Month: May 2014

By John Mauldin

 

I’m bringing you a special Outside the Box today to address a very specific question that is on many investor’s minds: is there a bubble in biotech? To answer that question, Patrick Cox, editor of Mauldin Economics’ Transformational Technology Alert, teases apart the data on stock performance in the biotech space and then goes beyond the data to show us how the unique characteristics of the sector bear on the question of bubble or no bubble.

The answer isn’t a simple yes or no, but Patrick’s clear, deeply informed perspective can help us make smart investment decisions in an industry where both gains and losses can be precipitous and outsized.

Your ready and willing to be transformed analyst,

John Mauldin, Editor
Outside the Box[email protected]

Stay Ahead of the Latest Tech News and Investing Trends…

Click here to sign up for Patrick Cox’s free daily tech news digest.

Each day, you get the three tech news stories with the biggest potential impact.

---

Is There a Biotech Bubble?

By Patrick Cox, Editor, Transformational Technology Alert

FDA approvals for new drugs have accelerated over the last few years.

In 2013 alone, the FDA approved 27 new drugs. That followed a banner year in 2012, in which 39 novel drugs were approved—the most in 15 years.

Demographic trends will support the need for continued growth in the sector for years to come, as the aging US population increases demand for pharmaceuticals and other healthcare services. However, is this new paradigm enabling the growth potential of biotech firms or fueling the fire of yet another bubble?

A Brief History Lesson

The S&P 500′s biotech stocks are up more than 250% from the March 2009 bottom, versus a gain of roughly 180% for the rest of the market. This figure—although staggering on its own—does not include the hundreds of small- and mid-cap biotechs that have gone up even more.

The Nasdaq Biotechnology Index, which does include some of these smaller names, gained 66% last year, double the S&P 500′s return. In fact, biotech was the #1 performing sector in each of the last three years.

Since 2012, biotech stocks also began a full-scale invasion and colonization of the healthcare sector.

For comparison, here’s a look at the percentage of biotech market-cap weighting in the healthcare sector SPDR (XLV) by year:

Percentage Weighting of Biotechnology Stocks in Healthcare Sector SPDR (ARCX:XLV)
March 2010	11.62%
March 2011	9.60%
March 2012	10.65%
March 2013	14.44%
March 2014	19.00%

The pace of biotech stock growth is accelerating, but this isn’t enough evidence to say that we’re in a bubble. To properly label biotech’s rise and fall, let’s look at how the performance came about in the first place.

Numbers are being tossed about to show very high total returns, but they ignore the preceding sluggish period.

As shown below, biotechs were one of the laggard groups in the 2009-2011 period, outperformed handily by the Nasdaq Index, where the majority of biotech firms trade:

The chart above shows how the boom can be broken down into three phases:

• 2009-2011 = underperformance

•  2012 = catch-up performance

•  2013-recent = outperformance.

From 2009 through 2011, there was little to no public market capital for anything remotely risky, and so young biotech companies were forced to sell out to larger drug companies on the private market. This makes sense, as valuations on the private market were actually much better.

Meanwhile, as sluggish global growth persisted, investors began to favor large-cap biotech companies, such as Gilead, Pfizer, and Amgen. Unfortunately, there weren’t enough reputable biotech franchises to go around, thanks to a period of industry consolidation that included a buyout of Genentech by Roche for $46.8 billion, Merck acquiring Schering-Plough for $41.0 billion, and Sanofi taking over Genzyme for $20.0 billion, coupled with a shortage of public offerings. All the while, institutions took the remaining large biotech stocks to all-time highs.

Spreading the Wealth

In most markets, there are examples of both huge winners and terrible losers, and biotechnology is no different.

Here’s what the distribution of returns looks like for 172 US biotechs with a 12-month performance return:

While there were many small companies with monstrous returns, the returns were widely distributed, suggesting that this market is more selective than we would expect from a general bubble. However, it remains possible that many of these individual companies carry inflated valuations.

IPOs

In the first quarter this year, there were about 50 IPOs; 45% of these offerings were for pre-profit biotechnology companies. In other words, they all lost money, yet they were valued at a median of $199 million.

Half of those biotech IPOs had no revenue at all. For those that did have some, the median 12-month sales amounted to only $200,000. That compares with median revenue of $125 million for non-biotechs with initial offerings.

However, although this may look fishy to the untrained eye, it’s not unusual for a small biotech company to have no earnings or revenue, as the company’s value is derived from potential future earnings and revenue from a product that’s currently in development.

That said, the bubbly part of this IPO market is that the average gain for these new biotech offerings is over 50%.

There has also been a spike in deal activity: last quarter M&A in the life-sciences sector spiked 24%, as 31 companies were bought for a total of $37 billion.

So yes, 2013 was a banner year for biotechnology IPOs—there’s no denying that. But when you look at the long-run trend, biotechs had been depressed for a decade. The truth is that there are hundreds of small startup companies that have great ideas, great products, and great futures, but they have yet to go public.

What’s lost in the hubbub about all these new IPOs soaring are two things:

• First, a lot of them have gone down in value, not up.

