Below is an article from my friend Brandon…..again.  He writes such great stuff….that….for obvious reason….I like to post it!  Enjoy…until next time….rob

The Führer Principle

In grade school, I remember asking myself how could the German people elect someone as evil as Adolf Hitler. How could they allow such a monster to become supreme chancellor? Understanding how it happened is very important, mainly so it does not happened again. The significance of this newsletter will only make sense by looking through the lens of today’s events. Many of the main ingredients that led to the Nazi take over are present today. Recognizing the circumstances is the solution to history not repeating itself.

The beginning of the end for the Weimar Republic began with the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. For the German people, the treaty was humiliating. The treaty placed heavy restrictions on Germany much of which were embarrassing for the once proud nation. The German army was reduced to one hundred thousand solders and arms for citizens became non-existent.  The initial German economic fatalities due to the treaty were shocking. Germany’s territories vanished overnight. Germany lost approximately 13.5% of its total land mass, 13% of its industrial productivity, and more than 10% of its population. Additionally, the loss of important mining regions such as the Saar and Upper Silesia resulted in a loss of some 74% of iron ore and approximately 25% of its coal reserves. Historians and economists have long deliberated the real effects of the treaty but one thing is for certain it lead to “deprivations that shattered their faith in the democratic process and left them cynical and alienated.” –G.A. Craig

Germany’s economic situation never improved. To keep up with the stringent demands of the treaty, the Weimar Republic faced hyperinflation never seen before in history. The German Mark ratio to the U.S. dollar was 4 to 1 near the end of the WWI. It was 8 to 1 in 1919, 250 to 1 in 1921, and 2000 to 1 in 1923. The Weimar government, at various times, faced food shortages, massive unemployment, and an unprecedented economic depression. By 1932, some 6 million Germans were unemployed. Millions of them were homeless living on the streets relying on soup kitchens and charity organizations. “Men standing hopelessly on street corners of every industrial town in Germany; houses without food or warmth; young people without the chance of a job. All these things explain the bitterness which burned in the minds of millions of ordinary Germans.”

The escalation of political violence in Weimar Germany must certainly be factored in as a contributory reason for the country’s political volatility. Beginning with the emergence of the Freikorps, which later became the brutal SS, formed units immediately after the declaration of the Republic. The tendency toward violence became entrenched in Weimar politics after the 1919 assassinations of Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. Large protests and riots became an all too familiar sight for the citizens of Germany.

Among the widespread disarray and frustration, the basic notion of a government was being questioned. What type of government could lead and govern the will of the people? This ongoing debate became known as the Führer Principle. The Führer Principle is established on the acknowledgment that the true will of the people cannot be revealed through plebiscites but that the will of the people in its natural and virtuous state can only be articulated through the Führer. Therefore, a difference must be drawn between the theoretical will of the people in a parliamentary democracy, which simply echoes the discord of diverse social perspectives, and the true will of the people in the Führer-state. Hitler took the Führer Principle and redefined it as himself…he was the Führer. Redefining the Führer was nothing short of audacious. It was captivating and alluring to many who were famished for change.

Many of the governing members in the Reichstag (congress) struggled to tame and communicate effectively to the youth of Germany. The Reichstag members continually doubted the youth’s ability to recognize a just government. Keep in mind most of Germany’s youth grew up in this chaotic state. Their view towards the government was distorted to say the least. The Weimar Republic only lasted 14 years but before that Germany spent the last 5 years in battle. A huge cohort of individuals only knew suffering and turmoil. Disconnect between the defenders of the former Kaiser rule and much more progressive governments were mounting daily. During the short lived Weimar Republic, Communism, Socialism, and a whirl of leaders/dictators were fighting for control.

Hitler knew very well that the youth’s mind were especially susceptible. This is exactly why he began with them. In the beginning, his messages were engineered for the youth. He knew the youth would be prone to messages of change and optimism. Joseph Goebbels (Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda) used propaganda methods to manipulate the masses. It was this desolate desire for change that gave Hitler his power.

