the chance of Obama being re-elected is currently pegged at 60.4% and that figure has held steadily above 60% since March.  This followed a relatively lengthy period of time in which, as can be seen in the chart below, President Obama’s chances of re-election were much closer to 50%.  In fact, in September and October of 2011, the chances were solidly below 50%.

 

Money Talks: Donation Trends as a Leading Indicator for the 2012 Presidential Election - chart2

 

In traditional polls comparing Romney versus Obama, we see a similar trend.  Specifically, if we look at the last ten major polls that compare Obama and Romney, Obama wins in 7 of 10, Romney wins in 2 of 10, and one poll is a tie.  Based on the Real Clear Politics poll average, Obama currently has an advantage of +3.1 versus Romney. 

 

As we drill down into the electoral vote math as driven by state-by-state polls, Obama’s situation also looks convincing.  Most pundits, including us, agree that Obama would safely carry 14 states, mostly on the coasts, which would garner him 186 electoral votes.  Meanwhile, it is likely that Romney safely carries 20 states in the South and West, which would garner him 156 electoral votes.  Since the magic number of electoral votes needed is 270, this leaves many states still up for grabs. 

 

In the scenario that Romney then won all of the states that Bush won in 2008, which includes Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, New Mexico, and Nevada, Romney would receive an additional 112 electoral college votes.   Assuming that occurs, Romney’s total would then be 268 total Electoral College votes, which would obviously still be two short of the total needed for Romney to win the Presidency.  As well, a lot would have to go right for Romney to win every single one of the aforementioned states.

 

So, as things stand today, an Obama re-election looks likely.  There are two factors that we think may not be totally accounted for in today’s polls and indicators.  The first is deterioration in the economy over the next couple of quarters, a factor that is becoming increasingly likely.  The second is political fundraising, which has historically been a good leading indicator for electoral success.

 

In fact, political scientist Adam R. Brown published a paper titled, “Does Money Buy Votes? The Case of Self-Financed Gubernatorial Candidates, 1998 – 2008”, that looked at this the relationship between money and votes.   His conclusion was:

 

“Because campaign spending correlates strongly with election results, observers of American politics frequently lament that money seems to buy votes. However, the apparent effect of spending on votes is severely inflated by omitted variable bias: The best candidates also happen to be the best fundraisers. Acting strategically, campaign donors direct their funds toward the “best” candidates, who would be more likely to win even in a moneyless world. These donor behaviors spuriously amplify the correlation between spending and votes. As evidence for this argument, I show that (non-strategic) self-financed spending has no statistical effect on election results, whereas (strategic) externally-financed spending does.”

 

If we take this a step further, it implies that in a Presidential election the money that is raised directly by the President, or his competitor, versus by his Party or a Super Pac, is strategic in nature and the most likely indicator of success.  In this vein, Obama looks to be struggling.

 

Currently, President Obama has raised only $196 million as of the end of Q1 2012 for his re-election campaign.  This is almost $40 million less than was raised by the same point in the 2008 election.   Further, donations by specific industries are down dramatically from the last election.  Most notably, donations from the investment industry are down -68% and donations from law firms are down -47%.

 

Not only are Obama’s fundraising efforts lagging, but it appears that Democrats in aggregate have been lagging Republicans.  Certainly some of this has to do with the fact that the Republicans had a Presidential primary that attracted a large amount of donations, but the trends remain somewhat staggering versus 2008.  The allocation of donations, so far at least, has shifted towards the Republicans in almost every major sector of the economy, even from unions.  The chart below highlights these trends.

 

Money Talks: Donation Trends as a Leading Indicator for the 2012 Presidential Election - chart3

 

If we look at corporations exclusively, a very similar trend emerges.  The chart below shows donations from major corporate sectors for 2008, 2010, and 2012. Once again, we see the trends shifting steadily towards the Republicans. (The reason some of these percentages do not add up to 100% is due to some money going to third parties and some being classified by the Center for Responsive Politics as “soft” money.)

