Energy & Commodities

Is There Still Opportunity in the Natural Gas Space?

Screen Shot 2014-01-31 at 1.10.39 PM

                                                                                                                                         Why upgrade?

 

The biggest story this week in oil and gas is declining profits and production and soaring project costs for the supermajors as disappointing fourth-quarter 2013 earnings come in, among other bad news for the big boys.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Chevron, Exxon Mobil and Shell spent more than $120 billion in 2013 to boost oil and gas output, but production is declining and they’re having a hard time justifying these costs.

Exxon Mobil’s fourth-quarter earnings, released yesterday, were down largely due to a 1.8% drop in oil and gas output and project delays in Canada and Kazakhstan. Q4 2013 earnings came in at $8.4 billion, down 16.1% from the previous year when it was at $10 billion.  Revenues fell to $110.9 billion in Q4 2013, well below market expectations.  This is down from $114.7 billion in Q4 2012.  

Then we have Shell, which issued a “significant” profit warning on 17 January, and whose Q4 2013 earnings of $2.9 billion were down from $5.6 billion for the same quarter in 2012.  Shell blames high exploration costs and problems in Nigeria for the most part. Overall, profits were down 71% based on earnings statements released on Thursday. Shell’s oil production was down 5% in 2013 to 3.25 million barrels per day, largely because of issues in Nigeria and overall natural decline in its mature oil fields.  

The situation is forcing Shell and its new CEO, Ben van Beurden (only a month at the helm), to rethink its strategy and start disposing of assets and refocusing this year.

Among other things, Shell is suspending its Arctic drilling program in Alaska. This decision also comes on the heels of a US Court of Appeals decision on 22 January that said the US Department of Interior had violated the law when it auctioned off exploration blocks in Alaska’s Chukchi Sea. It could just mean a break for Shell in the Arctic, or it could derail exploration here entirely—we’re not sure yet. To date, Shell has invested well over $5 billion in its Arctic drilling projects and spent six years fighting legal challenges from environmental groups.

Shell’s new CEO has a new, more conservative vision that involves disposing of some burdensome assets and perhaps looking at some more efficient projects down the line.

“We have lost some momentum in operational delivery, and we can sharpen up in a number of areas,” van Beurden said in a statement. “2014 will be a year where we are changing emphasis, to improve our returns and cash flow performance.”

Shell has agreed to sell $2.1 billion in holdings in Australia and Brazil and is said to be considering divesting some of its troublesome Nigeria assets. There has also been talk that Shell might sell off all or part of its $6.3 billion stake in Woodside Petroleum Ltd. The company has already sold around $300 million in assets in Q4 2013, including a liquids-rich shale play in Ohio.

Chevron is set to announce its Q4 2013 and full-year earnings today, while the expectations here are not the declines we have seen in Shell and Exxon, Chevron, too, is spending a lot on monster projects. Chevron’s Gorgon LNG project, for instance, is expected to come in at $54 billion, or $20 billion more than originally expected.

So this year will be a definitive year for the supermajors and we’ll be watching the divestments—and acquisitions—very carefully. At the same time, we’ll also be looking more closely at some small- and mid-cap companies who are managing to balance risk and reward at a better pace.  

This weeks report comes from Premium’s Inside Investor and Dan Dicker takes a look at the natural gas market and whether there are still good opportunities for investors. (See the full report below the introduction.)

Do also take a minute to find out about Oilprice Premium – we have a superb letter lined up this week and in addition to the reports you will have full access to the archive and receive the next 4 weeks letters completely free. There is no risk to you and you can cancel anytime within the 30 day free trial. Click here to find out more.

That’s it from us this week.

I hope you enjoy the below report and have a great weekend.

Best regards,

James Stafford
Editor, Oilprice.com

The proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline is unlikely to increase the pace of Canadian oil sands development, a U.S. State Department study said on Friday, raising pressure on President Barack Obama to approve a project environmentalists see as a major climate change problem.

The massive 11-volume environmental impact study released on Friday did not recommend whether President Barack Obama should grant or deny an application by TransCanadaCorp to build the $5.4 billion line, which would transport crude from Alberta’s oil sands to U.S. refineries.