• Second, and more importantly, the surge in IPOs only reflects the shortage of biotech IPOs in the last 10 years. 35 or so IPOs in one year for biotechs may seem like a lot, but averaged out over the last 10 years, it’s nothing. Predictions are for another 35-40 to go public in 2014, for an annual total of almost 100.

From these mostly small, focused companies can come blockbuster, patented products. Once a privately funded biotech has reached a certain level in its development, an IPO can furnish it with the funds necessary to move through the next stages. Not all of these companies will be successful, but for the ones that are, the payoff can be large—even enormous—and that’s what keeps investors interested and willing to pay a premium for the opportunity.

Valuing the Biotech Market: One Size Does Not Fit All

Here’s the big picture via Brendan Conway of Barron’s:

“The price-earnings ratio of the SPDR S&P Biotech ETF is a rich 33 times trailing earnings, versus the S&P 500′s 17, says Morningstar. But Morningstar removes unprofitable firms from the tally. Add them back in and tally the losses against the prices, and the P/E multiple would be a negative 19, according to ETF.com’s Matt Hougan–if such a thing were possible.”

Some companies look more expensive and some look more reasonable today, compared to 2000. The real challenge with these companies is whether or not they’ll be successful in pushing their products through the pipeline and into the market.

Based on earnings forecasts, large-cap biotech companies including Amgen, Celgene, and Gilead are trading at 13.5x 2016 earnings and 11.7x 2017 earnings, which is cheaper than 14.2x and 13.5x, respectively, for the S&P 500. Of course, these are based on the assumption that the biotechs will recognize 21.5% annual earnings growth through 2017, versus 5.5% for the S&P 500—and both of these assumptions may prove to be too optimistic.

However, biotechs are often improperly “group analyzed.” Each company is in its own mini-field, at its own development stage, with its own potential return and risk outlook. Most currently listed biotechs have some sales, but few have positive earnings. Yet we read that the stocks are overpriced because the average P/E ratio is high. Here are the key statistics:

• All listed US biotechs = 215

• Some sales = 173 (80%)

• Meaningful sales (a price/sales ratio of 10 or less) = 45 (21%)

• Positive current earnings = 29 (13%)

• Positive estimated (forward) earnings = 35 (16%).

There’s a wide disparity among the 215 companies. Looking at market capitalizations, we can see a great divide between the few mega- and numerous mini-biotechs:

More to the point is the relationship between market cap and earnings yield (E/P). This graph shows the great number of money-losing, smaller biotechs.

Clearly, using a one-size-fits-all traditional industry analysis and valuation comparisons misjudges biotechs. Each company must be analyzed individually, as no two companies are addressing the same market with the same product and the same stage in their development.

But as a whole, the biotech sector still looks attractive when factoring in its growth potential. The price-to-earnings growth ratio (which is similar to earnings per share; however, it takes earnings growth into account) for biotech is around 0.7, around half the value of the S&P 500.

Broader Market Implications

Growth stocks are on their own tracks and will proceed according to their own developments and investor views.

In short, it’s beginning to look a lot like 1999 or early 2000, but not for the whole market or large-cap stocks. Those crucial areas could be overvalued after five years of enormous gains, but the numbers suggest that the overall Standard & Poor’s 500-stock Index compares favorably with the stratospheric prices that investors routinely paid in 2000.

In 2000, for the 10 biggest stocks in the S&P 500 by market cap, the P/E ratio was 62.6. Today, the comparable figure is only 16.1. Back in March 2000, Cisco had the highest P/E ratio among the 10 biggest stocks, at 196.2, followed by Oracle, at 148.4. Those figures were so high that when sentiment turned, the stocks plummeted.

Today, only one stock in the big 10 has a P/E above 30: Google, the sole Internet company in the group. Its P/E is 33, double the current average for the S&P 500’s 10 biggest companies, but compared with the levels that prevailed in 2000, it’s reasonably priced. If earnings grow rapidly, Google could conceivably be profitable for investors at its current valuation.

The point is that even if prices are high in the overall market, they’re being backed up by earnings to a much larger extent than in 2000. That’s important, because—as I’m sure many of you remember—when the dot-com bubble burst, the downdraft brought most companies down with it.

Moving Forward

Many of our subscribers have written to us asking how the most recent selloff will affect our analysis moving forward.

In short, not at all. We examine individual companies based on the merits of their technology. We evaluate the potential market value of their products and adjust for the probability that they’ll pass through clinical trials based on their particular stage of development. This results in a highly defensible valuation for the company that changes as the company’s products move through clinical trials.

The important factor that many analysts ignore is the probability for a product’s success, which varies by the clinical trial phase and therapeutic area. This, among other factors, is how many of the high valuations have been justified.

Our analysis, however, remains grounded in reality. Even the best companies can be priced too high or too low, and our recommendations focus on the best companies with the best risk-adjusted returns.

This, in our view, is the only way to come to a realistic valuation in this unique market.

