TWA: Get it? Got it? Good.

Tomahawk, WI 4/3/2012 (StreetBeat) -- Aristotle, it is said, had a particular view on how best to communicate an important idea to an audience. Begin by telling them what it is you plan on telling them. Then tell them. And in conclusion, tell them what it is that you told them.

Fed boss Bernanke is not happy with the labor market. He’s the first to acknowledge that the Unemployment Rate has fallen from a peak of ten percent down to 8.3% in relatively short order and he claims to be encouraged by the twenty-four month winning streak for private sector payroll growth, including the current six-month average gain of more than two-hundred thousand per month. But, despite that good news, he just can’t prove to his own satisfaction that the trend is as good as it looks; he’s worried that some of the data, such as the jobless rate, is misleading and could be the basis of incorrect conclusions and result in wrong-headed policy decisions. He has decided to communicate these concerns in a clear and thorough manner; I think one should pay attention.

First tell your audience what you are going to tell them.

In early February Bernanke testified before Committees in both houses of Congress that he thought some of the data that makes headlines, such as the declining unemployment rate, are likely understating the weakness of the labor market. Without going into much detail he expressed concern that the employed to population ratio and the unusually high level of long-term unemployment were indicating trouble in the labor market is ongoing.

Tell them.

On March 26 Bernanke gave a speech before the National Association of Business Economists (NABE); it was called “Recent Developments in the Labor Market”. In fifteen pages of text, in addition to fourteen charts, he discussed in great detail the concerns that he mentioned briefly in February on Capitol Hill. He explained his quandary at the top, “We have seen some positive signs on the jobs front recently, including a pickup in monthly payroll gains and a notable decline in the unemployment rate. That is the good news. At the same time, some key questions are unresolved. For example, the better jobs numbers seem somewhat out of sync with the overall pace of economic expansion. What explains this apparent discrepancy and what implications does it have for the future course of the labor market and the economy?” Among the labor market topics that he touched upon were the debilitating effect of long term unemployment on the individual and the society, the fact that much of the statistical improvement is from a decline in firing as opposed to an increase in hiring, and the mismatch between sluggish economic growth and the sharp decline in the unemployment rate. Bernanke is not happy with the labor market and, in this speech, he told us why that is so.

But there is another layer to Bernanke’s concern about the labor market, a layer that I think is the real heart of the matter. He is worried that the dichotomous labor market data will lead policy makers to the conclusion that the problems are structural and not cyclical. And if that is the case decisions will be taken using the assumption that little more can be done to help the labor market. Bernanke is not of that opinion, and he wants us to know that the Fed will not stand down, not now anyway and likely, not anytime soon.

Early in the NABE speech Bernanke told the audience the position he will defend, “I will argue today that, while both cyclical and structural forces have doubtless contributed to the increase in long-term unemployment, the continued weakness in aggregate demand is likely the predominant factor.

Consequently, the Federal Reserve’s accommodative monetary policies, by providing support for demand and for the recovery, should help, over time, to reduce long-term unemployment as well.” And then he defended that stance, “A pessimistic view is that a large share of the unemployment we are seeing, particularly the longer-term unemployment, is structural in nature, reflecting factors such as inadequate skills or mismatches between the types of skills that workers have and the skills that employers demand. If this view is correct, then high levels of long-term unemployment could persist for quite a while, even after the economy has more fully recovered. And it appears true that over the past two decades or so, structural factors have been responsible for some increase in long-term unemployment…However, although structural shifts are no doubt important in the longer term, my reading of the research is that, at most, a modest portion of the recent sharp increase in long-term unemployment is due to persistent structural factors.” He then took the time to remind the crowd of the point he had strived to make in the speech, “…further significant improvements in the unemployment rate will likely require a more-rapid expansion of production and demand from consumers and businesses, a process that can be supported by continued accommodative policies. I also discussed long-term unemployment today, arguing that cyclical rather than structural factors are likely the primary source of its substantial increase during the recession. If this assessment is correct, then accommodative policies to support the economic recovery will help address this problem as well.”