The straw that broke the camels back for the Weimar Republic was the American Great Depression. The stock market crash of 1929 sent shock waves across Europe. The crash knocked Germany into the gallows. It was Hitler’s time to move. On September 14th, 1930, the Reichstag elections were held. The results were shocking. The Nazis had entered the register as the ninth and smallest of Germany’s political parties. The German people voted. The Nazis controlled 107 seats after that election. In November 1932, Hitler was defeated in the presidential election to WWI veteran Paul von Hindenburg. He received 42% of the votes. Hitler decided to enter a coalition government as chancellor in January 1933. Upon the death of Hindenburg in August 1934, Hitler become successor by popular vote.

Today, we are suffering the ongoing effects of the worst recession since the Great Depression. We are facing a global economic contraction. Greece is on the verge of insolvency and the US is limping along. Worldwide riots and protests have plagued the streets invoking for revolution. Frustration levels are swelling. This is the formula for calamity. However, it begins with the youth. Vladimir Lenin famously referred to youth uprisings as “useful idiots”. With the exception of the American Revolution, most revolutions in history conclude with a radical party seizing opportunity out of the political madness. People such as Hitler, Mao, and Lenin took advantage of a chaotic situation. I do not foresee a Weimar revolution of this magnitude anytime in the near future. Nevertheless, if we are not careful and mindful of the situation it becomes an unquestionable possibility. Education and knowledge of the truth is the only thing that will prevent history from repeating itself.

Have a great weekend my friends!

Brandon Saylor
-Associate

Below is a post from Bob Bach……I hope you enjoy…..rob

Manufacturers Rally

Analysts shuddered two months ago when the monthly Business Outlook Survey from the Philadelphia Federal Reserve plummeted unexpectedly, signaling a worrisome slowdown for manufacturers in the region. Although it covers only a corner of the U.S. – eastern Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey and Delaware – the survey provides an early clue to the more widely followed manufacturing index from the Institute for Supply Management. The dismal August reading from the Philly Fed raised fears that the economy was sliding into recession.

But the manufacturing sector is expanding again according to the October survey, released yesterday. The survey asks manufacturers a list of questions with three possible answers – increase, decrease and no change – and calculates a diffusion index for each question, which is the difference between the percentage of respondents citing an increase and those citing a decrease. The index rose from minus 17.5 in September to 8.7 in October, the largest one-month gain since the early 1980s. The index measuring activity levels expected in six months increased to its highest reading since April before the economy began to slow. The survey doesn’t point to robust growth ahead, but it is consistent with Grubb & Ellis research showing sustained demand for industrial space over the past two quarters and this quarter as well. Together with other recent indicators such as retail sales and weekly jobless claims, the Philly Fed survey suggests that the economy is fighting off a near-term recession.

Have a great weekend.

Best regards,
Bob

Robert Bach
SVP, Chief Economist
Grubb & Ellis
312.698.6754

Before I jump into the history lesson for the day, let me set the context by explaining the elementary moral of the laws of economics. As they say, “economics is the painful elaboration of the obvious.”  And while this old joke is true, the laws of economics do not bend or bypass stature. This is why we call them laws. There is no immunity to a government or an individual who accumulates too much debt. You either have to spend less and balance or face insolvency.  The same law of economics applies to the United States Federal Government.

Our first option is to implement austerity measures. Australia, among other countries, should be looked to for inspiration.  Australia went through a downgrade experience. In 1986, both Moody’s and Standard and Poor’s downgraded Australia’s foreign currency rating. Australia was downgraded a second time in 1989, after little action was taken to make the necessary changes. The shockwaves of the second downgrade sent Australia into a deep recession. The treasurer, Paul Keating, cautioned that Australia was in jeopardy of becoming a “banana republic.” Instead of running budget deficits and playing the blame game, he altered the direction and, after two years, delivered the first surplus. “But that did not get our credit rating back,” Keating said. “We did not recover our AAA rating until 2003.” It took a little over 17 years after that first downgrade for to Australia completely recover.