– Patrick Cox, Senior Editor, Transformational Technology Alert

– Robert Ross, Senior Analyst, Mauldin Economics

– Andrew Wagner, Analyst, Mauldin Economics

—————————-

If you’d like to learn more about Mauldin Economics’ Transformational Technology Alert, the groundbreaking advisory in which Patrick Cox leverages his 30+ years of industry research experience to identify promising development stage technology firms, click here.

You can start a risk-free trial of Patrick’s work today and preview his ability to find the tech and biotech plays with the potential to radically alter both the markets and society. It’s fascinating reading, and once again, you can learn more about Patrick’s research and trial his service risk-free for 90 days by clicking the link above.

Like Outside the Box?
Sign up today and get each new issue delivered free to your inbox.
It’s your opportunity to get the news John Mauldin thinks matters most to your finances.

© 2013 Mauldin Economics. All Rights Reserved.
Outside the Box is a free weekly economic e-letter by best-selling author and renowned financial expert, John Mauldin. You can learn more and get your free subscription by visiting www.MauldinEconomics.com.
Please write to [email protected] to inform us of any reproductions, including when and where copy will be reproduced. You must keep the letter intact, from introduction to disclaimers. If you would like to quote brief portions only, please reference www.MauldinEconomics.com.
To subscribe to John Mauldin’s e-letter, please click here: http://www.mauldineconomics.com/subscribe
To change your email address, please click here: http://www.mauldineconomics.com/change-address

Outside the Box and MauldinEconomics.com is not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and those that he interviews. Any views expressed are provided for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest and is not in any way a testimony of, or associated with, Mauldin’s other firms. John Mauldin is the Chairman of Mauldin Economics, LLC. He also is the President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA) which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states, President and registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS) member FINRA, SIPC, through which securities may be offered . MWS is also a Commodity Pool Operator (CPO) and a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB) and NFA Member. Millennium Wave Investments is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. This message may contain information that is confidential or privileged and is intended only for the individual or entity named above and does not constitute an offer for or advice about any alternative investment product. Such advice can only be made when accompanied by a prospectus or similar offering document. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Please make sure to review important disclosures at the end of each article. Mauldin companies may have a marketing relationship with products and services mentioned in this letter for a fee.

Note: Joining The Mauldin Circle is not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and Millennium Wave Investments. It is intended solely for investors who have registered with Millennium Wave Investments and its partners at http://www.MauldinCircle.com (formerly AccreditedInvestor.ws) or directly related websites. The Mauldin Circle may send out material that is provided on a confidential basis, and subscribers to the Mauldin Circle are not to send this letter to anyone other than their professional investment counselors. Investors should discuss any investment with their personal investment counsel. You are advised to discuss with your financial advisers your investment options and whether any investment is suitable for your specific needs prior to making any investments. John Mauldin is the President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA), which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states. John Mauldin is a registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS), an FINRA registered broker-dealer. MWS is also a Commodity Pool Operator (CPO) and a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB). Millennium Wave Investments is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. Millennium Wave Investments cooperates in the consulting on and marketing of private and non-private investment offerings with other independent firms such as Altegris Investments; Capital Management Group; Absolute Return Partners, LLP; Fynn Capital; Nicola Wealth Management; and Plexus Asset Management. Investment offerings recommended by Mauldin may pay a portion of their fees to these independent firms, who will share 1/3 of those fees with MWS and thus with Mauldin. Any views expressed herein are provided for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest with any CTA, fund, or program mentioned here or elsewhere. Before seeking any advisor’s services or making an investment in a fund, investors must read and examine thoroughly the respective disclosure document or offering memorandum. Since these firms and Mauldin receive fees from the funds they recommend/market, they only recommend/market products with which they have been able to negotiate fee arrangements.

PAST RESULTS ARE NOT INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THERE IS RISK OF LOSS AS WELL AS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR GAIN WHEN INVESTING IN MANAGED FUNDS. WHEN CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS, INCLUDING HEDGE FUNDS, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER VARIOUS RISKS INCLUDING THE FACT THAT SOME PRODUCTS: OFTEN ENGAGE IN LEVERAGING AND OTHER SPECULATIVE INVESTMENT PRACTICES THAT MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INVESTMENT LOSS, CAN BE ILLIQUID, ARE NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PERIODIC PRICING OR VALUATION INFORMATION TO INVESTORS, MAY INVOLVE COMPLEX TAX STRUCTURES AND DELAYS IN DISTRIBUTING IMPORTANT TAX INFORMATION, ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE SAME REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AS MUTUAL FUNDS, OFTEN CHARGE HIGH FEES, AND IN MANY CASES THE UNDERLYING INVESTMENTS ARE NOT TRANSPARENT AND ARE KNOWN ONLY TO THE INVESTMENT MANAGER. Alternative investment performance can be volatile. An investor could lose all or a substantial amount of his or her investment. Often, alternative investment fund and account managers have total trading authority over their funds or accounts; the use of a single advisor applying generally similar trading programs could mean lack of diversification and, consequently, higher risk. There is often no secondary market for an investor’s interest in alternative investments, and none is expected to develop.

