sâmbătă, 22 octombrie 2011

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis


"Resurrection of Dead" Stories by The Telegraph

Posted: 22 Oct 2011 10:36 PM PDT

Inquiring minds are investigating "resurrection of the dead" stories such as New euro 'empire' plot by Brussels by The Telegraph.
The proposal, put forward by Herman Van Rompuy, the European Council president, would be the clearest sign yet of a new "United States of Europe" — with Britain left on the sidelines.

The plan comes as European governments desperately trying to save the euro from collapse last night faced a new bombshell, with sources at the International Monetary Fund saying it would not pay for a second Greek bail-out.

The single Treasury plan emerged in Brussels yesterday as Europe's finance ministers tried to find a way out of the crisis engulfing the eurozone. A full-scale rescue plan could cost about £1.75 trillion.

British sources said Mr Van Rompuy, who is regarded as being close to the German government, suggested plans for a "finance ministry" to be based either in Frankfurt or Paris. The EU already has its own "foreign ministry", headed by Baroness Ashton, the former British Labour minister, and based in Brussels.

A senior Coalition source told The Sunday Telegraph: "I am well aware of arguments in Brussels and elsewhere in favour of a single Treasury. You'd get any number of different versions of 'Europe' all running at very different speeds."

A series of meetings are due to be held over the next few days on the eurozone crisis that will involve the leaders of EU member states.
Resurrection of the Dead

I am tired of nonsensical headlines that have a zero percent chance of happening.

Anyone who gives any credence to blowhards like Herman Van Rompuy is a complete fool or is looking to gain hits via absurd headlines.

There is NOT going to be a single treasury for the EU because it will require a referendum from German voters whom will not go along with it. For that matter nor will Finland, Austria, the Netherlands and possibly other countries.

More importantly, there is a zero % chance the Telegraph does not realize that.

To be sure Van Rompuy, keeps attempting to resurrect dead ideas, However, the 10th attempt does not deserve a headline like "New euro empire plot by Brussels".

Instead the headline should be openly mocking of the Van Rompuy.

The only way the Telegraph headline makes any sense is if it was done on purpose, to gather hits. The Telegraph got hits from me, but likely ones they do not want.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List


EU Finance Ministers Decide to Force Banks to Take Bigger Greek Bond Losses, Recapitalize by $140 Billion; Amount Insufficient, Few Other Details

Posted: 22 Oct 2011 05:01 PM PDT

Details are sketchy but Reuters reports Banks under pressure in Europe crisis, pushed to raise capital, take Greek losses
On Saturday, the finance ministers of the 27-country European Union decided to force the bloc's biggest banks to substantially increase their capital buffers -- an important move to ensure that they are strong enough to withstand the panic that a steep cut to Greece's debt could trigger on financial markets.

A European official said the new capital rules would force banks to raise just over euro100 billion ($140 billion), but finance ministers did not provide details on their decision. The official was speaking on condition of anonymity because it had been agreed to let leaders unveil the deal at their first summit Sunday.

The deal on banks was likely to be the only major breakthrough ready to announce on Sunday, leaving many important decisions and negotiations to be completed by Wednesday night.

On Friday, the first day of the marathon talks, the finance ministers of the 17 countries that use the euro -- and which have found themselves at the center of the crisis because of the currency they share -- agreed to demand Greece's private creditors take big losses on their bondholdings.

But they still have get the banks to come along and convince them that the cuts are the best way to ensure that Athens can eventually repay its remaining debts.

The picture in Greece, whose troubles kicked off the crisis almost two years ago, is bleaker than ever. A new report from Athens' international debt inspectors -- the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund -- proved that a preliminary deal for a second package of rescue loans reached in July is already obsolete.

The report showed that in the past three months Greece's economic situation has deteriorated so dramatically that for the bank deal to remain in place, the official sector would have to provide some euro252 billion ($347 billion) in loans. Alternatively, to keep official loans at euro109 billion ($150 billion), banks would have to accept cuts of about 60 percent to the value of their Greek bonds.

"I believe we are now arriving at a more realistic view of the situation in Greece," said German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the country that has long been advocating a more radical solution to Athens' problems.