Bernanke is a student of the history of the Fed. He does not want to repeat the Fed’s mistakes in the late 1930s that, in retrospect, seemed to extend the Depression unnecessarily. I think that he is very sensitive to the idea that if he decides that the labor market’s difficulties are now a structural problem and therefore conducts Fed policy from that perspective, that he will be cutting loose millions of former and or future workers from the labor market; extending the personal Depression of those workers unnecessarily in addition to wider societal implications as well, or so I could imagine Bernanke surmising. In regards to that view, he warned the NABE audience of the consequences of giving up too soon on the goal of returning the labor market to its former condition, “We must watch long-term unemployment especially carefully, however. Even if the primary cause of high long-term unemployment is insufficient demand, if progress in reducing unemployment is too slow, the long-term unemployed will see their skills and labor force attachment atrophy further, possibly converting a cyclical problem into a structural one.” Or, in other words, Bernanke does not plan to walk away from a battle that he does not think is over.

Tell them what it is that you just told them.

Shortly after Bernanke completed his speech at NABE the New York Fed announced that their in-house blog, Liberty Street Economics, would present, over the following few days, six essays on the labor market. Coincidentally, the essays’ content was strikingly similar to the topics that were covered by the chairman of the Federal Reserve System in a speech that same day. Not to say that the essays were merely reiterations of Bernanke’s opinions, but the connection between the two is inescapable and the message is, I think, clear; this is the key topic, familiarize yourself with it.

Bernanke did not leave the review of his message solely to others. The day following the NABE speech he took the unusual step of being interviewed on ABC News, where he added this coda to his view of the labor market and what he sees as the proper response from the Fed.

Bernanke: “It’s great to see unemployment come down the way it has recently. And there are a lot of other indicators in the labor market which are positive. But—again we’re still millions of jobs below where we were before the recession.”

Diane Sawyer: “You worried that people are getting too optimistic?”

Bernanke: “Well, optimism’s a good thing. It –makes people go out and –you know, start businesses and spend and do whatever is necessary to get the economy going. But I think as policymakers we need to be –cautious and---and not—not change policy too quickly.”

Bernanke told us the topic, explained the topic in detail and then reminded us of his point. Since he is the chairman of the Fed it is a point that matters, whether or not it is one to which you can agree.

StreetBeat Disclaimer

Distributed by Viestly

TWA: The Round Hole and the Square Peg

Tomahawk, WI 10/18/2011 (PennyPayDay) – Last week the September Retail Sales data was released. The headline reading for sales showed a 1.1% improvement from the month before; the best monthly result since February. Sales are up almost eight percent on a year on year basis. Eight percent also happens to be the 12-month average annualized gain for sales; the highest mark since 2000. These numbers would seem to suggest that the consumer is back, free of the recessionary hair shirt and spending freely.

On the same day of the retail report the University of Michigan Survey of Consumers reported that sentiment had fallen in early October, continuing a recent trend. The headline index fell a couple of points to 57.5 and is now just two points or so above the lowest levels seen during the recession. The expectations component has collapsed since early this year and the latest reading is 47.0, the lowest level since 1980. The text of the report was even more dire than the indexes would indicate; “An all-time record number of consumers cited income declines when asked to explain how their finances had recently changed and the largest proportion of consumers ever recorded expected no increase in their income during the year ahead…The state of consumers’ finances is bleak. Half of all consumers reported that their finances had recently worsened for the third consecutive month. When asked to explain their situation, 39% of all consumers cited income declines, the highest percentage ever recorded. Four-in-five consumers anticipated no improvement in their finances during the year ahead in early October. Among all households, 65% expected no income increase during the year ahead, the highest level ever recorded. Even with relatively low inflation, the majority of households expected declining inflation adjusted incomes in the year ahead.”

Retail Sales is the round hole into which the square peg from Michigan does not fit. Sure there is no need for a monthly match between sales and sentiment, but over the long run the two reports used to sing the same song, just not the same chorus each and every month. Both the annualized rate of sales and consumer sentiment found a bottom in late 2008, however their paths have been divergent from the beginning of last year. It has now become obvious that the two indexes have not spoken to or texted one another at all in 2011; sales remain firm while sentiment has collapsed. Why the disharmony?

There is a relationship between retail sales and the stock market; the wealth effect. This was something Bernanke wanted to tap into by doing quantitative easing, he wrote about it in the Washington Post the day after the FOMC announced QE2 last November. So it is not unexpected to see sales benefit from a stock market double off the 2009 low. But, while the wealth effect extends to some percent of the population beyond the “one percenters”, there is a limit to how far down the pay scale it reaches. Most of the people depend on an expansion of their earning power in order to expand the amount of goods they put into their shopping carts. But that metric appears to have headed in the opposite direction of the stock market, at least according to a recent report in the New York Times that echoes the latest Michigan survey; “In a grim sign of the enduring nature of the economic slump, household income declined more in the two years after the recession ended than it did during the recession itself, new research has found. Between June 2009, when the recession officially ended, and June 2011, inflation-adjusted median household income fell 6.7 percent, to $49,909, according to a study by two former Census Bureau officials.