Source: Brian Sylvester of The Gold Report (5/5/14)

http://www.theaureport.com/pub/na/chris-ecclestone-right-size-right-metals-signal-success-for-ree-projects

The rare earth elements sector is smaller than it was a few years ago, and Chris Ecclestone, mining strategist with Hallgarten & Co., thinks it needs to get smaller still. The only way to succeed, he tells The Gold Report, is by finding the right-sized project with the right REEs. He also shares his theories on China’s manipulation of REE prices and touts the mineral wealth of Spain and Portugal.

The Gold Report: In a March Hallgarten & Co. research report, you noted that rare earth elements (REEs) had “come out of hibernation.” Did they wake up happy or grumpy?

Chris Ecclestone: The REEs have run hot and cold since 2009. They had a run for about a year, went off the boil, then had another run.

At the peak, Molycorp Inc. (MCP:NYSE) had launched and everyone was excited about Lynas Corp. (LYC:ASX). Both had market caps in excess of $1 billion ($1B). An array of midtier stories, like Avalon Rare Earth Metals (AVL:TSX; AVL:NYSE; AVARF:OTCQX) and Rare Elements Resources Ltd. (RES:TSX; REE:NYSE.MKT), had market caps in the high hundreds of millions of dollars. Juniors proliferated. In total, there were 50–100 REE stocks listed on the TSX and TSX.V. That’s a big group considering the size of the total universe of specialty metals stocks.

Then, the sector was scorched. The price of REEs plummeted. Molycorp and Lynas both encountered cost overruns and Lynas had environmental issues in Malaysia, where it was building its processing plant. These two bellwether stocks became damaged goods. Investors began to think, if the two big ones can’t make money in REEs, who can?

This all coincided with the worst overall mining equity market in 10–15 years. Thus, REE stocks were doubly out of favor.

Beginning this year, there’s been a better vibe in the mining markets in general. REEs have started to pick themselves up off the floor. They look like a viable investment alternative again. However, I believe that we need at most 20 REE stories. Right now, two are in production. Another four or five will get into production over the next few years. We probably don’t need the rest. There will be a race to get into production. If you can’t win that race, you might as well pack up your tent and go home.

TGR: Do you see higher REE prices? Has the sector bottomed?

CE: Prices have bottomed, yes. Some people remain bearish on lanthanum and cerium, which are in massive oversupply. Those prices may go lower. However, I believe it’s not in the Chinese interest to see those two metals go lower. Lanthanum and cerium make up the bulk of what China produces in the REE space, but they’re not the value-added metals. Metals like europium may enjoy better prices, but they’re a small part of the whole REE complex.

China’s bread and butter comes from Bayan Obo, which is not a rare earth mine at all. It’s an iron ore mine that produces REEs as a byproduct. The Chinese can’t stop producing REEs at Bayan Obo because they’d have to stop producing the iron ore as well.

One of the intriguing things about REEs is that you can’t just take the ones you want and leave the others behind. You have to go through the whole chemical extraction process to get those with the biggest market or the best price. You can’t send a metal into the tailings pond because it doesn’t have a good price today. You have to do them all.

You’re stuck in a reverse economy of scale; the more you process, the more unprofitable it could be.

TGR: Given the margins on producing a concentrate or even an oxide, is vertical integration the only way to make money in the REE space?

CE: The ideal scenario is to be vertically integrated. That is a bit of a challenge for some of the juniors. Molycorp is the only company that has the REE soup-to-nuts combo. Molycorp put that together by buying Silmet, an Estonian-based processor. The company then bought Neo Material for its factories around the world and its distribution system. Putting that together cost Molycorp a lot of money and a lot of dilution.

Like silicon technology, the mining is not the sexy part of the REE business. No one would say that digging silica out of the ground is the quality end of the tech business. The quality is at Intel’s factory, where the silicon chip is put on the circuit board. The mere insertion of the word “rare” in the name was a marketer’s dream and has ended up being an investor’s nightmare. They’re not rare; they’re as common as dirt.

TGR: The World Trade Organization (WTO) recently ruled in favor of the U.S. in a trade dispute over Chinese exports of REEs, tungsten and molybdenum. Does that change the playing field for junior REE development companies?

CE: No, because it won’t have much effect on the REE market. I recently attended an antimony conference, where we heard about China’s quota on antimony exports and the fact that it never reaches its quota. Yet, according to the official statistics of individual European countries, their individual imports of antimony from China are higher than the entire Chinese export quota. Chinese export quotas do not affect daily life in the REE sector. They will be smuggled out; they will be walked across the border and become Vietnamese REEs.

I think the Chinese are more interested in controlling the prices of REEs than the supply. Call me conspiratorial, but I think that the Chinese sunk the REE prices in 2011 after having pumped it up. They did that because there was a sudden proliferation of REE properties out of nowhere in the west. The Chinese thought, oops, we’ve shot ourselves in the foot here by attracting all these additional mines. If we let them run down the track with these high prices, five years from now there will be massive overproduction. At that point, the Chinese sunk the prices.