Canada also endured a manifold stage downgrade over a period of several years. In October of 1992, S&P dropped Canada’s foreign debt rating by one notch from AAA to AA+. Interestingly, there was little impact on Canadian markets. Moody’s followed S&P and downgraded the foreign debt rating by one notch. The 10-year note increased 0.45% over the subsequent months and stocks plunged 6%. In April 1995, Moody’s downgraded Canada again. In reaction to the downgrades and severe negative economic news, Canada enacted strict budget reforms. Prime Minister Jean Chrétien slashed federal spending by a monstrous 20%.  He fired 23% of public sector workers, raised taxes, cut defense expenditures by 15%, lacerated certain subsidies by 40% to 60% and eradicated some ministries completely. Canada did not regain the prestigious AAA rating until 2002.
There are two things to be cognizant of in the next few years. Both Australia and Canada reported minor hiccups in economic growth after the 1st downgrade. It was only after the second downgrade did both countries experience a chain reaction to brutal economic consequences. They also reacted with swift and bold changes only after the second downgrade. If history is any guide, not much will change with the 1st downgrade. As it sits now, S&P has the United States on a negative outlook. It only seems reasonable to assume we will be downgraded again. A second downgrade seems especially eminent because Congress has such a wide ideological rift in remedy for the debt problems. The second thing to be aware of is the status of other AAA rated countries. Besides Australia and Canada there are 12 other countries with a AAA credit rating. The other countries are Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland and England. In the near future, I can see most, if not all, of the European nations challenged with a downgrade. France and England seem especially vulnerable in these volatile times.

Option number two is to inflate our way to “prosperity”. Quantitative easing is a fancy way of saying the Fed is going to print (or as they say “digitize”) money to ease our debt and stimulate the economy. Hoping that this will pave a way for a brighter economic climate is just as wishful as magically finding the other side of the rainbow. It does not work. The by product is always inflation or hyperinflation. Inflation is a law of economics. History is my witness.

Think Weimar Republic, Germany, post World War I. The German Mark ratio to the U.S. dollar was 4 to 1 near the end of the war. It was 8 to 1 in 1919, 250 to 1 in 1921, and 2000 to 1 in 1923. Hyper-inflation hit so hard that newspapers sold for $100 billion marks! It was reported that most people were paid by the hour so individuals could purchase goods during their lunch break before the mark slipped further into the value of nothing.

In 1989, after years of massive budget deficits that were financed with borrowing from abroad, the Argentinean government resorted to the printing press. Hyperinflation soon kicked in. It was reported that grocery stores did not price any inventory. A man with a microphone would broadcast the prices of numerous items, frequently increasing the price every few hours by 30% or more. Workers would get their pay in cash and dash to the store to buy anything. By the end of the week their pay would be worthless.
Zimbabwe has been plagued for years with colossal deficits. In 2008, Zimbabwe’s annual inflation rate reached 516 quintillion per cent, that is 516 followed by 18 zeros. For the common Zimbabwean, the end result is atrocious. They must spend money as soon as they get it before it loses its value. The dysfunctional economy means that goods are in dreadfully short supply and they must spend hours searching for things to buy.

Of course, these are extreme examples however it goes to show, inflation is not a theoretical issue; it is reality. There are many other examples such as Hungary (1946), Japan (2001), and the United States (1933).The history and consequences of hyperinflation is required material in most Latin American schools. The United States is not exempt to these fundamental laws. Expect QE3 to be on the horizon despite many assertions to the contrary.

We are at the crossroads of a very important historical decision. Quantitative easing is the hail marry of economics. It is the last resort. For the sake of the future of this country, I hope we can find a way to reduce federal spending and find a way to balance. It really is the only way of out of this hole.
Brandon Saylor
-Associate

I know it has been a while but I truly want to get back into the swing of things and keep this blog going.  Once recognized as one of the top ten commercial real estate investing blogs in the country….now….just another blog…maybe worse.  I hope to fix that in the next coming months.  So….I would like to kick things off …..again….

I would like to introduce you to my buddy and colleague, Brandon Saylor….he’s a writer and a good one at that…..check out his latest below.  Brandon is sometimes controversial but….I agree with most of what he says…if not all.  With Brandon’s permission….I will be posting Brandon’s writings on this blog.

Brandon Saylor

Anatomy of an Economic Bubble

This recession has taught me a lifetime worth of knowledge. Observing the catastrophic meltdown that occurred in 2008 seared lessons within me. One of these fundamental lessons is the understanding of economic cycles and the red flags of danger. In short, the economic meltdown of 2008 began with the bubble bursting of credit markets affecting everything from real estate to the stock market. It is paramount to understand the anatomy of a bubble and the natural economic cycles that ebb and flow through time. Below are the main stages of a bubble.