During the recession—from December 2007 to June 2009—household income fell 3.2%.” Additionally there has been no extra kick for sales by an increase in the use of plastic. According to Fed data the monthly net change for revolving debt, credit cards, has been negative in thirty-one of the last thirty-five months; in the previous quarter century this figure never declined for more than three consecutive months.
So where is the marginal consumer retail buying coming from? It could be that part of the divergence in the sales and sentiment comes from an issue that is negative for sentiment but that also creates found money for additional purchases. The high rate of mortgage delinquencies, and the apparent increase in what is known as strategic defaults, has created a pot of money that stays with the households but had previously been sent out to the mortgage servicers. I first wrote about this possibility in April 2010, citing that the long, multi-month, delays in processing the delinquent mortgages and finalizing foreclosure, means that these households have more money to spend on discretionary items, or, as may be the case, on necessary purchases they may have done without when they were still servicing their loans.

Back in 2010 economist Mark Zandi of Economy.com estimated that the five million households who were in some stage of default and not paying their monthly housing bills would have as much as $60 billion additional cash over a twelve month period at their disposal as a result. In May 2011 Bloomberg News reported that Michael Feroli, chief US economist at JP Morgan, figured that the “so-called ‘squatter’s rent’ or the increase to income from withheld mortgage payments, will be an estimated $50 billion this year…” A couple of weeks ago research by JP Morgan analyst John Sim noted that “the more sophisticated prime and Alt-A borrowers are significantly more likely to choose to go delinquent, even when they appear to have the means to continue paying,” once their home price went underwater. This report said that the share of strategic delinquencies among the total had risen to about 26 to 27 percent from 20 percent a year ago and this is a group more likely to spend their new found funds.

It should be said that the net increase in the seasonally adjusted monthly total of retail sales for September was up $29 billion from the total seen twelve months before, delivering about an eight percent increase year on year. The figures I’ve cited show that it is at least possible that some portion of the increase in retail sales since the end of the recession are the result of things that are less than positive for the economy as a whole. Another factor is just as dubious, the seasonally adjusted annualized rate of savings has fallen by $114 billion in the year up to August. Given the general condition of the average household this is likely an unappealing last ditch option to stay afloat and not an indication of confidence that this stockpile could be rebuilt in a timely manner because of a rosy view of the future; remember the U of Michigan consumer expectations component is at a three decade low.
This of course does not indicate how sales will continue the rest of this year and especially the prospects for the holiday shopping season. But there is some reason to believe that retailers may not believe in their own success over the last year is sustainable. “When retailers expect that Americans will be crowding into their stores, their orders pile into the nation’s ports in August and September for delivery to stores by late October. But logistics companies say that is not happening this year,” reports the New York Times in a recent story on the nation’s container ports. “’We’re concerned, because usually at this time, your see this peak,’ said Richard D. Steinke, the executive director of the Port of Long Beach in California. ‘We haven’t seen it.’ In fact, the five busiest container ports in the United States said that imports in August 2011 were lower than or even with 2010 volumes. In Long Beach, the second-busiest container port by volume, August imports fell by 14.2% from August 2010. While the port has not yet released September volumes, a spokesman, Art Wong, said it expected about a 15 percent drop from September 2010.” One measure of activity for container ships is the Harpex. Developed by Hamburg shipping company Harper Petersen, it is an index of the cost to rent one of those ships that carries mostly consumer goods. The Harpex rebounded off a record low set near the end of the recession up to a peak in early 2011.

But since then the price of rental has fallen sharply, by almost fifty percent. Part of the calculation for what to charge depends on the number of ships that are available. Earlier this year the number of ships not being used, or “laid up”, was quite low, but in recent months that amount has increased. According to a report yesterday in the Hellenic Shipping News, an industry standard, “the amount of tonnage being idle has finally picked up, but as demand has been struggling hard to take off, the amount of tonnage that needs to be laid up to bring balance is a good way beyond the current level.” So, some of the weakness in the Harpex could be the result of the number of ships that have been added to the fleet in recent years, but it is also the result of a fall off in demand and that in part reflects back to the anticipated retail sales for this holiday season.