The REE market is easy for the Chinese to manipulate because they have the stockpiles. In 2011, the Chinese released a deluge of product. That sank the price and 75% of the listed REE equities into oblivion. I think the Chinese want to see the prices rise again, but only when they can be confident higher prices won’t trigger another surge of new REE companies.

TGR: How is China’s role today different from its role in 2010–2011, when the sector exploded?

CE: It plays essentially the same role now. In 2011, China was pretty much the only game in town. India, Malaysia and Brazil had small amounts of production. Today, Molycorp and Lynas look like wounded beasts. They have, just barely, managed to spoil the lanthanum and cerium market for the Chinese. Their existence means that the Chinese don’t control those markets anymore. I still don’t see either one as competition for the Chinese, but they are price spoilers at the cheap end of the REE space, in lanthanum and cerium.

TGR: If China is the kingmaker and in control, why would an investor wade into these waters?

CE: There are niche categories. One of them is strategic metals. In 2010, you heard a lot about the perception that the West had made itself too vulnerable to Chinese supply of the strategic metals that the western defense establishment needs. Here we are four years later. China is as threatening or as non-threatening as it was back then.

Will the U.S. do anything about it? So far, not much has happened. The U.S. needs to say, “We need a big stockpile of yttrium, of terbium and samarium and other scarce REEs.” Ironically, when you’re talking about rare earths used for, say, night vision goggles, the U.S. defense establishment is probably buying the rare earth oxides that go into those from Japan or China. Meanwhile, Japanese are dependent upon the Chinese. Many of the Japanese plants for processing REEs are being forced to move to China because the Chinese have said, “You’re not getting it unless you move your plant over here.” They’re almost like captives of the Chinese and the Japanese don’t like that. The U.S. doesn’t seem to care.

TGR: In a recent interview, Asian Metals Analyst Zachary Schumacher said, “Very few REE projects stand out.” Which ones stand out for you?

CE: Great Western Minerals Group Ltd.’s (GWG:TSX.V; GWMGF:OTCQX) project in South Africa is one. Steenkampskraal is an old thorium mine with phenomenal grades in its gigantic tailings. It should be in operation now, but the company seems to be going a bit soft on the pedal because it doesn’t want to come to production in this grim market.

TGR: Are you following other REE names?

CE: I like Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp.’s (TRER:OTCQX) Round Mountain project. It’s easy to get to and it’s more than an REE project; it has beryllium and lithium. It also has yttrium fluorite and it can extract fluorspar, as well as yttrium.

Ucore Rare Metals Inc.’s (UCU:TSX.V; UURAF:OTCQX) Bokan Mountain is just the right size. Ucore saw the light early on and halved the size of the project. It’s the companies that are sticking with their oversized projects that will come to grief.

One project without pitfalls in terms of good infrastructure and location is Tasman Metals Ltd.’s (TSM:TSX.V; TAS:NYSE.MKT; TASXF:OTCPK; T61:FSE) Norra Karr in Sweden. Scandinavia is where REEs were first found. Norra Karr might come to fruition.

TGR: What about African rare earth players? Prospects? Do you know Mkango Resources Ltd. (MKA:TSX.V)?

CE: Africa is interesting for REEs. While Latin America is rather poorly endowed with REEs, Africa is exactly the opposite, at least the southern half of the continent seems to have quite a number of resources of economic proportions. The ones I am acquainted with are in South Africa (Great Western at Steenkampskraal), Namibia with a couple of projects, Tanzania with a couple and Malawi with quite a number, disproportionate to its size. The Japanese, through its agency JOGMEC, have taken a particular interest in the latter country.

I do know Mkango and it seems to be not only one of the more determined and serious players in the REE space, but it has some hefty institutional players behind it (Sprott, Genesis, Och-Ziff) that mark it out from those stocks that are reliant upon retail investors. It has skipped the preliminary economic assessment phase and is heading toward a feasibility study to be published in coming months. This will give us a better idea of its prospects and capital expenses. It seems it will come in at the lower end compared to many of the Canadian REE contenders.

TGR: Does Medallion Resources Ltd. (MDL:TSX.V; MLLOF:OTCQX; MRD:FSE) fit into your thesis of having the right metals and a relatively small footprint?

CE: I know Medallion Resources very well. Its concept is to get REEs as a byproduct of ilmenite and rutile mining. The company wants to put its project at the entrance to the Persian Gulf. That’s a smart move because of the cheap energy. Most of the world’s ilmenite and rutile production is around the Indian Ocean.

TGR: Is ilmenite your favorite mineralization to host REEs?

CE: Ilmenite is not my favorite. It is a titanium-driven product. If the price of titanium goes to hell in a hand basket, some ilmenite projects would follow. The danger Medallion faces is its dependence on what happens with titanium demand; the REEs are only a byproduct.

I love xenotime because you get yttrium along with it. I like yttrium because of its high-tech uses in anything that must be coated to protect them from very high heat, like jet engines. it’s a very interesting strategic metal.

Northern Minerals Ltd. (NTU:ASX) and Spectrum Rare Earths Ltd. (SPX:ASX) are working deposits in Australia. Spectrum claims to have the only ionic absorption clay deposit outside China. It hasn’t yet been proven to be adsorption clay, but it definitely contains REE. Ionic adsorption clay is the holy grail of REEs.