 

Money Talks: Donation Trends as a Leading Indicator for the 2012 Presidential Election - chart4

 

The most staggering shift in donations is coming from, no surprise, the financial sector.  As an example, in 2008, 75% of donations from Goldman Sachs went to Democrats.  In 2012, only 21% of donations from Goldman Sachs went to Democrats.  Now, to be fair, part of this is once again that the Republicans just had a competitive Presidential primary, but as the chart below highlights these trends also occurred in 2010.

 

Money Talks: Donation Trends as a Leading Indicator for the 2012 Presidential Election - chart5

 

 

 

The other key area where the Republicans are leading the Democrats in the cycle is in Super Pac funding.  There are two Super PACs supporting Romney, American Crossroads and Restore Our Future, which have a combined $34 million on hand.  Meanwhile, there is one Super PAC that is supporting President Obama, Priorities USA, which has $2.8 million on hand.  Studies suggest Super PAC money is not as much of an indicator of electoral success as direct donations to the candidate, but, nonetheless, even here the Romney edge is meaningful.

 

In conclusion, while President Obama continues to look solid in many of the real time indicators we follow, the money appears to be flowing to the Republicans and Romney.  In the arms race that is a Presidential campaign, money talks.   

 

 

 

Daryl G. Jones

 

Director of Research

 

 

 


A Refreshed Look at Asian and Latin American G/I/P Trends

Conclusion: Growth Slowing continues to be the predominant theme across both regions and the monetary policy outlook is generally less supportive than it was 3-6 months ago. Combined with our forward-looking G/I/P analysis, this backdrop makes consensus valuation/"buying opportunity" calls risky from a TREND-duration perspective.

 

On red days like today, naturally higher-beta names lead to the downside from a single stock perspective; the same can generally be said from a country risk perspective as well, given the relatively high volatility of the various emerging market equity indices, currencies, and bond markets. Rather than overreact to these proactively-predicted drawdowns, we find it helpful from a research perspective to head back to the trenches of fundamental analysis in order to refresh our general thoughts on each region.

 

GROWTH

Looking at the trailing data points out of both Asia and Latin America, it’s clear that rates of economic growth continues to make lower-highs across both regions. The ~2yr trend of slowing Real GDP growth continued unabated in 4Q11, with Asia (+6.8% YoY) and Latin America (+3.2% YoY) both posting headline numbers that were the lowest since 2H09 for each region, respectively.

 

A Refreshed Look at Asian and Latin American G/I/P Trends - 1

 

For a more up-to-date measure of regional demand, we turn to each region’s GDP-weighted Imports, with the premise that the growth rate of the quantity of goods imported represents a broad read-through into the demand trends of a particular country or region – irrespective of their ultimate destinations (consumption, fixed asset investment, manufacturing and re-export, etc.). As the chart below shows (though MAR ’12) demand in Asia and Latin America continues to slow:

 

A Refreshed Look at Asian and Latin American G/I/P Trends - 2

 

INFLATION

Looking at each region’s trailing inflation trends, a bifurcation has emerged in timing, with Asian CPI peaking from a cyclical perspective in 3Q11 and Latin American CPI having done the same in 4Q11. In Asia, inflation (+3.6% YoY) hasn’t been this slow since 4Q09; in Latin America since 3Q10 (+6.6% YoY):

 

A Refreshed Look at Asian and Latin American G/I/P Trends - 3

 

The trend of slowing inflation across both regions has been supported by relative currency strength vs. global food and energy prices, which have become increasingly driven by U.S. monetary policy. Still, despite what the Chinese, Brazilians and South Koreans have identified as a Fed/ECB-induced “flood of destabilizing liquidity”, their currencies have recently experienced less downside on the margin relative to the USD than key commodity prices over the LTM – thus providing a disinflationary tailwind to each region’s CPI indices:

 

A Refreshed Look at Asian and Latin American G/I/P Trends - ADXY

 

A Refreshed Look at Asian and Latin American G/I/P Trends - LACI 

 

