InvestorsFriend Inc. Newsletter
September 6, 2009
Why Not Invest By Lending
Money to Your Neighbors?
Many of you might be happy to
get a 5% return on your excess cash these days. Meanwhile your neighbors,
friends and relatives might be very happy to be able to borrow at 5%.
Is this a match made in heaven
or what? Shouldn't small groups of people borrow and lend amongst themselves
in this fashion?
That would cut the evil bank
middle men out of the equation and would be great right?
Well, maybe not...
Most of us would not even think
about lending money to our neighbors and except in extreme circumstances,
not to friends and relatives either. Part of the reason is that we are not
set up with contracts and the general infrastructure to make this work. And
a huge part of the reason is the risk that we would not get paid back on
schedule and that if that happened the difficulties and the social
awkwardness of taking any kind of legal action.
When you think about the risks
of lending money to people, you can start to see that banking can be a very
risky business.
Banks obviously face much lower
risks in lending to your neighbor than you would.
Banks diversify by lending to
thousands or even millions of people. Lending a $100,000 to 1 person is many
times more risky than lending $1000 each to 100 people. In the first case
there is a chance of losing all your money but there is realistically no
chance of that in the second case.
Banks of course have the
infrastructure to lend and collect. They have access to credit records, they
have contracts, they have all the procedures in place to take fast action
when any borrower starts to fall behind in payments.
Nevertheless, Banking can still
be quite risky. If a bank lends $100,000 each to 100 people and makes $1000
net profit per year on each one, after all expenses, then just one single
borrower who fails to pay wipes out the expected profit not just from the
one but from 100 borrowers.
In a strong economy banks tend
to do well but when the economy weakens it only takes a small percentage of
people to default on their loans and suddenly the bank can be in trouble.
In the United States there are
many small banks. U.S. banking regulators have shut down 89 banks this year.
And in the past year or so some of these bank failures involved huge banks.
In Canada we don't have many
small banks. But we do have some small banks and lots of small credit
unions.
One example is Western Financial
Group. This company's main business has been to buy up small independent
insurance sales offices and consolidate them with central systems. That has
been quite successful and we have generally been a fan of the company.
However, several years ago they started up their own bank (Bank West) and
that worried us. We believe that banking is a business in which you can
basically "blow your brains out" if you are not careful. Bank West has no
established branches as such.
It offers Guaranteed Investment
Certificates through independent deposit brokers. That means it does not get
access to the "free" money sitting in chequing accounts that bigger banks
get. It can generally only attract deposits by offering higher interest
rates. On the lending side it has essentially no walk-in business. (It get's
a bit through its insurances offices). So it started going to places like
Travel Trailer businesses and offering to finance those for customers. That
is quite scary to us since travel trailers are often purchased no-money down
and with payment terms of up to 20 years. And if you re-possess a trailer
you may find you can't sell it for even half of what is owed on the loan.
One wonders how they win the business (lower interest rates charged on
loans?, possibly commissions paid to the trailer dealer? approving credit
that competitors would not approve?)
Still, with the strong western
economy few buyers would likely default and all might be well. Over the past
few years we continued to think Western Financial Group would be a good
long-term investment. But now as the western economy cools off the risk of
loan defaults must be rising.
More recently this bank bought
into a business that lends money to farmers. Maybe some farmers do well, but
it always seems like in the news they are constantly crying the blues. This
year I understand crop yields are way down due to low rainfall in much of
the West. I'm not sure I want to be dependent on farmers paying me back in
that situation.
For these reasons and others we
finally started to sour on Western Financial Group. It may do very well and
has a number of positive attributes. But we grew uncomfortable with them.
How I saved $8,000 with a
five minute phone call.
Still on the topic of banks, I
was recently able to get a HUGE reduction in a bank fee.
In February of this year, a
friend was attempting to sell her home. She was a single-mom with a modest
income and was finding that she could not afford her mortgage payments. Her
mortgage had almost three years left at 8.05%. That was the lowest rate she
could get last year when she renewed in November 2008. (Normally open
floating rates are lower, but when you are a higher-risk customer, normal
need not apply). The mortgage was about $162,000. The penalty on selling the
home and paying off the mortgage early was then estimated by the Trust
company at about $12,000.