But a State Department official who briefed reporters ahead of the report’s release said that blocking Keystone – or any pipeline – would do little to slow the expansion of Canada’s vast oil patch, maintaining the central finding of the State Department’s preliminary study issued last year.

The report’s publication opened a new and potentially final stage of an approval process that has dragged for more than five years, taking on enormous symbolic political significance, potentially helping define Obama’s legacy.

With another three-month review process ahead and no firm deadline for a decision on the 1,179-mile line, the issue threatens to drag into the 2014 congressional elections in November. Obama is under pressure from several vulnerable Democratic senators who favor the pipeline and face re-election at a time when Democrats are scrambling to hang on to control of the U.S. Senate.

…..more HERE

Ditch the Risk and Embrace the Upside

Adrian Day likes to think long term, and historical trends persuade him that the bull market in gold should continue for years to come. In this interview with The Gold Report, the founder of Adrian Day Asset Management explains why he expects a significant gold price recovery in the near future. In the short term, he counsels investors to choose companies that minimize risk through royalty agreements, joint ventures and robust balance sheets. In other words, companies with the means to seize profit-making opportunities, and Day shares the names of a handful that fit the bill.

COMPANIES MENTIONEDALMADEN MINERALS LTD.: ALTIUS MINERALS CORP. : CALLINAN ROYALTIES CORP. : DETOUR GOLD CORP. : FRANCO-NEVADA CORP. : GOLDCORP INC. : MIDLAND EXPLORATION INC. : NEW GOLD INC. : NEWMONT MINING CORP. :PRETIUM RESOURCES INC. : RESERVOIR MINERALS INC. : ROYAL GOLD INC. : VIRGINIA MINES INC. RELATED COMPANIES ALKANE RESOURCES LTD. :CLIFTON STAR RESOURCES INC. COMMERCE RESOURCES CORP. INTEGRA GOLD CORP. :PREMIER GOLD MINES LTD. RICHMONT MINES INC.TERRACO GOLD CORP.

The Gold Report: John Makin of the American Enterprise Institute noted on Dec. 20, “In 2013, the Federal Reserve’s actual monthly purchase of bonds—the size of quantitative easing (QE)—has averaged $94 billion ($94B), or $9B above the advertised pace of $85B/month.” So is all this talk of tapering a shell game?

Adrian Day: Even if the Fed had stuck to the $85B/month as advertised, tapering is a sham. The Fed reduced QE to $75B/month in January and now has announced a further $10B/month reduction. But $65B/month is still an enormous amount of stimulus. Very shortly, the Fed’s balance sheet will exceed $4 trillion. We’re focused on the wrong thing here.

TGR: Considering all this talk of recovery, the Jan. 10 jobs report was dismal, was it not?

AD: Absolutely. The employment situation in the U.S. is a long way from what one would expect from a decent recovery, let alone a robust recovery.

TGR: U.S. job creation since 2008 has been mostly part-time jobs, temporary jobs and low-paying jobs. How does this lead to increased consumer spending, which is, we are told, the basis of a robust recovery?

AD: Consumer spending is being fuelled by debt. Since 2007, it has increased 23% for the lower 40% of earners. The Fed reports that net household income and net household wealth have now exceeded the 2007 highs. If we break down the numbers, however, we see that net worth is actually down for 90% of U.S. households. For the bottom 50% of households, net worth is down an astonishing 44%.

Day1-31-1

 

TGR: We can’t have a recovery based on the purchase of yachts and multimillion-dollar New York City condos, can we?

 

AD: Of course not. We can’t have a strong economy based on just 10% of the population getting richer. Frankly, I don’t mind whether there’s a gap between the rich and the poor—so long as the rich are getting their wealth honestly and not from government handouts. And so long as the middle class is getting richer also.

 

TGR: President Kennedy said famously that a rising tide lifts all boats. Do we still believe that?

 

AD: Since 2008, the Fed’s stimulus has gone mostly to Wall Street, not to Main Street. That is a fundamental problem for the economy but also for the polis, for the public social good.

 

It’s not that I want the government to do things specifically for the middle class; I just want it to get out of the way. If small businesses are created and can expand and hire people, then we will have a rising tide lifting all boats.