There are no time limits between each stage. The “stealth phase” is the 1st phase in which the asset is adhering to its core fundamentals. Subsequently, the “awareness phase” is when the value of the asset begins to rise above its fundamental value. In the third phase, the asset value explodes as the media begins to remark about its escalating value. A swelling number of investors eulogize the merits of the asset as they merge with the cause.

In the final phase, the value of the asset begins to dissipate. Many naive investors still believe it will continue to increase in value. The daunting reality sets in that the asset is overpriced and everyone tries to get out. Unfortunately, many are left behind as the value of the asset plummets to its long term fundamental value.

Conceivably, the most legendary and oldest, well-documented instance of a speculative bubble is the “tulipmania” that hit 17th century Holland like a bomb. The tulip became an instant hit upon its introduction to Western Europe in the mid 16th century. Dutch collectors developed a hierarchy of tulip varieties based upon their species and coloring. Because it was impossible to determine which variation would bloom from a particular bulb, the tulip grew into an asset of speculation. Before the 1630s, the bulbs were popular among the extreme wealthy and were flaunted to exhibit class. By the mid 1630s, the obsession caught on with the middle class and lower socioeconomic classes. The increased demand caused the price of the bulbs toescalate dramatically.

The market reached its pinnacle in late 1636 and early 1637, after the bulbs had been seeded to blossom the following spring. People mortgaged their homes and traded in their savings in order to buy rare and exotic bulbs to resale at higher prices.

In February 1637, as winter turned to spring the bulbs were close to flowering, consumer confidence evaporated and the market suddenly crashed. As the price collapsed, nobody would buy the bulbs, even though they offered them at one quarter of the sums they had paid for them. The tulip bubble burst is alluded to in the recent sequel of Wall Street 2.

Economic bubbles are a reality of any capitalistic monetary system. The point of this email is to recognize the red flags before it is too late. The first red flag is to recognize the larger macroeconomic forces that dictate the market. It is now understood the catalyst for any bubble begins with easy money. The Austrian School of Economics believes “asset bubbles occur when there is an extended period of low interest rates coupled with an expansion of credit. The availability of cheap money encourages speculation in one or more asset classes causing the price to escalate rapidly exceeding their underlying fundamental value.” The availability of cheap money promotes an over abundance of growth. Consequently, a bubble ensues. Bubbles can be an excellent way to make money if you get in at some stage in the “awareness phase” and get out before you reach the inevitable landslide. The key to success is to not be trapped when the eruption begins.

What is the next bubble? In the past decade, we have had the escalation and crash of the dotcoms, the oil bubble and the monstrous credit bubble following the oil crash. Is the stock market the next big bubble? The Dow Jones industrial average is now trading at 86% of its all time high of 14,164.53. Is it gold? Gold is constantly breaking record prices for the value of a troy ounce of gold. Could it be the bond market? Another energy bubble? At this point, it is hard to determine which market/asset is going to be the next bubble. However, armed with the knowledge of warning signs it will be easier to decipher the craze when an asset is going gangbusters.

Ultimately, there are two things about economic bubbles I want to leave with you today. Greed intensifies the problem and it is the definitive drive to astronomical prices. As they say, “Avarice has ruined more souls than extravagance.” And ask yourself does this type of speculative behavior make sense?  Does gold trading at $1,455/oz make sense? Is the stock market value reflective of the health of the economy? Does $107/ barrel of oil make sense? If common sense does not fit the reality of the time then maybe it is a good time to get out before it is too late.

Have a great weekend my friends!

-Brandon Saylor

Good stuff huh?

If you want to catch Brandon’s future writings as well as past writings….subscribe at the top right corner….

Until next time….rob

The Real Wealth Expert Panel

Greetings from the metropolis of Cedar Crest, NM!

Today’s post comes from a question from a friend of mine.  It is a detour from real estate, but like most of us, we have investments in different types of vehicles….stocks and mutual funds for example.  So…I thought this may be helpful for some of you…..

Rob, I have a meeting with my financial planner next Tuesday.  I primarily invest in mutual funds and stocks.  My portfolio has dwindled buy 50%.  I would like to know what questions I should ask my financial planner in order to right the ship.