Looking at the situation I was a
bit angry. The Trust company knew she wanted to sell the house but the
mortgage had to be renewed or else even higher interest rates would apply
(9.75%!) and the three year term was the lowest interest they offered and so
she was almost forced to take that because she did not have the extra cash
flow to incur a higher interest rate for however long it would take to sell
the house. So it seemed like they trapped her into taking the three year
term which created a large penalty if she were to sell the house.
There would be an interest rate
differential penalty on paying off the mortgage because interest rates had
dropped since the renewal. Her rate in November has been their posted 3-year
rate plus 1.35% (the adder for a lower credit score). The interest
differential would consist of the amount that their posted 3-year rate had
dropped PLUS the 1.35%. I can understand the logic. But this is all quite
maddening for those with lower credit scores.
Numerous calls to the Trust
Company's Call Centre produced no relief. The $12,000 penalty would apply
and that was that. Also no reductions to the payments or interest rate could
be arranged
So... I contacted investor
relations and got the name and phone number of an assistant vice president
in charge of such matters. My approach was to be friendly and acknowledge
that the penalty was perfectly legal and they had every right to charge it.
But I looked for some sympathy on the single parent situation.
He was not very sympathetic and
pointed out that my friend had decent equity in the house. I asked if he
could lower the interest penalty and he said he could change it to $8,000. I
thanked him because that was a $4,000 saving. But I said I had been hoping
for something closer to $2 to $3,000 so my friend would have more equity
left after the house sale. We chatted a bit more and just before hanging up
I asked if he could go any lower. He said $7,000 and that was his final
offer and he said he would add this to her file and it would be good for a
sale within a year. I thanked him and told him he was a "good man" and hung
up having saved my friend $5000.
By the time the house was sold
in August, interest rates were substantially lower and the interest
differential penalty had risen to about $15,000! The trust Company applied
"only" the $7,000 penalty as agreed and so my five minute phone call ended
up saving my friend $8000!.
Some lessons here are:
Don't be afraid to ask for
discounts and concessions especially on big-ticket items. The worse that can
happen is that they say no. But often at least some concession will be
offered.
Go big or stay home. Speak to an
executive who is authorized to make the concession. The Call Centre is often
not empowered in that way.
Be polite. Don't insult the
company or call them crooks or whatever.
Thank the company for any
concession made. They could have said no.
Businesses That Solicit
Charity Donations at the Cash Register
One of the strangest business
practices that I have encountered is when the cashier solicits some donation
as I make my purchase.
For example Eddie Bower used to
ask customers if they wanted to add on a dollar to the charge to help plant
a tree. A Shoppers drug mart a few years ago asked me if I wanted to donate
to something. And I was very surprised one day to be asked by Wal-Mart about
adding on something for a donation.
This is a dumb business practice
for a number of reasons.
A customer does not go into a
store with the idea in mind of making a donation. That is probably the
furthest thing from their mind at that time. In many cases the customer will
say no. Why would a business that should be trying to get its customers to
say Yes (Yes, I will buy that) solicit a donation that is very easy to say
no to. This practice is likely to embarrass the customer. Many customers
will say yes but go away at least a little resentful of being asked. Many
others will say no but will feel that they should not have been asked. They
will wonder if the cashier considered them to be a cheapskate. It just takes
away from the whole purchase experience.
Business should not do this.
As customers perhaps we should
say no and also request that the bosses be informed that we resented being
asked.
Businesses are free to ask for
such donations if they want to but I think it is a poor business practice
that will certainly do nothing to attract shoppers.
A much better practice is things
like Tim Hortons Camp Day and Dairy Queen's Children's Hospital day where
proceeds go to charity on that day. If a business wants to donate money, by
all means it can do so, but it shouldn't ask its customers to make the
donation.
A business would be wiser
to solicit its vendors for donations rather than its customers.
Government Pension Plan
Expenses
One item that has not much hit
the news is the large increases that governments are facing to fund their
pension plans.