 

TGR: The International Monetary Fund last month cautioned that debt levels have become so perilous that recovery, as Ambrose Evans-Pritchard of The Daily Telegraph wrote, “will require defaults, a savings tax and higher inflation.” Do you agree?

 

AD: Debt has become unmanageable. Now, there is nothing wrong with debt per se. When I argue against high government debt, people often respond that in the 19th century the U.S. debt to GDP ratio was higher than today. But that debt was used for capital investment (canals, railroads, etc.), which led to higher economic growth. Today, debt is being used to fund wars and welfare, not investments in the future.

Defaults? Perhaps. Taxes will never deal with the debt problem. You could tax 100% of income above $100,000, and you would fix the U.S. deficit only for a few months. Higher inflation? Perhaps. The one thing Evans-Pritchard didn’t mention was currency devaluation. Because the vast majority of U.S. debt is issued in U.S. dollars, the easiest way to liquidate it is to devalue the dollar.

TGR: In a speech last month in Shanghai, you said, “Gold moves in long cycles.” Do all commodities move in cycles?

AD: Most do because producers get price signals from the market with a delay. Take the retailer that sells TVs. If sales go down three weeks in a row, the retailer will order fewer units the next month. He gets an immediate price signal. The wholesaler gets signals with a bit of a lag but still relatively early.

But the producer of a rare earth that goes into TVs gets the signal from the market with a much longer lag than the retailer, the wholesaler and the manufacturer. So, metals cycles tend to be very long. And it’s far more difficult for miners to cut back or increase production than for retailers to adjust orders.

TGR: Where are we in the current gold cycle?

AD: Over the last 250 years, the shortest cycle on record was the 1970s, just over 10 years. Typically, gold upcycles have lasted close to 40 years. On that basis, we aren’t even halfway through the current gold upcycle.

Day1-31-2

TGR: So last year’s price collapse did not indicate the end of the gold upcycle?

AD: Significant corrections in long, secular bull markets are typical. Gold, from top to bottom, has declined 37% in this particular cycle. If you look back to the upcycle of the 1970s, 1975–1976 saw a midcycle correction of 47%. But that was right before gold went up eightfold to more than $800/ounce ($800/oz).

Where are we now? It would be optimistic to assume a V-shaped recovery, but gold has bottomed, and over the next 12 months we are likely to see a slow, if uneven, recovery. The typical recovery comes from a long midcycle correction. We should reach $1,550–1,650/oz in 2014 or early next year, and then gold will start to accelerate. Some gold stocks could recover a lot quicker in expectation of higher prices.

TGR: You noted in Shanghai that gold stocks have lagged behind the gold price in an extraordinary manner. Why?

AD: First, costs have gone up, in some cases more dramatically the price of gold. Second, companies grossly overpaid for acquisitions with no synergies. Barrick Gold Corp. (ABX:TSX; ABX:NYSE) comes to mind in this regard.

For these reasons, we’ve seen a great deal of new equity dilution. If we look at all-in costs—and not just mining costs— it’s been estimated that about half of all mines are losing money. So it’s no surprise that gold stocks have done badly, particularly in light of the attractive and simple alternative: gold exchange-traded funds.

Day1-31-3

TGR: When can we expect gold stocks to recover?

AD: As you know, many gold companies have made big mea culpas. They’ve fired CEOs and committed to not making the same mistakes. The irony is that with companies and individual mines so cheap now, when it’s so difficult for companies to raise capital, this is precisely when the big companies should be making acquisitions.

That’s why I applaud Goldcorp Inc.’s (G:TSX; GG:NYSE) bid for Osisko Mining Corp. (OSK:TSX). I think a few more mergers and acquisitions (M&A) like this will get the market excited again.

TGR: Assuming a general recovery in gold stocks, which sector do you think will do best—majors, mid-caps or micro-caps?

AD: Broadly, the seniors will probably move first because when generalist investors move into the gold sector, that’s typically where they first put their money.

 

But I don’t look at the gold sector that way. Today, the most important criterion is the balance sheet. Does the company have the cash to carry out its plans? If it must raise cash, can it do so in a nondilutive manner? Some seniors will be able to answer affirmatively, and so will some explorers. That’s the test.

TGR: It’s said that some companies are too big to fail. Are some gold companies, like Barrick, too big to succeed?