POLICY

Monetary policy, which is far less easy and insightful to aggregate, is fairly bifurcated across both region – a noteworthy delta from late in 2011, when the country-to-country outlooks collectively sang the tune of easier policy across the board. While forward-looking currency markets generally continue to suggest easier policy ahead across both regions, forward-looking interest rate markets are pricing in a wide range of outcomes over the NTM – largely due to expectations of easier policy (on the margin) being pared back over the last 3-6 months:

 

A Refreshed Look at Asian and Latin American G/I/P Trends - 6

 

When analyzed on a holistic basis country-to-country, both the direction and magnitude of anticipated monetary policy throughout various counties in Asia and Latin America leads to some clear divergences, as outlined in the chart below:

 

A Refreshed Look at Asian and Latin American G/I/P Trends - 7

 

G/I/P OUTLOOK 

Looking ahead, our predictive tracking algorithms suggest Asian Real GDP growth bottoms here in 2Q, while that of Latin America slows at a demonstrably slower rate in the quarter. Jumping the 3Q, our models are currently pointing to a modest inflection point in the slopes of both region’s rates of economic growth. The 3-6 month inflation outlook for both regions is fairly muted from both a directional and magnitude perspective. We are comfortable with this fundamental outlook provided we see a continued Deflating of the Inflation across key commodity markets. As always, we will continue to vet all the relevant information (market prices, economic data, policy maneuvers, etc.) on a daily basis to either confirm or dispel this baseline scenario, flagging to you in real-time any meaningful divergences.

 

Darius Dale

Senior Analyst

 

A Refreshed Look at Asian and Latin American G/I/P Trends - 8

 

A Refreshed Look at Asian and Latin American G/I/P Trends - 9


MCD: WHERE TO FROM HERE?

McDonald’s continues to be the de facto safety trade of the restaurant space.  Our opinion at this point is that there are some subtle changes taking place as the new Chief Executive Office takes over that are worth noting.

 

On Friday we took the opportunity to ask Don Thompson what he thinks his legacy will be when he finds himself – hopefully long from now – closing in on retirement as Jim Skinner currently is.  His response was, in our view, interesting in that he mentioned the “Plan to Win” but also spoke of the importance of growing organically and building new restaurants coincidentally.  Specifically, Thompson stated that “we are much smarter now” and that McDonald’s “can walk and chew gum at the same time” [organic unit growth].  We do not view this as a negative for the company but it does represent a lower return growth profile for the company than we have seen over the past five years.

 

Thompson’s three “global priorities” are:

  1. Optimizing the menu [transitioning from dollar menu]
  2. Modernizing the customer experience [remodel/reimage program]
  3. Broadening accessibility to Brand McDonald’s [unit growth]

Unfortunately, the McDonald’s conference call was littered with headwinds facing the company that are, on a relative basis, greater than those facing competitors such as Yum Brands.  McDonald’s highlighted three major hurdles facing the company in 2012.  Firstly, the economic climate remains challenging, particularly in Europe.  Secondly, consumer confidence remains varied across markets.  Finally, the company highlighted “economic pressures and inflationary costs”.  Beef has been a key driver of these cost pressures.

 

Simply comparing McDonald’s to Yum Brands under the specter of these three factors paints McDonald’s in an unfavorable light relative to its rival. Yum has shrugged off concerns related to China’s rate of growth but McDonald’s’ exposure to Europe seems to be causing some concern among management personnel and investors alike. 

 

 

WHAT WAS NOT SAID

 

Changes on the margin are all-important and we see the decrease in emphasis on beverages as a strategy going forward as being important.  While management said that “the U.S. also continues to strengthen its position as a as a beverage destination”, total beverage units were only up 6% versus up 20% in 4Q11, 16% in 3Q11, and 29% in 2Q11.  In fact, the word “beverage” was only mentioned twice on the 1Q12 call.  The 4Q11, 3Q11, and 2Q11 calls included 4, 8, and 18 mentions of the word “beverage”, respectively.  The word “McCafé” was mentioned twice on the 1Q12 call.  The 4Q11, 3Q11, and 2Q11 calls included zero, 7, and 11 mentions of the word “McCafé”, respectively. 

