Showing posts with label Hydrology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hydrology. Show all posts

Friday, November 17, 2017

"Nightmare On Bond Street": HY Turmoil Leads To Third Largest Junk Outflow In History

Following this month"s drop in junk bond prices and the 40 bps spread widening in high yield last week - the largest since November 2016 - Bank of America has come up with an apt title for its weekly fund flow report: "Nightmare on Bond Street"...



... and with good reason: last week, US junk bond funds and ETFs reported a $4.43bn outflow this past week - the third largest outflow on record and the largest since August 2014. This follows a smaller $0.94Bn outflow the prior week. Non-US HY contributed an additional $2.3bn worth of redemptions, bringing the global junk outflow figure to -$6.7bn, also the 3rd largest ever.



The near record outflows accompanied the second most aggressive round of selling in the US junk bond market in 2017. The weakness in performance only trails a sell-off that occurred in March, when spreads widened by 61 points in less than three weeks according to FT.


“It was very much a flows driven sell-off last week and in the beginning of this week,” said Tim Schwarz, a credit analyst with Investec Asset Management. “We saw a lot of . . . pockets of illiquidity.”


According to EPFR, roughly half of the US HY withdrawals came last Friday, when more than $2bn left the space in one day. Since then, the outflows have been slowly declining each day, from $585mn on Monday to $494mn yesterday. Somewhat surprisingly, large outflows such as the most recent bout are not correlated with subsequently weak performance. In fact, out of the 15 largest-ever daily high yield outflows recorded, next 3 month returns have been positive 10 times, with an average annualized return of 7.2%. According to BofA, this is likely because most of the spread widening occurs just before the flood of withdrawals, providing an opportunity to capture excess returns should the selloff prove to be temporary. Indeed, as BofA"s credit strategist note, given Thurdsday"s strong secondary performance, "we think such is likely to be the case in last week"s episode as investors have once again embraced a buy-the-dip mentality."


In contrast, EPFR also reports that flows for other fixed income asset classes were relatively stable. However, the large outflows from high yield and loans resulted in a net $1.32bn outflow from all bond funds and ETFs, after a $2.27bn inflow in the prior week.



Inflows to high grade were little changed at $3.31bn, down from $3.41bn a week earlier. Inflows to short-term fixed income increased (to $0.65bn from $0.27bn) while inflows outside of short-term declined (to $2.66bn from $3.15bn). Inflows were higher for high grade funds (to $1.83bn from $1.52bn), but lower for ETFs (to $1.48bn from $1.89bn). Inflows to global EM bonds weakened to $2.66bn from $3.15bn, mostly driven by local currency funds / ETFs. Inflows to munis instead improved to $0.34bn from $0.28bn. Finally, inflows to money markets were close to flat at $0.02bn, down from a $7.58bn inflow in the prior week.



Speaking to the FT, Robert Cusack, a PM at WhaleRock Point Partners, said that the recent high-yield sell-off could be short lived, likening it to the brief but rapid move higher in credit premiums earlier this year. But Cusack added that he is still looking to reduce exposure to the asset class.


“It’s a topic each week in our investment committee meetings and we have been discussing the risk reward in high yield now,” he said. “Our next move is to reduce our exposure in high yield.”


Meanwhile, there were no problems in equity land: flows to stocks improved to a $3.2 billion inflow, which however once again masked an ongoing divergence, as $9.9bn of this amount went to ETFs. Active, i.e., human managers, saw another outflow, this time for $6.7 billion as the non-ETF financial sector continues to die a slow, painful death.









Thursday, September 7, 2017

How The Feds Blocked Effective Flood Insurance

As the floodwaters brought by Hurricane Harvey last week recede and new hurricane Irma moves slowly toward the Eastern U.S., it might be edifying to review how millions of Americans, despite federal anti-flood efforts, came to live and work in hazardous to dangerous flood-prone areas.


The foundation of the current disaster traces back at least to the late 1920s under Republican interventionist Herbert Hoover. In 1927, a very destructive flood occurred along the Mississippi River. Secretary of Commerce Hoover’s relief campaign greatly increased the power of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to implement supposed flood protection. 


No doubt, the Flood Control Act of 1928 helped construct what was considered one of the most impressive systems of levees in the world along the Mississippi River. However, the one thing it did not do was control flooding. While the new levee system prevented flooding in some areas, it quickened the natural current of the river which helped produce flooding in other areas. Other unforeseen consequences were the reductions in natural soil deposits and natural flow of water into the river"s flood plains.


Less than a decade later, another damaging flood in New England helped drive the passage of the National Flood Control Act of 1936. This Act was a real turning point in terms of centralization. Besides doubling the size of the federal flood-control program, it signaled that Congress would no longer merely provide occasional flood relief and regard floods as principally a local matter. It effectively enlisted the federal government and Army Corps of Engineers in the battle against floods.


For the rest of the 1930s and 1940s, private insurance markets were undermined because the Army Corps of Engineers built hundred-year flood walls which reduced risk just enough for homeowners to make private flood insurance too costly. On the other hand, private insurers saw these walls as insufficient protection which did not reduce risk enough. Regardless, an impasse was created for private markets that was both figuratively and literally cemented in place by the Army Corps.


Enter the New Deal central planners of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) in 1953. TVA began monitoring flood-prone areas in and around one hundred and fifty towns and cities in its jurisdiction. At first, TVA used a worst-case standard from the Army Corps, regardless of whether such a flood had ever actually occurred.


This stringent standard was quickly abandoned when it was realized that it would eliminate huge areas of potential development that not only local private and public planners wanted, but TVA as well since part of its conflicted mission was spurring development. Thus TVA adopted a new standard skewed in favor of development that was based on past floods that occurred inside a 60- or 100-mile zone from proposed development.