While the market will react to economic data as it is presented, I think it is worthwhile to pull back the curtain once in a while to understand better the why’s and wherefore’s of it. In the case of the round hole and the square peg that are retail sales and consumer sentiment, I think it is reasonable to assume that at some point one or the other will have to be whittled down in order to make for a more comfortable fit.

PennyPayDay Disclaimer

Distributed by Viestly

TWA: Should the Dots Be Connected?

Shawshank, VA 10/11/2011 (PennyPayDay) – A sovereign default does not come out of the blue, without warning. A sovereign default is akin to watching an ill fated freight train speed past the “Bridge is Out” sign toward the chasm. There is always the chance that the brakes may be applied in the nick of time, but failing that, no one is really surprised by the sight of the caboose disappearing over the cliff.

A change in a currency regime however is a plan best hatched under cover of darkness. For instance, you can’t foreshadow devaluation without seeing a pre-emptive capital flight drain your banks and with it wash away any advantage you had hoped to gain through such a move. The economic dislocation that results from a major change in the value or fundamental structure of a currency makes it imperative that the change comes out of the blue.

When Nixon “closed the gold window”, ending the convertibility between the dollar and gold, in August 1971, he took the decision after a closed door session with advisers without consulting any other members of the international monetary system. This was no small deal as it tore asunder the Bretton Woods system of monetary order negotiated by forty-four allied nations in July 1944 and which came into being the following year. The decision to back out of the system was so stunning it soon became known at the “Nixon shock”.

So important was the element of surprise to this announcement that it is said that the President’s advisers now recall that more time was put into how and when to spring the controversial plan than was put into creating the finer points of the deal in the first place. This is not to say whether or not this was the right move to make, but that it was a move that could only be made behind closed doors lest the problems that it was intended to solve would get much worse in the time between general awareness of the plan and the actual execution of it.

The rightly held fear was that in the interim there would be a rapid collapse of the dollar, that was already quite weak, and a flight from the US of the gold that had backed its value. Sure there were dots that in retrospect could easily be connected to one another; but then there are no surprises when history is deconstructed and you walk back from the historical outcome and review the events that led to it. For instance it was West Germany that was the first to leave the system in May 1971 and Switzerland followed their lead in early August. But the big fish in the Bretton Woods pond was the US and its dollar and its exit was truly a shock to the system.

Success of the eurozone depends on all parties living up to the agreements that have been made and for all those in the currency union to act as one. But it is fair to say that one or more members have already failed to abide by the relevant treaties and it has become clear that the system as it was constructed is not something that can work. Greece is being told that it must pay with austerity for its fiscal sins while Germany and others are being asked to provide the backstop for this and any other shortfalls.
This is not how the zone was supposed to work. This crisis has done more to clarify the differences of the members than it has done to expose it as a unified group pulling in the same direction. For all of the declarations by the various European leaders that they will not allow Greece or the larger project to fail I think there are more indications of countries going it alone than there are indications of all for one and one for all.

As the Financial Times noted in a recent editorial, “Cracks are already visible in the edifice of European unity—witness the strain on the Shengen visa-free travel scheme.”

Although there is much talk of another grand bargain being reached by Merkel and Sarkozy the lack of details is troubling. It is unlikely that Merkel has the political clout within her own country to offer up more German treasure to plug the holes elsewhere in the system. Her recent comments seem more aimed at making sure her banking system is covered than at funding a program for the larger group. If success of the eurozone is dependent on Germany going all in then there is also a problem, as it is questionable how far they can go down this road without revisiting their own constitution.

European unity is about more than a common currency and free trade; it is at the end of the day an expression of the desire to have a continent without war. Therefore the fear of a break-up of the union is about more than economics it is about the maintenance of peace. But that does not mean that Germany and the others will stick with a system that does not work, because that could make any eventual problems from dissolution all the worse. I don’t know how this tension will be resolved, but it does not appear the status quo is the long-term solution. Some have said Greece should go back to the Drachma.

Others, such as hedge fund manager Kyle Bass, said it is Germany who will exit first. Alan Greenspan says that it is the chasm between the northern European countries and the South that must be bridged for the euro to remain viable. “Above all, leaders must create the political conditions for good policy;” say the editorial writers at the FT. “Monetary union can only survive if each of its members wants it to: without voter support Europe will fail.” But what are the odds that a referendum on the currency would pass in Greece or Germany at the current time?