But Merkel and her eurozone counterpart were on for tough negotiations with the banks.

Charles Dallara, who has been representing private investors in the talks with the eurozone, said Saturday that negotiations that carried on sporadically throughout Saturday were making only slow progress.

"We're nowhere near a deal," he told The Associated Press in an interview.

Germany and France still disagree over how to give the EFSF more firepower. France wants the fund to be allowed to tap the ECB's massive cash reserves -- an option that Germany rejects. Weaker economies, meanwhile, are wary of signing up to the other two parts of the grand plan -- bigger bank capital and cuts to Greece's debt -- without assurance that sufficient buffers are in place.
Recapitalization Insufficient

100 Million Euros is insufficient. The IMF pegged the amount between 100 million and 200 million. There is absolutely no reason to suspect the minimum is needed. Indeed, there is every reason to expect 400 million euros is insufficient.

Capital Shortfall Estimates of European Banks Range from 8 to 413 Billion Euros


The Wall Street Journal reports widely varying analyst ranges in its article European Banks Face New Scrutiny Over Capital Needs

Analyst Estimates

  • Citigroup estimates there is a capital shortfall of between €64 billion and €216 billion for banks to achieve a minimum core Tier 1 ratio of 7% to 9%, respectively.

  • Credit Suisse came up with a similar figure of €220 billion for the potential 9% scenario.

  • Analysts at Espirito Santo said write-downs at current market prices on Greek, Portuguese, Irish, Italian and Spanish bonds, along with a higher minimum capital ratio of around 9%, could require as much as €413 billion in new capital across the sector.

  • Merrill Lynch analysts in turn came up with estimates of between €7.6 billion and €143 billion in required capital for the region's major banks, depending on various scenarios.

These ranges provide more questions than answers. Moreover, low-end lowball estimates such as €7.6 billion by Merrill Lynch are preposterous under all but the most ludicrous scenarios in the third round of "stress-free" tests now underway.

Deutsche Bank AG Chief Executive Josef Ackermann says it isn't clear recapitalization efforts will help solve the crisis.

Hey, let's just not recognize any bank losses ever.

Credit Suisse Estimates

Zero Hedge has some interesting charts of capital shortfalls as estimated by Credit Suisse.
Commentary and charts below from Credit Suisse. No link provided. Click on charts for sharper image.




One of our conclusions was that the overall European banking sector is facing a €400bn capital shortfall which compares to a current market cap of €541bn.

The table below details the breakdown of our estimated capital shortfall.

Figure 6: European banks – Capital deficit in CS 'accelerated sovereign shock

I believe 400 million Euros will prove way insufficient once Portugal, then Spain, then Italy get into trouble.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List


Damn Cool Pics

Damn Cool Pics


Improv in Toronto: Dare to Fight?

Posted: 22 Oct 2011 12:06 AM PDT



Improv in Toronto dared random people to fight a ninja. Those who chose to take them up on that dare where faced with more than one ninja.


Back To The Future: Electric DeLorean Coming in 2013

Posted: 21 Oct 2011 11:55 PM PDT

The DeLorean Motor Company of Texas has announced plans to launch an all-electric version of the DeLorean in 2013. The car, made popular in the Back to the Future movies, will be updated to reduce the weight of the vehicle and to bring in the more modern technology of today's cars.

The DMCEV will have a DC electric motor that will be able to go from 0-60mph in 4.9 seconds with an estimated top speed of 125mph. The car isn't planned to be released until 2013 and even then will cost up to $90,000-100,000! I'm just wondering where the flux capacitor is.










Sources: kevin-mccauley, delorean


Men Photographed in Stereotypical Pin-Up Poses

Posted: 21 Oct 2011 11:11 PM PDT

"Men-ups!" is a humorous project by photographer Rion Sabean featuring men doing pin-up-style poses. It's interesting how much more absurd some poses instantly look when they're being done by men.
















Source: flickr


Man Taking Care of a Baby Dolphin

Posted: 21 Oct 2011 10:23 PM PDT

A beached baby dolphin, found alive with its umbilical cord still attached, is being hand-reared in Uruguay.