For example, the Alberta
Government Public Service Pension Plan employer contributions have gone from
$66 million in 2001 to $165 million in 2008. That a 150% increase in 7
years! And it's set to go up by a staggering 40% more in 2010 to about $231
million.
36% of this 40% increase or
about $59 million is due to increases in pension funding rates. The
remaining approximate 4% is due to higher salaries.
Back in 2002 the pension funding
rate for this Pension Plan was an average of 10.1% of wages split evenly
between employees and the government. Now, with the losses in the stock
market and lower expected returns and longer life expectance, the required
funding rate is 19.9% of wages split evenly between the employees and the
government.
This would be funny if it were
not so painful. For every government worker making $50,000, about $10,000 is
going into the pension plan. Seven years ago it was $5000. That is taking a
LOT of money out of the consumer economy and diverting it into pension
plans.
And that's just for the main
government pension plan in Alberta.
The story for other Alberta
government pension pans like Teachers, Police, and municipal employees is
the same. HUGE increases in contribution rates. And much the same story
applies to federal pensions and all the other provinces.
Contributions to the Canada
Pension plan are large as well at 9.9% of salary split between employees and
the employers (Including government employers) although only up to a maximum
salary of $46,900.
As it is, people have complained
about rich government pension plans for years. Now tax payers should start
hearing about the higher payments. This is contributing directly to deficits
and perhaps soon to tax increases.
I am surprised that the media
has not yet picked up on this story (to my knowledge at least).
Corporate pension plan
contributions are rising rapidly as well.
All told, pension plans are
taking up a much larger share of gross wages than was the case just a few
years ago.
Stock Market Valuation
Warren Buffett has always said
that the stock market can't be predicted in the short term but that the long
term trend is definitely upwards.
He has said that you can observe
whether or not the stock market is "cheap" or "expensive".
In late 1999 with markets
soaring he famously pointed out in FORTUNE magazine that the large gains
could not be expected to continue. Many laughed and said he was out of touch
with the new high-tech world. He could not predict where the market would
head in the short term as we entered the 2000's but he could observe that
the market was expensive and could not be expected to continue providing
double digit returns. He looked at the double digit average returns earned
in the 17 years from 1982 to 1999.He stated that the mathematics suggested
that an average gain of perhaps 6% per year was more realistic for the next
17 years from 1999 to 2016. As of 2009 it looks like, if anything, rather
than being too pessimistic, he was perhaps too optimistic. The total return
on the S&P 500 (including dividends) from 2000 through to today is
negative.
Using the type of Analysis that
Buffett laid out, I recently updated our analysis of the
valuation of the S&P 500
index.
The analysis indicated an estimated
fair value of the S&P 500 index of 886 (though with a wide range around that
depending on assumptions). Given that the index is currently at 1016, it
would appear to be moderately over-valued.
Nevertheless there are always
individual stocks that offer good value and a good probability of
satisfactory returns.
Winter Vacation
With Summer winding down,
thoughts turn to winter vacation.
If you are looking to rent a
vacation home I recommend the site Vacation Rentals By Owner
http://www.vrbo.com/
This site offers vacation homes
for rent all over the world.
More specifically, my sister has
a home in Tampa, Florida for rent on that Site which may be of interest to
some of you. This house is available for all weeks except February and the
first week of March are now booked. Now that Fall is arriving, the other
weeks and months will be going fast.
Personal
Advertisement: If anyone is looking to rent a newer
vacation home (with screened-in pool)
near Tampa Bay, Florida, my
sister has a 3 bedroom, 2 bathroom house that is now for rent by the week
(discount for 1 month rental). The house is in Riverview which is adjacent to
Tampa to the South. Only about a 20 minute drive to downtown Tampa. The house is in a quiet
and newer subdivision. Most of the neighborhood houses are owner-occupied and
working families so this is a quiet area. The neighbors mostly do not have pools
so they are not even outside that much.
Here is a link to check out pictures of the house and more
details. http://www.vrbo.com/182199
There is a calendar that shows you availability. From that Site you can also "Inquire About the Property" In your note, mention I sent you.
END
Shawn Allen, President
InvestorsFriend Inc.
To see older editions of this newsletter, or to
get off of this email list , click here.