 

The evidence suggests that beverages are increasingly becoming a less important part of the vocabulary from McDonald’s’ management team.  With that in mind, foremost in our thoughts is what the company’s strategy will be to maintain top-line momentum over the next few months.

 

MCD: WHERE TO FROM HERE? - mentions mcd

 

UNITED STATES

 

The beverage initiative last year clearly helped McDonald’s take share from competitors.  Don Thompson did provide an interesting take on the industry when he said, “around the world we continue to gain market share in an industry with minimal-to-negative growth”.  For a frame of reference, the Justice Holdings presentation touting the upcoming Burger King presentation cited an industry growth number of +6%!

 

For McDonald’s, one of the core initiatives in the U.S. this year is an attempt to evolve the company’s value proposition with the new Extra Value Menu and, in doing so, turn away from the existing dollar menu.  Beginning in April, McDonald’s is focusing the menu on four tiers (excluding combo meals):

  1. Premium ($4.50-5.50)
  2. Core ($3.50-4.50)
  3. The new Extra Value Menu ($1.20-3.50)
  4. The Dollar Menu

Given that the company is guiding to 4.5-5.5% inflation in the U.S. in 2012, we believe that management is attempting to manage check and margin by forcing customers to trade up to the Extra Value Menu from the Dollar Menu.  This belief is supported by the fact that one of the biggest changes that the company is undertaking is the addition of fresh baked cookies and ice cream cones to the Dollar Menu in place of small drinks and small fries. 

 

Our view remains that this is a big risk for McDonald’s.  If this change goes against consumer preference, there is a

possibility that satisfaction scores will be negatively impacted.  When we spoke to the company in March when the menu changes were first announced, we learned that a “mini-combo meal” offering may bundle the fries, burger, and drink but a decision has not been made on that yet.  Still, ordering the $1 items individually is no longer an option. 

 

MCD: WHERE TO FROM HERE? - mcd us

 

 

EUROPE

 

Turning to Europe, McDonald’s has been significantly impacted by the macroeconomic environment there, more so than any other multi-national restaurant company due to its relatively larger exposure to the region.  Europe represents 40% of total revenues for McDonald’s and 39% of operating profit.  As Don Thompson said, Europe is a region that “continues to experience unprecedented economic challenges from widespread austerity measures, concerns over the sovereign debt crisis and unemployment levels averaging about 10%”.

 

The company has long been focused on upgrading the customer experience; 80% of the system’s interiors have been refreshed as well as 50% of the exteriors.  Roughly 150 McCafés will be added to the Europe system in 2012.

 

MCD: WHERE TO FROM HERE? - mcd eu

 

 

APMEA

 

In APMEA, McDonald’s called out the challenging economic conditions in China (8.5% same-store sales), ongoing “tightening” in Australia, and uneven results in Japan.  Again, the company is looking to value as a strategy with the recent launch of the Loose Change Menu in Australia last month.

 

We think that APMEA is an important component of the long-term strategy for McDonald’s but, given that it only comprises 18% of EBIT, the near term story will be dictated far more by business in the US and Europe, which account for 43% and 38% of EBIT, respectively.

 

MCD: WHERE TO FROM HERE? - mcd apmea

 

 

CONCLUSION

 

McDonald’s trends are not disastrous but going forward, we see plenty to be concerned about.  Specifically, lapping the outsized performance of the U.S. business last summer, which was driven by impressive beverage sales, and maintaining momentum in Europe are two key issues.  As we wrote earlier, beverage unit growth is sequentially slowing so we believe that catalyst is no longer a major factor. 

 

Given the pending IPO of Burger King and our view that the brand is “too big to fix”, it struck a chord when McDonald’s management emphasized that it is “willing and able to invest for continued growth and to widen our competitive advantages”.  In reimaging 2,400 restaurants globally (800 U.S., 900 Europe, and 475 APMEA) and rebuilding 200 U.S. locations, the company is clearly in a position of strength versus its closest rivals.  The longer-term outlook for McDonald’s is positive, with competitors like Wendy’s and Burger King floundering, but growth in that segment of quick service pales in comparison to fast casual/specialty.  We would look elsewhere for top long QSR ideas at this price.  Jack in the Box is one company that we believe has upside potential from here.