AD: There’s no systemic reason why Barrick is too big to succeed. It has a complex and far-flung structure, but so does Nestlé S.A., which buys from more than 100 countries and sells to more than 200. Nobody says that Nestlé is too big to succeed. Barrick’s problem is that it probably grew too big too fast.

Successful exploration entails risks and the understanding most risks will fail. It’s natural that lower-level managers in large companies become much more risk averse. The solution is for the majors to use the juniors as their exploration arm, as companies like Newmont Mining Corp. (NEM:NYSE) have done. Newmont does joint ventures (JVs) with other companies and then, if appropriate, buys the properties or buys its partners outright.

TGR: How long until Barrick’s new management can put its stamp on the company and tell investors: That was then, and this is now?

AD: The first thing Barrick must do is make it very clear exactly what kind of company it is: does it want to be a gold company or a diversified mining company? Will it hedge? Considering the way the management transition has been handled—the $11.9 million ($11.9M) signing bonus for new Co-chairman John Thornton and the two independent directors resigning because they think the “independent” directors are still too close to Peter Munk—I think it’s going to be a while before Barrick can draw a line under the past.

TGR: Why do you favor the royalty/streaming model?

AD: When a company acquires or creates a royalty on another company, that first dollar in is typically the last dollar in, meaning that the royalty company is not responsible for setbacks. If there are cost overruns, if the shaft floods, if taxes are raised, the company with the royalty is not responsible.

The worst that can happen is that royalty payments are reduced or delayed. For instance, the original capital expenditure (capex) of Pascua Lama, Barrick’s project that straddles Chile and Argentina, was $2.25B. By the time it was shelved, the capex had reached $10B.Royal Gold Inc. (RGLD:NASDAQ; RGL:TSX), which had a royalty on Pascua Lama, was not responsible for this huge increase. Of course, Royal still doesn’t have any revenue from that project, but at least it didn’t have to front any more money.

TGR: What are the advantages for royalty companies besides risk mitigation?

AD: Staffs tend to be small, so profit margins tend to be high. And royalty companies have exposure to exploration upside. If a company has a royalty on a particular mine, it will typically have a royalty on at least some of the exploration ground around that mine. If there is a discovery on that ground, the royalty owner benefits just as much as if it were the company making the discovery. Royalty companies get most of the upside and very little of the downside.

TGR: Which royalty companies do you like?

AD: I like most of them. Having said that, Franco-Nevada Corp. (FNV:TSX; FNV:NYSE) is, in my view, far and away the best. It has great management, a great balance sheet, about $900M in cash and no debt. It has a very broad portfolio of properties. It has royalties on 37 producing mines and more than 300 other, nonproducing royalties.

TGR: Which of the smaller royalty companies do you like?

AD: It’s not in the gold business, but Altius Minerals Corp. (ALS:TSX.V) has morphed into a royalty company. It began as a low-risk operation, partnering on JVs. It then innovated by spinning off projects but retaining shares and royalties.

Altius has just acquired a package of royalties on coal and potash. Add that to its royalties on Vale S.A.’s (VALE:NYSE) Voisey’s Bay nickel mine and Alderon Iron Ore Corp.’s (ADV:TSX; AXX:NYSE.MKT) developmental Kami iron ore project in Newfoundland and you have a very attractive company.

I also like Virginia Mines Inc. (VGQ:TSX), which, like Altius, has grown largely with JVs. It has a royalty on Éléonore in Quebec, which is Goldcorp’s next major mine to come onstream, in Q4/14. Production is estimated at 600,000 oz annually after ramp up.

TGR: Your January portfolio review noted that Altius was up 24% for 2013, and Virginia Mines was up 16%.

AD: Most of the mining companies that did well last year had very good balance sheets and weren’t associated with high risk. That’s certainly true of Altius and Virginia.

It amazed me that Virginia was still so inexpensive even as Éléonore’s net present value continued to grow and Virginia’s royalty came ever closer to fruition. The explanation is that investors are short-term oriented. Virginia is arguably a little ahead of itself after the recent run, given today’s gold price, but it is still one of the top companies I would want to hold long term.

TGR: Any other royalty companies you’d care to mention?