TGR: The Alaskan Senate recently approved $145M in long-term bonds to finance Ucore’s Bokan Dotson Ridge project. Does that guarantee the mine will be built?

CE: With REE prices going lower, all bets are off. However, you could build a mine with that amount of money.

TGR: Besides financing, what else does the Bokan Dotson project have going for it?

CE: It’s the right size. It’s better to have a project that runs out in 10 years rather than trying to build the biggest project.

It will be 2016–2017 by the time Bokan Dotson gets built. Some REE prices will be higher then: praseodymium and neodymium, the ones used in wind turbines and in hybrid autos. The Chinese are trying to deal with urban pollution by a wholesale shift toward hybrid autos.

We’ve seen this over and over in China. When China needs something, it starts by using all of its own product. Then it starts importing the product because demand outstrips production. That’s not to say that China will become a net importer of REEs, but if China goes for a big paradigm shift into hybrid autos, it could generate massive demand for neodymium and praseodymium, to be used in the magnets in the engines.

TGR: The WTO ruling also covered Chinese tungsten. Can you update our readers on the supply/demand equation for tungsten and your investment thesis?

CE: One of the main uses for tungsten is the filaments in electrical light bulbs. The shift toward low energy-consuming bulbs reduces tungsten demand in that industry.

It’s also used for hardening, including machine tools. China wants to muscle in on the traditional European strength in machine tools. That means using more tungsten, which is what led to the Chinese export quotas on tungsten. Those quotas frightened a number of European companies that depended on Chinese tungsten.

Sandvik AB (STO:SAND), the big Swedish company that produces a lot of heavy machinery, is an example. Sandvik decided to buy an old Austrian mine and get it going again as a source of tungsten outside of China. Sandvik also invested in Wolf Minerals Ltd. (WLF:ASX), which is developing a tungsten mine in the southeast of England.

Global Tungsten & Powders Corp. is a big producer of tungsten powders from mines around the world. GTP backed Malaga until its demise last year. It is now backing Almonty Industries Inc. (AII:TSX.V), which owns the Los Santos Mine in Spain. It has been producing for five years.

We’re seeing more tungsten mining in Europe, a place regarded by many as having too many regulations and expensive labor to be worth the effort to start a mine. Australia has a number of projects coming down the track, too.

Size is a problem for North American Tungsten Corp. Ltd.’s (NTC:TSX) Mactung project in the Yukon. It has a $400M budget. The current tungsten price is good, but not phenomenal. If you have an existing mine, that’s great, but trying to rustle up $400M today is pushing a rock up a hill. I don’t think Mactung will get going until the tungsten price is much higher.

TGR: As far as Almonty goes, how much mine life does Los Santos have?

CE: It has four or five years left. However, Almonty made an abortive bid last year for Ormonde Mining Plc (ORM:LSE). Ormonde’s project is also in the Salamanca Province of Spain, which gives Almonty lots of potential economies of scale. Right now, it’s in the prefeasibility stage. Almonty would bring its skill set to get the mine going.

Spain is one of the most prospective areas in the world for a lot of minerals, actually. Rio Tinto Plc (RIO:NYSE; RIO:ASX; RIO:LSE; RTPPF:OTCPK) was founded there as a lead-zinc mine. Gold, lead, zinc, even iron ore, tungsten, tin, antimony—Spain has it all, Portugal as well. Lundin Mining Corp. (LUN:TSX) operates big mines in Portugal. Colt Resources Inc. (GTP:TSX.V; COLTF:OTCQX) has a tungsten project outside Lisbon.

In the Iberian Peninsula, you get the added juice of tin in many tungsten deposits. If you really hit the jackpot, you get tantalum as well. You don’t need to go to exotic locations or troll around the top of the Andes. Just catch a flight to Madrid.

TGR: What should investors expect in 2014 and beyond in the REE space?

CE: I compare the REE space to a science-fiction movie, where the spacecraft crew is cryogenically frozen. Some of the crew will defrost the way they’re supposed to, but others will be lost.

In the REE space, it will become clearer over the next 12 months which five or six projects are most likely to survive. Many of the other REE companies will change their names and become totally different companies seeking other metals in other countries.

I don’t think there will be a second wave of new REE stocks. This is the universe we have, and it’s getting smaller, not bigger.

TGR: What’s your advice to investors Chris?

CE: Diversify. If you want to take on REE stocks, buy two or three to mitigate risk.

TGR: Chris, thanks for your time and your insights.

Christopher Ecclestone is a principal and mining strategist at Hallgarten & Company in New York. He is also a director of Mediterranean Resources, a gold mining company listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange, with properties in Turkey. Prior to founding Hallgarten & Company in 2003, he was the head of research at an economic think tank in New Jersey, which he had joined in 2001. Before moving to the U.S., he was the founder and head of research at the esteemed Argentine equity research firm, Buenos Aires Trust Company, from 1991 until 2001. Prior to his arrival in Argentina, he worked in London beginning in 1985 as a corporate finance and equities analyst and as a freelance consultant on the restructuring of the securities industry. He holds a degree from the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology.