The female La Plata dolphin was found on a beach near Montevideo city and was sent to the non-government wildlife rescue organisation S.O.S Rescate Fauna Marina.
















Source: reuters


Google Hides Search Referral Data with New SSL Implementation - Emergency Whiteboard Friday

Google Hides Search Referral Data with New SSL Implementation - Emergency Whiteboard Friday


Google Hides Search Referral Data with New SSL Implementation - Emergency Whiteboard Friday

Posted: 21 Oct 2011 11:18 AM PDT

Posted by Aaron Wheeler

On Tuesday, Google announced that signed-in users will, by default, be routed to the SSL version of Google (https://www.google.com). Before Tuesday, most users used non-SSL Google for their searches. Now, according to Google, "...a web site accessed through organic search results on http://www.google.com (non-SSL) can see both that the user came from google.com and their search query... However, for organic search results on SSL search, a web site will only know that the user came from google.com." The effects were obvious immediately. Here's a screenshot of our GA account showing the quantity of "(not provided)" keywords going up from Sunday to today:

Google Analytics (not provided) visitors

Clearly, the inbound marketing community isn't thrilled. Take Ian Lurie of Portent, for example: he declared war with Google outright. Having a bunch of "(not provided)" referral keywords in Google Analytics is definitely not pretty. Fortunately, as Avinash Kaushik explains in this Google+ post, there's something you can do to at least gauge the effects on your analytics, and as Rand will explain, the effects aren't as devastating for most users as they could be. Yet.

In this emergency Whiteboard Friday, Rand will go over the changes Google has made, why it happened (and why it really might have happened), and what you can do to stay calm and fight back. Let us know how this change has affected your sites in the comments below!

 

Video Transcription

Howdy SEOmoz fans. Welcome to a special emergency edition of Whiteboard Day Agnostic We'll Interrupt Any Day to Do This. Unfortunately, Google has made a big change to the way that they are serving keyword referral data from their search results, and this is going to have an unfortunate impact on all of us who do white hat SEO, who do web analytics, and who try to learn from this practice.

I want to try in this Whiteboard video to explain why this has happened, what Google is doing, why they claim they're doing it, and then also explore some of the reasons that they might actually be doing it, and try to provide some actual information about what folks in the web analytics and SEO spheres can do since this data may become less available.

So let's start by explaining what happens when you do a Google search today. For example, I have done a Google search here for "learn SEO." I click the Search button and some results pop up, and here's this nice learn SEO, SEOmoz, www.seomoz.org, learn SEO, and then there's an ad over here, "Learn SEO from PayMeBucks.com." Click on my ad. Dude, I need your visits bad. That probably would not get approved by the AdWords people, but you can get the idea.

Now previously, if I were to click this result or this result, the web analytics tool, whatever it is - your Webtrends, your Omniture, your Google Analytics - at the other end would get some referral data, so with your log file, get some referral data about what sent that visit, which keyword sent that visit. So in this case, it would be "learn SEO" sent a visit from Google.com search over to my website. It would track whether it's a paid or an organic ad.

This is changing. It is changing only for folks who are logged in. If you are searching from Google and you are logged in, this will be changing so that the logged in behavior, the keyword that referred the visit will be shown as (Not provided). This will show in your web analytics. That's what Google will say. They will use these parenthesis. That's how you can see it in the Google Analytics dashboard currently. However, if you click this paid search ad, they will still be providing the keyword "learn SEO." So logged out behavior in purple here. Logged out behavior always gets keyword "learn SEO" as the referrer. Logged in behavior gets keyword (Not Provided) if you click on organic results. But if you're paying Google, you will still be able to see the referral information.

Now Google claims they're doing this to protect user privacy so that users who are logged in will by default not be showing their searches to the websites that they visit. Unfortunately, I think that there are a lot of people in the search world and folks who observe this who have rightfully stated, well, if Google were trying to protect privacy, they've already to some extent done that by providing a secure search - https search, which is what's doing this as well, the SSL search - for those people who would not like to provide that information. Some very small portion of people do use that form of Google search, the sort of protected search.