 

Globally, the price factor flowing through the company’s income statement is roughly 3%.  With inflation pressuring margins, particularly in the U.S., sales trends will take on an increased importance.  Given the difficult top-line compares and uncertainty around the transition from Dollar Menu to Extra Value Menu, our conviction on the top-line continuing to meet consensus is tenuous at best.

 

MCD: WHERE TO FROM HERE? - mcd quadrant

 

 

Howard Penney

Managing Director

 

Rory Green

Analyst

  


Hedgeye Statistics

The total percentage of successful long and short trading signals since the inception of Real-Time Alerts in August of 2008.

  • LONG SIGNALS 80.64%
  • SHORT SIGNALS 78.61%

European Banking Monitor: More Euro-Carriage Spokes Snap

Below are key European banking risk monitors, which are included as part of Josh Steiner and the Financial team's "Monday Morning Risk Monitor".  If you'd like to receive the work of the Financials team or request a trial please email .


Key Takeaways:

 

* Spanish and Italian swaps continue to rule the day with Italian swaps, in particular, climbing higher. French and German CDS widened by 15 and 12 bps, respectively on concerns around the ongoing deterioration in economic conditions across the Continent, and expectations that the bailout will further encumber both countries. French elections are adding further uncertainty to the economic outlook. EURIBOR-OIS continues to drift sideways as the ECB’s overnight deposit facility holds elevated, near all-time highs. 

  

* EU financial companies were mixed last week, but French banks saw their swaps widen noticeably. BNP Paribas (+25 bps to 263 bps), Credit Agricole (+31 bps to 320 bps), Societe Generale (+24 bps to 339 bps) all widened meaningfully. Recall that there was concern around the counterparty exposure to French banks in 2H11 that principally weighed on US banks, so it's interesting to note the current, short-term divergence.

-------------

 

Security Market Program – For the sixth straight week the ECB's secondary sovereign bond purchasing program, the Securities Market Program (SMP), purchased no sovereign paper for the latest week ended 4/20; the total program remains  at €214B.

 

The standstill comes as market risk returns across Europe.  While there are other channels to suck up sovereign bond issuance, including through funding from the two 36-month LTRO programs, the SMP’s lack of buying may send a negative signal to market participants that are already weary of the sovereign and bank risks bubbling in Spain. Add to that uncertainty around the Dutch government as PM Rutte handed over his resignation this AM after failure over the weekend to agree on budget cuts and the unexpected performance of far-right and anti-Eurozone National Front leader Marine Le Pen, who despite a third place finish behind Socialist Francois Hollande (28.5%) and Nicolas Sarkozy (27.1%) in Round 1 of the French Presidential elections, took a record high 18.2% of the vote.

 

European Banking Monitor: More Euro-Carriage Spokes Snap - 11. SMP

 

Euribor-OIS spread – The Euribor-OIS spread (the difference between the euro interbank lending rate and overnight indexed swaps) measures bank counterparty risk in the Eurozone. The OIS is analogous to the effective Fed Funds rate in the United States.  Banks lending at the OIS do not swap principal, so counterparty risk in the OIS is minimal.  By contrast, the Euribor rate is the rate offered for unsecured interbank lending.  Thus, the spread between the two isolates counterparty risk. The Euribor-OIS spread tightened by 1 bps to 40 bps.

 

European Banking Monitor: More Euro-Carriage Spokes Snap - 11. euribor

 

ECB Liquidity Recourse to the Deposit Facility – The ECB Liquidity Recourse to the Deposit Facility measures banks’ overnight deposits with the ECB.  Taken in conjunction with excess reserves, the ECB deposit facility measures excess liquidity in the Euro banking system.  An increase in this metric shows that banks are borrowing from the ECB.  In other words, the deposit facility measures one element of the ECB’s response to the crisis.  The latest overnight reading is €775.7B.

 

European Banking Monitor: More Euro-Carriage Spokes Snap - 11. facility

 

European Financials CDS Monitor – Bank swaps were wider in Europe last week for 23 of the 39 reference entities. The average widening was 0.3% and the median widening was 4.2%. French banks, in particular, saw their default probabilities rise notably week over week.