Last week Mohamed El-Erian, CEO of PIMCO, said that “the unthinkables have become a reality.” He was not referring directly to the situation in Europe but it is a comment that may be applicable to the continent. The path forward is far from clear, but the one thing that can be said is that if there is a change coming in the structure of the common currency the announcement will be a surprise when it happens. And even though it may be one of those unthinkable outcomes, there are plenty of dots that could be connected.

PennyPayDay Disclaimer

Distributed by Viestly

TWA: iPod Security Breach

Shawshank, VA 9/6/2011 (PennyPayDay) – The internet is full of information; some of it is valuable and important, some not so much. A lot of the data are well documented and verifiable and some of it is completely and utterly unreliable. But little care I for exhaustive research, or clear attribution, if it’s on the internet I believe it wholeheartedly; why the heck not, who would lie on the international web.

So over the weekend I was delighted to stumble across a shadowy non-profit group that publishes on the internet some private, but not necessarily secret or classified information; they are known as WackyLeaks. Some of their reports concern serious stuff about Brad and Angelina and there was also a fascinating story about the private lives of the cast of Jersey Shore, but some of the items are more frivolous than that. For instance, by utilizing the most sophisticated spyware available the WackyLeaks staff was able to hack into the IPod playlists of many of today’s global news makers. It’s on the internet, ergo it must be true.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, apparently very disappointed at the poor showing by her party, the Christian Democratic Union, in the state election in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, added the mid-sixties hit by Lesley Gore, “It’s My Party” to her playlist late Sunday night. You know the tune, “It’s my party and I’ll cry if I want to.”

I don’t know if the next musical revelation should be considered foreshadowing, but it is interesting to note that one of the sitting judges on the German Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe, who are due to rule Wednesday morning 3:00am CDT on the constitutionality of the 2010 Greek bailout recently included Neil Sedaka’s “Breaking Up is Hard To Do” on his IPod.

Here’s a good one; The Bank of Japan will make a policy statement following its meeting Wednesday in Tokyo. Their key interest rate is 0.10%, but their currency is much too strong for their liking. Governor, Masaaki Shirakawa is not expected to make a move this week but maybe his current favorite song choice suggests he would if he could; “Less than Zero” by Elvis Costello.

Another central banker whose taste in music has been revealed is ECB boss Trichet. On Thursday he will chair the penultimate meeting of his tenure as the chairman of the central bank. It could be that his pending departure can’t come quickly enough, judging by the placement of The Sound of Music song “So Long, Farewell” at the top of his list of favorites. A well situated source at the ECB headquarters in Frankfurt tells me the halls are alive with the sound of Jean-Claude:

“So long
Farewell
Aufwiedesrsehen
Adieu
Adieu, Adieu
To yieu and yieu and yieu…”

It should come as no surprise that Fed boss Bernanke has long had “The Twist” by Chubby Checker on his playlist. But the recent addition of “I think I’m Turning Japanese” by the Vapors, could be a sign of monetary policy angst on the part of the chairman. I am trying to confirm a WackyLeaks rumor that instead of a Q and A session following his noon CDT Thursday speech he will instead make use of a Karaoke machine; just chatter at this point.

And finally, the lapse in musical security has spread to the Oval Office IPod. President Obama is set to make an important speech about jobs Thursday night at 7:00pm CDT. He hopes to unveil a comprehensive package that will revive the labor market that will also revive his chances to get reelected. It may not be a good sign that he just added “I Need a Miracle” by the Grateful Dead to his song catalog.

PennyPayDay Disclaimer

Distributed by Viestly

TWA: Not Perfect, But Close

Shawshank, VA 8/8/2011 (PennyPayDay) -- It is unlikely that the Fed will decide on Tuesday that now is the perfect time to panic. I think they could indicate that they have moved a few steps closer to making another Hail Mary pass, but are not yet ready to launch it.

In many respects this year is unfolding in a manner that is eerily similar to a year ago. The Fed wrapped up QE1 at the end of March 2010. Within a few weeks the stock market topped out and proceeded to decline; it was down seventeen percent by early June. In the post QE period the labor market was not showing much progress and the overall economy was laboring to move forward. And European debt was a problem without an obvious, or at least without a painless, solution.

The scorecard for this year: stocks down considerably since the end of QE2, labor market and other economic indicators are weakening and the situation in Europe is just as convoluted, in some respects more so, as it was a year ago; check, check and check.