Outside TVA’s jurisdiction, the U.S. Geological Survey and Army Corps of Engineers mapped flood plains with roughly the same backward-looking standard. By the end of the 1960s, all three agencies had laid the groundwork for a national map of floodplains. A very bad standard had been created.


Of course no tapestry of disastrous policies would be complete without a contribution by Lyndon Baines Johnson, thus the Southeast Hurricane Disaster Relief Act of 1965. This Act authorized $500 million in spending to assist in repairing damage created by Hurricane Betsy.


Next came the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, which created the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which covered up to $250,000 in damage to single-family houses and buildings in cities and towns meeting the flawed federal flood-plain criteria.


The absolute death knell for any semblance of economic and actuarial soundness in the NFIP came in 1973, when Congress allowed coverage to be extended to property owners who should have enrolled in the program and paid for insurance but did not.


While none of this is to say that had more rigorous private standards prevailed and the Army Corps and TVA never been created, that no one"s residence or workplace would ever have flooded.


However, there"s no doubt that the federal government"s perverse subsidization of residential and commercial development in flood-prone areas as well as artificially cheap flood insurance completely detached from risk assessment have contributed to not only the untold loss of billions of dollars of property, but lives as well.

Saturday, August 19, 2017

"Colossal Fraud": Lawsuit Accuses Poland Spring Of Selling Groundwater

Ever wonder if that bottled mineral water you just spent several dollars on is really mineral water? According to a bombshell new lawsuit filed this week, at least in the case of one company it isn"t.


A group of bottled water drinkers has brought a class action lawsuit against Nestle, the company which owns Poland Spring, alleging that the Maine business has long deceived consumers by mislabeling common groundwater. The lawsuit was filed on Tuesday in a Connecticut federal court and accuses Nestle Waters North America Inc. of a “colossal fraud perpetrated against American consumers” the Bangor Daily News reports.


The plaintiffs claim that falsely labeling its "groundwater" product as pure spring water allowed Nestle to sell Poland Spring water at a premium; as a result the consumers who brought the legal action are seeking at least $5 million in monetary damages for a national class and several state subclasses. They requested a jury trial. The civil suit was brought by 11 people from the Northeast who collectively spent thousands of dollars on Poland Spring brand water in recent years. It seeks millions of dollars in damages for a nationwide class and hinges on whether the sources of Poland Spring water meet the Food and Drug Administration’s definition of a spring.


The 325-page lawsuit, which was filed by lawyers from four firms, claims that none of the company’s Maine water sources meets the federal definition for spring water and that the company has “politically compromised” state regulators. Rather than spring water, Nestle Waters is actually purifying and bottling groundwater, some of which comes from sites near waste and garbage dumps, the suit claims. The legal challenge comes as Nestle is looking to expand its operations in Maine.





For instance, the suit claims that the company’s wells in Poland, Maine, have never been scientifically proven to be connected to a spring and draw in surface water, which cannot legally be called spring water. It further alleges that the company has put water from some of these wells through a purification process that disqualifies it as spring water under federal regulations.



The suit makes similar claims about Poland Spring water sources in Hollis, Fryeburg, Denmark, Dallas Plantation, Pierce Pond Township and Kingfield.



Poland Spring has gotten away with this deception for years, the suit claims, by co-opting state regulators and interweaving its interests with those of state government. Since 1998 the company has generated millions of dollars for Maine through licensing agreements, and since 2003 it has had an executive on the governor-appointed body that oversees the state drinking-water regulation enforcement agency, the suit states.





The court complaint further says that the Maine Drinking Water Program scientist who approved many of the company’s spring water permits spent a decade working with this executive at a private engineering firm and that the agency failed to get independent proof of the springs’ existence.



In response to the lawsuit, a Nestle Waters spokesperson said that its water meets all relevant federal and state regulations on the classification and collection of spring water and that the suit is “an obvious attempt to manipulate the legal system for personal gain.”


“The claims made in the lawsuit are without merit. Poland Spring is 100 [percent] spring water.”


This is not the first time that Nestle Waters has faced such allegations. In 2003, it settled a class action lawsuit alleging that Poland Spring water doesn’t come from a spring. In that case, the company did not admit the allegation but agreed to pay about $10 million in discounts to consumers and charity contributions. In other words, pulling a page from Wall Street, it neither admitted, nor denied guilt.


The full lawsuit is below

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Nevada Weather Service Warns Of Dam Failure Threat

Update: according to an update posted moments ago by the Nevada Weather Service in Reno, the Flash Flood Warning has been canceled as the water has receded in the Dayton Retention Pond and it is no longer expected to fail.



* * *


It appears another damn dam is failing. After earlier issuing a flash flood warning, Reno Weather Service warned residents "This is not a drill" as County Emergency Managers noted a Dam Retention Pond is full and overflowing into drainages.


The initial tweet from NWS is quite concerning...




But, the good news is that there hjas been no dam failure...



But as NWS notes, the situation could change in the next few  hours.





THE FLASH FLOOD WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 630 PM PST FOR NORTHERN LYON COUNTY...
 
 At 153 PM PST, the Lyon County Emergency Manager indicated that the  South Dayton Retention Pond is full and overflowing into drainages. 



No failure has occurred and no homes or properties are currently  threatened.


However, the situation could change in the next few  hours.
 
 PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...


Pay attention to the latest information from emergency officials and  the National Weather Service in case the water retention pond fails.



Rain continues to fall in Reno...



Coming so soon after the Oroville Dam debacle, local residents are right to be concerned.