AD: Callinan Royalties Corp. (CAA:TSX.V). Again, it’s not gold. Callinan actually pays a dividend, about 4.6%. It’s quite nice to get a decent dividend on a resource-related company. Callinan has a good balance sheet and is continuing to make investments in other companies where it retains royalties. Over the next few years, investors will see Callinan expand from basically one producing royalty to several. In the meantime, investors get paid.

TGR: Reservoir Minerals Inc. (RMC:TSX.V) was up 21% last year. What’s its story?

AD: Reservoir has a JV with Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. (FCX:NYSE) on the Timok copper-gold project in Serbia. This proves again the worth of the JV model. Reservoir had to give up 75% of Timok, but with Freeport paying for the exploration, Reservoir can maintain its balance sheet.

Reservoir has about $18M in cash right now, which is a lot, considering what its expenditures are. It has had continually spectacular results from Timok. I think that Freeport is going to buy Reservoir or, at least, buy Timok. This could mean a very significant premium over the current stock price. Most shareholders are waiting for the endgame, so there aren’t a lot of shares available. So it’s important to look for any setback to buy, and to use a limit.

TGR: Moving to British Columbia’s biggest exploration story, could you explain the “battle of the consultants” over the quality of Pretium Resources Inc.’s (PVG:TSX; PVG:NYSE) Brucejack deposit?

AD: That was unfortunate. Pretium had two independent consultants, Strathcona and Snowden. Strathcona is the company that blew the whistle on Bre-X, so it has credibility. Pretium was doing a bulk sample to assess the value of Brucejack because the deposit is high-grade but spotty. The two companies had different methodologies for conducting and assessing this sample. These were technical differences, and I don’t know why Strathcona believed it had to resign from the project so publicly.

TGR: You sold Pretium, but now you’re bullish on it again.

AD: We sold because I was in a risk-averse mode at the time. I know Pretium’s CEO, Bob Quartermain, and his integrity is unquestioned. Nonetheless, I knew that a very public controversy like this would cause the stock to decline for quite some time, which it did.

Then the initial bulk sample results were released, and they were excellent. So I thought it was time to jump back in. I feel very positive about the deposit, and the bulk sample results have only gone to support that confidence. I think Pretium is a good buy at this point.

TGR: You have stressed the correlation of success with cash and/or cash flow. Name a company that demonstrates these attributes.

AD: Almaden Minerals Ltd. (AMM:TSX; AAU:NYSE) has great management, about $16M in cash plus a couple of million in gold bullion. The beauty of having cash means that a company can raise money or sell assets only when it wants to.

Almaden owns the Tuligtic gold-silver property in Puebla, Mexico. The company continues to drill the Ixtaca zone aggressively, and the results continue to be strong. A just-released updated resource estimate on the Ixtaca zone on this project shows an increase in total resource of about 20% and a Measured and Indicated resource of 3.5 million ounces; the deposit continues to grow. A preliminary economic assessment is scheduled for early March and I am expecting it to be positive. This stock is a bargain.

TGR: Any other bargains come to mind?

AD: Midland Exploration Inc. (MD:TSX.V), another prospect generator. It has 10 main projects in Quebec, five of which are currently under joint venture. Key projects are the Maritime-Cadillac gold project with Agnico-Eagle Mines Ltd. (AEM:TSX; AEM:NYSE), the Patris gold project with Teck Resources Ltd. (TCK:TSX; TCK:NYSE) and the Ytterby rare earth project with Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corp. (JOGMEC). These partners have already re-upped, which demonstrates confidence in the projects, and the company is working on finding partners for more of its projects. Midland has $4.5M in cash, more than enough, considering the money its partners are spending.

Midland’s stock is at $0.97/share. It’s a very thinly traded company, so I would urge investors to use a limit price when they buy, otherwise they’ll just push the price up on themselves. (Our clients actually own more than 10% of Midland, and we’re considered an insider.)

TGR: Could you rate the balance sheets of some other gold companies?

AD: We own Detour Gold Corp. (DGC:TSX). It does have cash, but it also has ongoing capital expenditures on its Detour Lake mine in Ontario. It’s more leveraged on the gold price than some of the other companies I’ve mentioned. If gold goes from $1,200 to $900/oz, it’s not going to be a great investment. But if gold goes from $1,200 to $1,500 or $1,600/oz, Detour will be one of the better performers. It is also a potential takeover candidate.