Want to read more Gold Report interviews like this? Sign up for our free e-newsletter, and you’ll learn when new articles have been published. To see recent interviews with industry analysts and commentators, visit our Streetwise Interviews page.

DISCLOSURE:

1) Brian Sylvester conducted this interview for Streetwise Reports LLC, publisher of The Gold Report, The Energy Report, The Life Sciences Report and The Mining Report, and provides services to Streetwise Reports as an independent contractor. He owns, or his family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None.

2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of Streetwise Reports: Northern Minerals Ltd., Ucore Rare Metals Inc., Mkango Resources Ltd. and Medallion Resources Ltd. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services.

3) Christopher Ecclestone: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: In the past, I have consulted for Ucore Rare Metals Inc. and Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp. My company has a financial relationship with the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.

4) Interviews are edited for clarity. Streetwise Reports does not make editorial comments or change experts’ statements without their consent.

5) The interview does not constitute investment advice. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her individual financial professional and any action a reader takes as a result of information presented here is his or her own responsibility. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer.

6) From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as well as persons interviewed for articles and interviews on the site, may have a long or short position in securities mentioned. Directors, officers, employees or members of their families are prohibited from making purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or otherwise during the up-to-four-week interval from the time of the interview until after it publishes.

Streetwise – The Gold Report is Copyright © 2014 by Streetwise Reports LLC. All rights are reserved. Streetwise Reports LLC hereby grants an unrestricted license to use or disseminate this copyrighted material (i) only in whole (and always including this disclaimer), but (ii) never in part.

Streetwise Reports LLC does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported.

Streetwise Reports LLC receives a fee from companies that are listed on the home page in the In This Issue section. Their sponsor pages may be considered advertising for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1734.

Participating companies provide the logos used in The Gold Report. These logos are trademarks and are the property of the individual companies.

101 Second St., Suite 110

Petaluma, CA 94952

Tel.: (707) 981-8999

Fax: (707) 981-8998

Email: [email protected]

Technical Sentiment: Neutral

Key Takeaways

• The long term triangle formation was breached towards the upside yet price quickly fell back down;
• GBP/JPY cleared stop losses below 171.90, major support confluence lies at 171.24;
• British Services PMI expected to print a small increase on Tuesday;

Last week’s rally ended on a sour note on Friday, when GBP/JPY ran into a lot of selling pressure just ahead of March’s top at 173.56. The day ended as a bearish engulfing bar and today the price action pattern was confirmed as the sell-off continued throughout the Asian and European session. The pair is expected to consolidate between 171.75 and 172.80 ahead of the British Services PMI.

Technical Analysis

GBP/JPY is currently trading above 172.00 after testing the 4H 100 Simple Moving Average. Although volume is thin and the pair has invalidated April 30^th Low of 171.92, April 28^th Low of 171.24 remains the most recent higher low on the Daily timeframe and the actual key support level. The 200 Simple Moving Average on 4H, 38.2% Fibonacci retracement from 167.75 to 173.44 and the triangle support trendline are located in this area.

If the Services PMI will print an increase to 57.9 or above expectations, GBP/JPY will put the resistance levels to the test, starting with 172.76 and ending with 173.56. The 173.56 resistance is unlikely to break before Thursday, as the markets will wait for BOE’s Official Bank Rate announcement. In case of a rally above the previous tops, 174.82 will immediately become the main attraction point.

Towards the downside, 171.24 should be watched for either a bounce or a strong break. A strong break below 171.24 will end the bullish higher lows configuration and open the way towards 170.00 (61.8% Fibonacci retracement from 167.75 to 173.43). This scenario has the most potential to increase volatility, as long traders will be shaken out of their positions and forced to reverse. On the other hand, a rejection has less potential as GBP/JPY will further consolidate in this choppy region.

*********
Prepared by Alexandru Z., Chief Currency Strategist at Capital Trust Markets

by Michael Lombardi, MBA

I keep hearing about the economy improving, but I keep asking, where? I ask because the facts continue to say otherwise.

The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis reports gross domestic product (GDP) came in at just 0.1% in the first quarter of 2014. To remind my readers, in the fourth quarter of 2013, U.S. GDP grew by 2.6%. (Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, April 30, 2014.)

These GDP figures reaffirm what I have been saying for some time now: the U.S. economy is headed towards an economic slowdown, not growth.

All we need to do is look at our exports. Exports from the U.S. economy to the global economy collapsed in the first quarter of 2014, declining by 7.6%. That’s definitely not helping GDP.

The Baltic Dry Index (BDI), an indicator of how demand in the global economy looks, is in a sharp downtrend, as illustrated in the chart below.

Chart courtesy of www.StockCharts.com

And consumer spending is facing headwinds. I can see this in the amount of inventory businesses are stockpiling. In the first quarter of this year, private business inventories rose by $87.4 billion after increasing by $111.7 billion in the fourth quarter of 2013. Businesses increasing inventories suggests customers are buying less, as each business’ inventory isn’t turning over; it’s stockpiling. GDP cannot grow without consumer spending.