I took the question to my good friends Emily and Steve….you can read both of their replies below….

There is a lot of information here….so feel free to print out…..

Response from Emily:

Hi Rob,

Emily Cressey Real Estate Investor and Coach

I think it’s a great question, and I would be glad to weigh in with some thoughts.

There’s nothing like suffering a down market to make you stop and re-evaluate your investment strategy.

However, a down or volatile market is rarely the best time to sell off mutual funds.  These are the days to stick to your strategy and dollar-cost-average your way into the market while prices are low.  (As I write this, I don’t think the market is particularly low or undervalued, I’m just speaking in general about when the market is “down.”)

Most mutual fund investors invest for the long term with the assumption that the market will go up approximately 11% a year on average.  However, with the current political climate and anticipated changes in increased government spending and government debt, as well as the potential government-takeover of the private medical sector, I think it’s reasonable to question these underlying assumptions, and hedge your bets a bit in case the next 100 years in the stock market don’t perform as well as the prior 80 years have.

One of the biggest things to look at is your asset allocation.

Within the stock market, you may have created some diversity.  Personally I invest in the following funds:

• S&P 500 – 35% of portfolio
• Small and Midcap Index Fund – 35% of Portfolio
• Total International Fund: 25%
• REITS: 5%

I don’t have a larger share of REITS because I have real estate investments outside of my stock investments.

I am more heavily invested internationally now than I have been in the past due to concerns about the future of the US economy.

I hold no bonds because their primary purpose in a securities portfolio is generally to provide stability – at the cost of lower returns.  I am young enough that I don’t seek security in my portfolio at this time.  I am chasing the higher returns.  This may change as I get nearer to the age at which I plan to start pulling money out of the portfolio or living off its returns.

I do have about 5-10% of my investable assests available as liquid cash reserves that are available to invest in various things including real estate or stock should an excellent opportunity present itself. This also lends some stability to the portfolio should something terrible happen.

In addition, I keep a 6-month emergency reserve for my family, separate savings accounts to save up for things like furniture or a new car, and operating capital for my businesses in case a rental property goes vacant or I need to do a repair on a house, pay my accountant, etc.

I think as far as questions to ask your financial planner go, I would focus on evaluating your overall portfolio strategy at this time to see if it still meets your needs.  Do you have the cash reserves, the portfolio-stabilizing bonds and cash, and the life insurance and operating capital you need to meet your needs?  Are you comfortable with the overall risk and return of the assets you are holding?  Do you need to re-balance anything?  And finally are there other asset classes that it makes sense for you to diversify into… real estate you own and operate, businesses, private mortgages, gold, etc.  My parents says their best-performing asset last year was a loan they made to me.  Personally, my cash-flow real estate is doing well, it’s always nice to get checks in the mail!

There are lots of ways to invest – but they are not all “easy” things for your financial planner to sell.  If you are willing to put the time into other types of investments, start with some books at the library (Or this blog, if it’s commercial real estate), and find out what people do who are successful with those investments, and what the risks are, as well as the ramp-up-time.

A lot of people are risk-tolerant on paper, but then when there is a shake-up, they have trouble staying the course.  It’s no fun to lose a million bucks just because the stock market has a bad day.

If you’re not comfortable with the losses you’ve taken, don’t just “Sell” to stabilize things, but look toward starting to buy some different asset classes that will create a more stable base for your net worth.

Also, remember to see what you need to do for your different goals – saving for kids college is a much different time line and should have a different strategy than saving for retirement.

I invest for retirement and my son’s college separately.  Our goal is 20% of our income going into retirement savings.  After we’ve covered that, our extra savings goes into paying down our mortgage.  Currently we’re not putting any more money into real estate at the moment, because it already represents a significant chunk of our assets, and we’re trying to diversify a bit to spread out the risk and return.  The nice thing about paying down debt is that you get an immediate, guaranteed, tax-free return!

Well, that was long-winded, but it hopefully will give you some good things to think about.

The challenge about financial planning in the abstract is that there is so much that is about YOU, and your situation, and not just “What the book says.”  I think you’ll have a great conversation with your financial advisor, and please let us know if you have any further questions!

Response from Steve:

Rob,

Before I give my answer to your friend’s question, I’m going to answer a that wasn’t
asked but that I believe is very relevant …

“How can I optimally work with any advisors”?