We also own quite a bit of New Gold Inc. (NGD:TSX; NGD:NYSE.MKT). It has four producing mines: Cerro San Pedro in Mexico, Mesquite in California, New Afton in British Columbia and Peak in Australia. It also has very strong management. Randall Oliphant, the executive chairman, is a former Barrick CEO, and board member Pierre Lassonde is chairman of Franco-Nevada.

New Gold has a good balance sheet and a good pipeline of projects. It is one of the most undervalued of the senior gold companies. So I would definitely be a buyer there.

TGR: Adrian, thank you for your time and your insights.

Adrian Day, London born and a graduate of the London School of Economics, heads the eponymous money management firm Adrian Day Asset Management (www.adriandayassetmanagement.com; 410-224-2037), where he manages discretionary accounts in both global and resource areas. Day is also sub-adviser to the new EuroPacific Gold Fund (EPGFX). His latest book is “Investing in Resources: How to Profit from the Outsized Potential and Avoid the Risks.”

Related Articles

 

 

Want to read more Gold Report interviews like this? Sign up for our free e-newsletter, and you’ll learn when new articles have been published. To see a list of recent interviews with industry analysts and commentators, visit our Streetwise Interviews page.

DISCLOSURE: 
1) Kevin Michael Grace conducted this interview for The Gold Report and provides services to The Gold Report as an independent contractor. He or his family own shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None.
2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of The Gold Report: Virginia Mines Inc., Pretium Resources Inc., Almaden Minerals Ltd. and Midland Exploration Inc. Goldcorp Inc. and Franco-Nevada Corp. are not affiliated with The Gold Report. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services or as sponsorship payment.
3) Adrian Day: I or my family own shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: Almaden Minerals Ltd., Altius Minerals Corp., Franco-Nevada Corp., Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc., Goldcorp Inc., Midland Exploration Inc., Reservoir Minerals Inc., Royal Gold Inc. and Virginia Mines Inc. I personally am or my family is paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. My company has a financial relationship with the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.
4) Interviews are edited for clarity. Streetwise Reports does not make editorial comments or change experts’ statements without their consent. 
5) The interview does not constitute investment advice. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her individual financial professional and any action a reader takes as a result of information presented here is his or her own responsibility. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer
6) From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as well as persons interviewed for articles and interviews on the site, may have a long or short position in securities mentioned and may make purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or otherwise.

 


 

 

Increasing Concerns and Systemic Instability

Screen Shot 2014-01-31 at 11.06.27 AMThe ratio of nonfinancial equity market capitalization to nominal GDP is presently about 120%, compared with a historical average prior to the late-1990’s bubble of just 55%. The comparison – about double the historical norm – is about the same if one uses the Wilshire 5000, which includes financials, and for Tobin’s Q (price to replacement cost of assets). The price/revenue multiple of the S&P 500 is presently 1.6, versus a pre-bubble norm of just 0.8. All of these measures have a correlation of about 90% with subsequent 10-year S&P 500 returns, even including recent bubbles and subsequent busts.

Increasing our concern is a 10-week average of advisory bulls at 57.7% versus just 14.8% bears – the most lopsided bullish sentiment in decades. Add the record pace of speculation on borrowed money, with NYSE margin debt now at 2.5% of GDP – an amount equivalent to 26% of all commercial and industrial loans in the U.S. banking system. Add the currency collapses in Argentina and Venezuela, as well as fresh credit strains and industrial shortfall in China, and one has any number of factors that could be viewed in hindsight as a “catalyst” (as the German trade gap was viewed after the 1987 crash, in the absence of other observable triggers).

….entire article HERE

1750 S&P Support: “Below Here Is Trouble”

S&P500 key support at risk.

Despite the repeated signals that investor anxiety is at unsustainable levels and that this is a late stage “risk off” environment, given the blow off top conditions in several EM currencies, particularly $/TRY, and extreme readings in SPX volatility, with the VXV/VIX ratio recently breaking below 1, the S&P500 can’t maintain a bid. Key support is vulnerable.

….click HERE or on chart for more comment & 5 Charts( all that can be made larger)

20140131 baml1

test-php-789