 

European Banking Monitor: More Euro-Carriage Spokes Snap - 11. banks

 

Matthew Hedrick

Senior Analyst


EZPW: IS THE PAWN BORROWER RUNNING OUT OF GOLD?

We thought the note below form our Financials Team highlighted an interesting data point related to gold from our Financials Team.  In effect, the largest pawn operators in the United States are reporting that their clients are basically running out of gold to pawn.  Cash America (CSH) reports this Thursday and will likely provide further confirmatory evidence of this trend (as well as disappointing earnings).

 

A New Issue in Pawn Lending: Clients Running Out of Gold

An ominous trend emerged from EZ Corporation's F2Q12 earnings report last week.  The company reported slowing growth in their U.S. pawn operations and lowered their guidance for FY 2012 by 6%.  Management said the reason for the decrease was a mix shift among pawn borrowers towards general merchandise and away from gold.  In other words, gold pawning is declining.  This manifested for EZPW in the form of a 14% decline in same store sales in retail jewelry in the U.S. (as distinct from scrap sales) and a 15% decline in gold volume overall.  

 

We saw a similar pattern out of FCFS earlier last week:  In the U.S., scrapping rose just 3% YoY, a decline of 11% on a per-store basis.  In Mexico, the story was similar, with -2% YoY total scrapping revenue and -20% on a per-store basis.  

 

EZPW management made three comments on the call that gave us pause:

- They noted that gold volume declines have been ongoing for at least three quarters (in terms of scrapping volumes, there have been four consecutive quarters of decline), but the revenue impact has been masked by rising gold prices.

- "Absolutely gold has been priced to some degree out of the range of some of our customers" - increasing gold prices are pushing retail gold out of reach for some borrowers.  The knock-on effect is that this gold is not recycled back into the community for use in future pawn transactions, so the available collateral in the community is diminished.

- The pawn customer is running out of gold: "Frankly, yes, their piggy banks are certainly emptier than they've been and what they have, they're hanging on to."  This implies higher redemption rates of pawn collateral as well as lower overall volume.  We find this quite plausible - while there are no hard statistics available, we expect that much of the gold that has been purchased by pop-up gold buyers and the like ends up as scrap and doesn't find its way back to the low-income borrower.  

 

Implications for the Industry

In our recent black book on this space, our primary concern with gold was a decline in the price of the commodity, not a decline in volume. However, from a revenue perspective, a volume decline has nearly the same effect. Margins would be unaffected, but revenue growth is directly linked to expanding volume.  We estimate the following as a rough heuristic for top line growth. Gold CAGR, store growth, and total revenue growth are actual values, leaving the 3% long-term same store sales estimate.  

Gold CAGR (tailwind): 9.6%

Store growth (tailwind): 5%

Same Store Sales (including gold volume increase): ~3%

-----------------------------------------

Total revenue CAGR: 18%

 

For gold-sensitive lenders, this tailwind appears to be set to become a significant headwind. Ongoing gold price increases mask the effect, but should the commodity reverse (as we believe is ultimately likely) then the problems compound.  

 

Where does this leave investors?  We return to our original conclusion, published with our Black Book on April 11th.  The best-positioned name, DFC Global (DLLR) has the least exposure to gold while still sharing the aggressive growth profile of the rest of the industry. Overall, we see Cash America (CSH) as being the worst posiitoned of the group through the combination of their high pawn (gold) exposure coupled with the highest relative exposure to US payday lending, where we see considerable regulatory risk. On the gold front, however, as the chart below shows, EZPW and FCFS are the two names with the highest gold exposure. Despite CSH's decline following the EZPW report (the stock was down roughly 5% compared to EZPW down 14%), we would still carry a short bias into the quarter. We are currently expecting $1.16 in EPS compared to consensus of $1.18.  

