Chairman praising Moynihan baffles the mind

The Chairman of the Board of Bank of America came out today saying that CEO Brian Moynihan’s job is safe. Whenever I hear that, it makes me think that something’s about to happen.

Moynihan has been in charge of BAC since January, 2010. Since that time, the stock has gone from $15 per share to just under $6 per share, a 60%+ haircut, and disastrous by any measure. This in spite of constant assurances that everything is fine at the bank.

Well, I can tell you this for certain; if everything was fine, the stock wouldn’t be down 60%. In fact, the S&P 500, during the same period of time, was up over 10%, so BAC is lagging the S&P by over 70% in a two year period. Awful.

Yet, the Chairman of the Board, Charles Holliday, gives Moynihan a public vote of confidence, saying, “Brian’s a great guy. It’s been a real pleasure to work with Brian the past two years. He’s put things in place (and has) a great team.”

Really? Let’s rewind the tape here.

Moynihan gets promoted to President and CEO in January, 2010. This is almost a year after the market has bottomed. The stock is trading for $15 a share when he takes over. He has two full years to get things in shape and the result is a drop in share price of over 60%, compared to a rise in the S&P of 10% during the same period of time. And for that, the Chairman of the Board pats him on the back for being a nice guy who has put together a “great” team.

I don’t know about you, but when I hear the term “great team” I think about the Yankees, or Red Sox, or Patriots, or Lakers. I don’t think of teams that are at the bottom of the totem pole, which is exactly where Bank of America is today.

So, it strikes me that Holliday was showing a vote of confidence in his public pronouncement when he gave Moynihan a thumbs up, when in fact he must be thinking, this guy’s got to go! And, who could blame him?

I can tell you one thing; I don’t have much confidence in the Board of Directors of a company when its Chairman is endorsing such poor performance. And, it’s likely that Holliday will be challenged to explain why he has condoned a trashing of the bank.

This whole situation reminds me of what happened before General Motors got rid of its CEO, Rick Wagoner. Everyone knew that he had tried his best, but everyone knew he had to go. Same thing with Moynihan. Thus, the only real question is, does he go now, or does he go when its too late to salvage BAC?

Solutions leading to a stronger America

Where do I start?

Let’s start with something everyone can relate to. We need fewer people losing their homes, we need more people working and we need small businesses to have easier access to funds to jump start the economy. I promise you, if we can make substantial progress with these three specific topics, we will be on our way to a better, stronger America. Oil is a problem as well, but let’s save that for another day.

Yes, we’ve got a deficit that is out of this world, but we’re not alone, and as crappy as things are in the US right now, we’re still the “go to” nation. So, let’s get it on the table right now; we need to lead the world out of its economic funk, because that will re-establish us as the power that we became and that we can become again.

The Fed has done everything necessary to keep interest rates low; they get high marks for that one. But, as my good friend and on-air partner Ed Handley from Fulcrum Securities pointed out during our show today, the Fed (actually, the White House, Congress, basically all elected officials) gets an F for doing its part (or lack thereof) to help stimulate jobs.

In addition, I don’t care what anyone says; the housing condition today is a national embarrassment; it’s beyond appalling. Yes, there are plenty of people out there who have figured out a way to scam the system and live rent free for years, but they are still in the minority, and for some of them, they might not even have a choice. Fine. It’s the other millions of homeowners who got lured by mortgage banks and didn’t have to show one iota of proof to back up their income and assets. And, this was all done SPECIFICALLY so the investment bankers could put together collateralized mortgage pools to sell to unsuspecting (some might say greedy) investors who were promised great returns.

So, make no mistake about it; the investment bankers and the mortgage bankers who went along with this scheme did just fine (Lehman accepted) while the vast majority of homeowners who took the banks up on their offers have completely gotten the shaft.

Next. Give me one really good reason why General Motors or any other corporation would go out of its way to create new jobs knowing that we could fall flat on our faces again? Do you honestly think GM wants to go through what it did to survive again when as a lean and mean company they can actually make money? Or, give me one good reason a bank would lend to anyone, other than someone who doesn’t need the money, knowing they can print profits simply from borrowing from the Fed for next to nothing and invest it into treasury bonds at no risk?

What’s the solution?

First, the banks must be forced to write down bad mortgages and work with homeowners to keep them in their homes. No more holding on to these bad loans that are underwater, “hoping” the market recovers. No more optional modification programs; ram it down their throats. A recovery isn’t going to happen even if you take mortgage interest rates to 0 (though it would help the cash flow, and thus the economy, of those lucky individuals who are actually able to refinance) because the vast majority of the individuals in the US don’t qualify for a mortgage loan. Yes, I know it doesn’t seem fair to those who aren’t under water, but we need a total “reset” of the housing market, because that will help everyone’s market value, and dramatically speed up a housing recovery. The banks will get spanked but the stock market would likely rally hard knowing a solution was at hand.

Next, IMMEDIATELY put a moratorium on FICA for the next year or two which would put substantial dollars in the pockets of both individuals and companies. All working individuals would get an immediate 5.65% raise (FICA was already lowered some in 2011, but it wasn’t enough). I would let individuals use those funds the best way they saw fit -savings, paying down debt, spending – while restricting corporate use unless the funds were used to create new jobs. Would it cause a problem within the social security fund? Maybe for a bit, but what about the $700 billion the banks got in their time of need? That seemed to work out just fine, and the impact from everyone getting a nice raise would become apparent quickly in the economy, quickly leading to more disposable income a big spike in demand for new jobs.