At the August 2010 FOMC meeting the Fed took a baby step toward QE2 when they agreed to reinvest their maturing securities into Treasuries so as not allow policy to unintentionally tighten. A few weeks later at the Fed Fest at Jackson Hole Chairman Bernanke strongly suggested that they would pursue additional accommodation, which they acted upon at their November policy meeting. But the reason they acted so quickly and aggressively last year was because the core measures of inflation were allowing them to. Despite record stimulus and rock bottom rates the PCE Core peaked in the month QE1 ended and then headed back down to the cycle low. Deflation became a primary concern for the Fed and Bernanke saw no alternative but to act.

The path of inflation is the key difference between this year and last. The PCE Core rate fell to a fifty year low of 0.9% at the end of last year, but has increased throughout 2011, rather than decline as it did in the aftermath of QE1. Additionally, there are many members of the policy committee who have set the bar very high for making another attempt at turning the economic tide with another round of creative monetary policy. It is hard to imagine a majority agreeing to a new venture in the first meeting since the previous strategy wound up.

But, on the other hand, a lot has changed since the FOMC last gathered in June. Growth has been revised significantly lower; the GDP for the first half of the year is now said to be 0.8%; I’d say that’s not much bang for the QE buck. While the Fed may still think this is a temporary pause and not the beginning of a reversal of trend, that argument is getting harder to believe when economic observers such as Martin Feldstein rate the odds of another recession at fifty/fifty.

Although Bernanke insists that it is the size of the Fed’s balance sheet and not the process of buying the assets that is the most important factor for the economy, that too is a tougher sell given the action in the stock market and economy in the periods that follow the final bit of Fed buying last year and this. Even though the PCE Core has steadily increased since the end of last year, it is, at 1.3%, below the level it was at when Bernanke laid the groundwork for QE2 in Wyoming in August 2010.

And, because of the collapse in crude oil and many other commodities since the springtime peak, the argument for further gains for inflation is dubious and the possibility of a move back down not so unlikely as the Fed thought a couple of months ago. The unemployment rate may have fallen by a tenth in July, but a Bernanke favorite indicator, the employed to population ratio, also known as the employment rate, fell to 58.1 last month, a new low for the cycle. I didn’t even mention that when the FOMC last met the US was rated AAA by all three rating agencies, but that is no longer true and the ramifications of the move by S&P may not be positive for the economy, huh?

The FOMC may not be ready to take additional action this week, but they may say they are not far from taking such a decision. In his Humphrey/Hawkins testimony to Congress in mid July Chairman Bernanke suggested a few thing he might want to try should things not go well for the economy. “On the one hand, the possibility remains that the recent economic weakness may prove more persistent than expected and that deflationary risks might reemerge, implying a need for additional policy support.

Even with the federal funds rate close to zero, we have a number of ways in which we could act to ease financial conditions further. One option would be to provide more explicit guidance about the period over which the federal funds rate and the balance sheet would remain at their current levels. Another approach would be to initiate more securities purchases or to increase the average maturity of our holdings. The Federal Reserve could also reduce the 25 basis point rate of interest it pays to banks on their reserves, thereby putting downward pressure on short-term rates more generally. Of course, our experience with these policies remains relatively limited, and employing them would entail potential risks and costs.

However, prudent planning requires that we evaluate the efficacy of these and other potential alternatives for deploying additional stimulus if conditions warrant.”

He went on to explain the other side of the coin, “the economy could evolve in a way that would warrant a move toward less-accommodative policy…” Never mind, no reason to think about that possibility any time soon.

PennyPayday Free Stock Quotes and Approach to the Stock Market

PennyPayday focuses on bringing penny stocks and small-cap companies from all exchanges into the spotlight for investors seeking early development opportunities. PennyPayday has quickly become a recognized penny stock site and a top source for investors seeking information and research on today's emerging hot stocks. PennyPayday provides the investing public with stock market daily news, free real-time stock quotes, free stock charts, research for investing, as well as economic stories, videos, and market briefs from a staff of experienced and dedicated financial journalists.

Sign up for our Free Newsletter today, and join the thousands already getting our emails on the hottest stocks to watch.

Disclaimer: Neither www.PennyPayday.com nor its officers, directors, partners, employees or anyone involved in the publication of this website or newsletters is a registered investment adviser or licensed broker-dealer in any jurisdiction whatsoever. PennyPayday may or may not have been compensated by mentioned companies. For full disclaimer/disclosure please read PennyPayday's disclaimer.

Distributed by IntelBuilder Social Media Platform