I strongly believe in and use advisors myself (attorneys, book-keepers,
CPA’s, physical training, financial mentoring, business mentoring and have
in the past used financial planners for years).

I believe three of the most significant keys to the effectiveness of your
advisors are:

1. Are my advisors really advising me for my best interest?
Are they teaching me HOW to think about things or just saying “do this”?
You of course have to expect and ask for this as often people want to take
the easy way out and just have someone tell them what they need to do.  For
example I really like my Iron-Man triathlon coach … except she doesn’t
really want to explain WHY we’re doing certain things.

2. Is my advisor actually DOING what’s being advised or are they simply
making money from giving the “advice”?
This is especially true in the area of financial planners, many of whom are
doing poor financially themselves.  This is why I’m following my passion of
teaching/coaching others as their “personal CFO” … to teach them HOW to
think financially what’s best for them.

3. And lastly and this is an important one … The quality of my advisor
depends on ME and the questions I ask.
While I greatly appreciate the advisors I use, the quality of the questions
I ask makes a big difference.  For example notice the difference with the
following two questions about the same topic.

“Should I invest in this opportunity”?

“What should I think about before I choose to invest in this opportunity,
and what are the risks I should consider before doing so?  How CAN I
optimally make this investment”?

For example if I was asked the 2nd question I might reply with the following
helping you think through the following.

“It depends” … What upside do you see (is it worth considering assuming
this works out as planned and will you do this type of investment again …
if not why bother looking further?  Let’s review the risks associated with
this type of investment.  (NOTE this may heavily depend upon YOU … for
example since I invest in cash-flow apartment complexes I view them as safe,
while I’m no longer involved with stocks and thus for me they’re more risky.
WHATEVER type of investment you choose you should at least understand the
basics of them (see attachment).  Many people invest in mutual funds which
are very easy but not many know that if you purchase towards the end of the
year you’ll likely be charged taxes as though you’d owned the fund all year.
As you grow as an investor you’ll learn to ask better questions and hence
get better answers.  You do NOT need to know all the details but at least
how the basics work.  ASK your advisor to explain them to you.

Some suggested questions first for YOU (not your advisor):

1. What is the goal of this investment (i.e. have enough money in 10
years for most of my daughters college education)?

2. Do I understand the “basics” of how stock and mutual fund
investing     works?  If not you may want to read “Take on the Street -
What Wall     Street and Corporate America Don’t Want You to Know & What
you Can Do     to Fight Back” – Arther Levitt, former chairman of SEC.  I
am NOT     saying you shouldn’t invest in stocks or mutual funds … I did for
years and others are still doing it successfully.  I have more of a     bias
for real estate as I have advantages there vs. the stock market
where I don’t.  I would recommend you learn about options, puts, and
calls which can protect you if you’re investing in the market vs. the
advice “just invest for the long term” … which by the way mutual     fund
companies don’t do (i.e. their turnover ratio is often greater     than 1 where
they sell every stock in the fund at least once a year).

OK, so I’m a little long winded and as you can see I have an opinion on
this, let’s get back to the “original question”

Questions for your financial planner?

1. How are you compensated from my investments?
* Is it a flat fee (i.e. % of your $’s invested) or commission / loads on
your investments?  For example in the insurance world brokers receive a
larger commission for selling more expensive “whole life” policies vs. term.
It helps to understand any potential biases.
* There are some great financial planners and some really do know about the
stock market, but interestingly enough last I heard about 80% of the index
funds (such as S&P 500 index) outperform the actively managed funds with
much higher fees.  If my portfolio over time isn’t doing better than “the
market” … such as S&P 500) maybe I should just invest myself in low cost
index funds, and then as needed pay an advisor (maybe for services rendered
or by the hour) for advice.  Again, I DO recommend advisors but in the right
context.

2. What changes would you suggest, and why?
KEY follow-up question – “will you guarantee that”?  In most cases the
answer will be “no, of course I can’t guarantee that stocks on average
return 12%”.  The reason I mention this is to learn to recognize someone’s
opinion vs. fact.  You can’t always get facts but often opinions are
presented as fact

Thanks Steve and Emily….

Until next time…..rob