So it's already available. The reason they're doing this by default I think that many people suspect . . . I'll link to a great article by Ian Lurie of Portent Interactive, who I think prognosticates or posits the actual reason for this is that ad networks today are being very successful using search referral data from visitors, and they're able to leverage that data across multiple websites. So Google is hoping to remove that ability and be the only ad network that can be aware of your search behavior, thus sort of blocking out other providers using their near monopoly in search to exclude other people from being able to use this data,

That's frustrating. It's sad. It's upsetting. It certainly doesn't fit with what we know about Google. But I think the unfortunate thing here is that those of us in the web analytics/SEO sphere are going to have a tough battle to fight from a PR angle because Google can play the "no this is to protect your privacy" card and use that as their excuse. Of course, if that were the case, it seems very odd that you can pay them and still get the data. But I'm going to reserve judgment on that, and I'll let folks make their own decisions. I do think it's very important that we not just get upset about this, but we also think about what we can do actionably. Anytime a major player in the search world or social world or inbound world makes a big change, we need to figure out what is it, how is that we can best respond, how can we use data, how can we continue to be great marketers.

There are a couple of things that I would recommend. First off, you should be measuring the quantity and percent of the lost keyword data. That is a very important metric that you're going to want to track over time. To do this, you simply go to your web analytics tool, you grab the number of (Not Provided) keywords or referrals, visits that came to, divide that by your total visits from Google organic, and you will get the percent of search referrals affected by this. You want to track this over time because you want to know if that's going up, if more people who are logged into Google are searching and finding your site, what percent of data you're losing, whether this is going to be a big problem as Google rolls it out more broadly, and you can see some data from SEOmoz.

So let's take a look at our own data. This is from Sunday to Thursday of this week, so ending yesterday. We're filming this on Friday for release tomorrow, Saturday. You can see (Not Provided) was 1,062 or 1.2% of the visits over these 5 days. However, the number is going up. So as of Sunday, we had zero visits that did not contain any keyword data. Monday had 90. Tuesday had 111. Wednesday had 381. Thursday had 421. That is 2.2%. So you can see that we've lost keyword information on a little over 2% of our visits and climbing. So this is frustrating. Google has said that they expect this will be less than 10% for most websites. So we hope to continue to get 90% of the data.

That leads me to number two. You can continue to leverage data from sources like the existing Google data, which should be hopefully around 90% of what you have today, Bing and Yahoo data, of course, which are responsible for around anywhere between 10% and 20% of your search referrals depending on your industry and niche, and of course, your internal search query data. This data is invaluable not only for doing keyword research and targeting, but also figuring out conversion rates, trying to optimize for those visitors, make their user experience better. It's really only for white hat types of activities. So it's frustrating that Google pulled this, rather than maybe tackling something more black hat focused. But we have what we have.

Number three, if you do feel strongly about this issue, there are lots of opportunities - I don't want to say complain - but lots of opportunities to let Google know how you feel. This is a change that they are making, and they are currently planning on making and rolling on and have been rolling out. But that doesn't mean that they might not backtrack if user feedback is overwhelmingly negative, and certainly that would be nice for those of us in the analytics sphere who like to use this data.

So you can obviously blog about it, write about it. You could even write to your congressional rep. There are several forums. The Google blog post announcing this accepts comments. The Google Webmaster Tools forum certainly accepts comments. You can also contact your AdWords representatives and let them know that you're not totally thrilled by this move either. Remember AdWords data is still passing the refer. It's organic search that is affected.

So hopefully this won't affect too big a percentage of search queries and thus will still continue to have some good data, but given Google's efforts to try and make more people be logged into Google Plus, to Gmail, to Google hosted apps, I don't know. There is a lot of, I think, fear and uncertainty right now in the analytics world.

But with that said, you have some actionable things you can do. You should definitely start tracking this data, and hopefully we will see you again next week for another edition of Whiteboard Friday, rather than an emergency, interrupting version. We hope we don't have too many of these. Take care everyone.

Video transcription by Speechpad.com

p.s. from Rand: I highly recommend checking out Danny Sullivan's more thorough writeup on this event at SELand: Google Puts a Price on Privacy.


Do you like this post? Yes No