 

EZPW: IS THE PAWN BORROWER RUNNING OUT OF GOLD?  - chart1

 

 

 

Joshua Steiner, CFA

 

Allison Kaptur

 

Robert Belsky

 


THE HBM: MCD, DPZ, EAT, CAKE

THE HEDGEYE BREAKFAST MONITOR

 

HEDGEYE VIRTUAL PORTFOLIO POSITIONS

 

LONGS: JACK, SBUX

 

SHORTS:

 

MACRO NOTES

 

Commentary from CEO Keith McCullough

 

I believe my competitor at ISI is calling it a “Growth Problem Alert” today – we’ve been calling it #GrowthSlowing since Feb:

  1. GROWTH SLOWING – when we say that, we mean it globally. The words USA “de-coupling” is an Old Wall St word that has not worked in the last 5yrs. The world is as globally interconnected as it’s ever been and what policy does to the world’s reserve currency has very consequential impact on the intermediate-term slopes of growth and inflation.
  2. EUROPE – Spanish stocks are crashing again (down -23% since Growth Slowing started, globally in Feb – Hong Kong and India stock markets stopped going up in Feb too). The French Services PMI print for April was awful (46.1 vs 50.1 MAR) and Italian consumer confidence just hit a record low. Central planning not working. DAX snapping TREND support (6689).
  3. COPPER – the Doctor is getting tagged this morning, down -1.7% and in a Bearish Formation (bearish TRADE, TREND, and TAIL in our model). Commodity prices (or Bernanke’s Bubbles) look a lot like US Treasury Yields again. 10yr yield getting smoked to a fresh 2mth #GrowthSlowing low of 1.93%.

 Next SP500 support = 1356.

 

SUBSECTOR PERFORMANCE

 

THE HBM: MCD, DPZ, EAT, CAKE - subsector1

 

QUICK SERVICE

 

MCD: McDonald’s CEO Jim Skinner highlighted jobless claims during the conference call on Friday as being indicative of the soft macro environment.

 

DPZ: Domino’s holder Trian reported a passive stake of 4.4% down 7.2% in value at the end of 2011.

 

NOTABLE PERFORMANCE ON ACCELERATING VOLUME:

 

YUM: Yum Brands traded up 3.5% on accelerating volume. 

 

CMG: Chipotle traded down -2.7% on accelerating volume.

 

 

CASUAL DINING

 

EAT: Impressive numbers out of Brinker today.  3QFY12 EPS came in at $0.60 versus $0.56 consensus and company-owned comparable restaurant sales at Chili’s came in at 4.6% versus 2.3% consensus.  As the charts below illustrate, Chili’s made significant progress on the top line.  Two-year average trends improved significantly on a sequential basis despite the more difficult compare and lapping of the introduction of the lunch promotion in January 2011.  How much of that successful lapping was due to weather is the question of the day.  Any forward looking commentary from management pertaining to April trends will likely have a significant impact on where the stock ends up at the close today.  From what we know, it seems that traffic slowed over the duration of the quarter at Chili’s; traffic was up 1.8% for the quarter but March came in at +0.5%. 

 

THE HBM: MCD, DPZ, EAT, CAKE - chilis pod1

 

THE HBM: MCD, DPZ, EAT, CAKE - chilis comps detail

 

CAKE: Cheesecake Factory’s CEO, David Overton, was paid $4.1m for FY11, according to filings made with the SEC.  In 2010, he received $3.7m total compensation.

 

NOTABLE PERFORMANCE ON ACCELERATING VOLUME:

 

CBRL: Cracker Barrel bounced back after a soft day’s trading on Thursday.  Shareholder Sardar Biglari is trying to shake things up at the company.  Friday the stock closed above Thursday’s high.

 

BJRI: BJ’s Restaurants traded down on accelerating volume on Friday.  The stock received an upgrade on April 12thbut has sold off since. 

 

THE HBM: MCD, DPZ, EAT, CAKE - stocks

 

 

Howard Penney

Managing Director

 

Rory Green

Analyst

 


the macro show

what smart investors watch to win

Hosted by Hedgeye CEO Keith McCullough at 9:00am ET, this special online broadcast offers smart investors and traders of all stripes the sharpest insights and clearest market analysis available on Wall Street.

next