Next, I would have the government put aside a LARGE chunk of money to be loaned to small businesses at the same rate banks pay for use of funds and by that I mean businesses who have somehow survived the past several years and need some additional capital to move to the next level. I’m not talking about those businesses who have pristine credit; they can already get loans. I’m talking about those small businesses who had the tenacity through blood, sweat, tears and shear perseverance to make it through the most difficult time since the great depression. They’ve likely seen their own credit suffer, but they’ve demonstrated they’ve got what it takes to help lead the economy out of the muck. Let’s give them the resources they need so they can get innovative, add employees, lead the way in jump starting the economy. I certainly can’t say the same thing for those banks that got billions in stimulus dollars that you and I as taxpayers backed. They are more concerned with increasing dividends rather than putting people back to work, so don’t count on them to lead the charge here.

I realize all of this is easier said than done, but we need some more “out of the box” thinking to get us out of the current economic muck, as nothing else right now is working. These are my thoughts; attack three specific, important components of our system. Anyone got a better idea?

Warren Buffet on Jobs; a bit too optimistic?

When Warren Buffet talks, people listen. So, when Buffet announced on CNBC the other day that the unemployment rate would be in the low 7′s by the 2012 election, I have to wonder how he arrived at that conclusion, and if he’s being too optimistic.

First of all, based upon the most recent reports, I haven’t seen any evidence that the employment picture is improving markedly. The weekly jobless claims continue to hover near the 400,000 range and there’s been very few announcements that large companies are hiring in any significant way. And, even though the overall unemployment rate was 9.0% last month, it’s still a long way from the low 7′s that Buffet envisions.

From my perspective, there’s little incentive for companies to add employees; why would they if profits are rising with reduced staffs? I’ve made the case for companies like General Motors before. They were taken to their knees, got lean and mean, and turned things around. Now they’re profitable, sharing some of their recent success with their employees, and not likely to add one more body than they need, relying more on improvements in technology and increased profitability.

Then there’s the whole issue with the price of oil, now sitting at $100 per barrel. If world consumption increases, and the price of oil continues to escalate, how is that going to help employment? For example, higher transportation prices will lead to higher food prices, which will lead to reduced spending, which will lead to a tightening of the belt. And, if the government is serious about reducing spending and bridging the deficit gap, how is that likely to help produce more jobs?

I want to be wrong here; more people working has to be a good thing for the economy, with the possibility of increased spending on goods and services. But, it seems to me that the golden age of full employment is history. I think we just need to get used to fewer people working.

What about that “Dirty Little Secret”?

For a long time, I’ve pointed out that companies have no real incentive to hire employees, not with advances in technology and improving productivity and with more corporate interest in fat bottom lines. Thus, I was interested in a story I read yesterday by John Melloy, Executive Producer, Fast Money, “Market’s Dirty Little Secret: 9% Unemployment Just Fine

In his story, John makes the contention that a high unemployment rate is actually good for corporate America, and quotes Stephen Weiss of Short Hills Capital:

While unemployment is a terrible circumstance for individuals and families, I am sure some companies believe they are better off with fewer people and are hiding behind a supposedly weak economy to keep their ranks thin, focusing instead on greater productivity from their current employees and ensuing higher margins.

Makes sense. In fact, not long ago, I made reference to General Motors, specifically asking what motivation they had to hire employees, considering they almost went down the tubes, and now they are content being more lean and mean. Undoubtedly, they are borderline paranoid about adding bodies, since they are focused on paying back the government to get them out of their hair.

It also makes sense because companies are hoarding cash, and in some cases, are concerned more about paying dividends than having to pay more workers. In fact, there are some major banks who have been talking about raising dividends, in spite of the fact that there are probably MANY bad loans that are not yet accounted for. Plus, how soon they forget that the entire banking system almost melted down just two years ago.

So, while many individuals continue to suffer, many of them being out of work for a few years now, companies aren’t about to go out of their way to give them a lift. No, it’s clearly more important to pump up the bottom line, give lip service that they are going to do their part to help get the economy back on track, when their actions are quite to the contrary. If I sound a bit jaded here, I suppose it’s because I am.

Unemployment picture still murky

I was reading CNN Money’s reporting on weekly jobless claims, and while the numbers came out better than expected, we seem to be stuck in the 400-450k level, in spite of recent suggestions that companies are hiring again. Interestingly, we are seeing some decent economic numbers, showing an increase in manufacturing activity as well as strengthening in the services sector. So, one would think this could ultimately lead to additional hiring, but we’re not seeing that right now.

Think about it. We just went through 4th quarter earnings season, and many companies reported strong profits, some with record earnings; this with a greatly reduced work force. So, exactly where are the incentives to increase the work force? Do you think General Motors is chomping at the bit to add a bunch of workers after what they’ve been through? They almost went out of business, so they’ve completely retooled and streamlined, seeing that they can be highly profitable when they are lean and mean.

This is happening all across America. Advanced technology has led to greater productivity which has led to greater profitability. Having additional bodies lying around is no longer acceptable. And, those individuals who have been collecting unemployment checks for 1-2 years, their skills have eroded, leaving them vulnerable even if companies do start hiring again.

It now appears that the stock market has accepted the notion that unemployment could remain high for a long period of time, since it barely reacts even when the numbers are worse than expected. Just look at December’s non-farm payroll report, when only 103,000 jobs were created; way below market expectations. So, what’s happened since then? The market has achieved 2.5 year highs.

I hope I am completely wrong on this, because more jobs should help to create a more robust economy, but I just don’t see any signs that any major companies are going out of their way to add jobs. Many of them will put a positive spin on the situation, saying they are prepared to add employees as things pick up, but as Jerry Maguire said, “show me the money.