Finally, last Friday, we heard the “good news” that the U.S. economy added 288,000 jobs in April—the biggest increase since January 2012. But the underemployment rate, which includes people who have given up looking for work and people who have part-time jobs but want full-time jobs, stands stubbornly above 12%.

Look closer at the data, and you’ll find the number of people actually in the workforce, known as the “participation rate,” fell to 62.8%—the lowest level since 1978. (Source: Economic news release, Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2, 2014.) With the government supporting so many people these days via different programs, I see the incentive to work actually fading.

But have no fear, dear reader. The Federal Reserve will look at the unemployment numbers and cheer. It will continue to cut back on its money printing program. It will take the brake off historically low interest rates and slowly let them rise. Rising interest rates: just what the economy needs for GDP growth!
This article Proof the Incentive to Work Is Fading was originally posted at Profit Confidential

By HY Markets Forex Blog

Crude prices were lifted on Monday, rising for the first time in three days as traders continue to focus on the escalated tensions in Ukraine, raising worries that the crises may weigh on global supplies. The North American WTI crude was boosted by the positive jobs data.

The European benchmark Brent crude for June settlement edged 0.13% higher at $108.74 per barrel on the London-based ICE futures Europe exchange at the time of writing. While futures for the North American West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude for June delivery climbed 0.55% higher at $100.31 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

The ongoing tension in Ukraine continues to weigh on the oil market and determine the oil prices.

“Oil production at Libya’s second-largest oil field, which has a daily production capacity of 340,000 barrels, cannot be resumed because other protesters are continuing to block a pipeline needed to transport the oil. If production can be resumed, this would significantly increase Libyan oil production and weigh on the Brent price accordingly,” according to a Commerzbank Corporates & Markets analyst note.

Crude – Ukraine

Over the weekend, the crises in Ukraine escalated, as Ukraine’s Interior Ministry forces were sent to drive out militants and release hostages, according to Minister Arsen Avakov.  The crises in Odessa left 46 dead.

The US and European Union are blaming Russia for the ongoing crises in the eastern region of Ukraine and have threatened Russia with further sanctions.

In 2012, Russia produced 10.4 million barrels of crude a day and exported 7.4 million, according to reports from the EIA.

Crude – US Jobs

The US jobs reports released on Friday showed that 288,000 jobs were added in the jobs sector in April, marking the fastest pace of employment since February 2012 and surpassing analysts forecast of 218,000. Meanwhile the unemployment rate dropped from the previous figure of 6.7% seen in March to 6.3% in April.

Visit www.hymarkets.com   to find out more about our products and start trading today with only $50 using the latest trading technology today

The post Crude Prices Lifted On Ukraine Tension appeared first on | HY Markets Official blog.

Article provided by HY Markets Forex Blog

By HY Markets Forex Blog

Stocks – Europe

Stocks in the European region began the trading week lower as investors focus on the ongoing tension in Ukraine as the crises escalated over the weekend.

The European Euro Stoxx 50 slid 0.39% lower opening at 3,165.62, while the German DAX fell 23% to start at 9,534.04 at the time of writing. At the same time, the French CAC 40 lost 0.24% opening the session at 4,447.57, while markets in the UK were closed for a public holiday.

Economic Estimates

The European Commission will be publishing its spring economic forecasts for the European Union member states later in the day. The European Union executive arm will be releasing its forecasts for the euro region’s gross domestic growth, employment, debt and budget deficits for last year, this year and 2015.

The Eurogroup meeting will begin later in the day in Brussels and will be discussing a string of important topics including the ongoing tension in Ukraine, the inflation and exchange rate developments for the eurozone and more.

Meanwhile, the Portuguese Prime Minister, Pedro Passos Coelho, said that Portugal will end its three-year bailout program without seeking a precautionary credit from the European Union.

Stocks – Asia

Asian stocks were seen falling on Monday as the key Chinese manufacturing gauge contracted for the fourth month in a row, raising concerns that the world’s second largest economy’s slowdown is worsening.

Hong Kong’s Hang Seng index fell 0.98% to 22,043.53 points at the time of writing, while the mainland Chinese benchmark Shanghai Composite slid 0.88% to 2,008.53 points. HSBC’s Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) for last month came in at 48.1 from 48.3, coming in lower than analysts forecast of 48.4. Readings below 50 indicates contraction.

Markets in Japan and South Korea were closed on Monday for public holiday.

Australia

In Sydney, the benchmark S&P/ASX 200 index slipped 0.19% lower to 5,447.90 points as of 2.55am GMT. Mining company, Rio Tinto traded 1% higher, while BHP Billiton edged 0.7% higher on Monday.

Investors will be focusing on Tuesday’s cash rate announcement from the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA), with forecasts that the banks 2.5% benchmark rate to remain unchanged.

Visit www.hymarkets.com   to find out more about our products and start trading today with only $50 using the latest trading technology today

The post Stocks Market Report 5th May appeared first on | HY Markets Official blog.

Article provided by HY Markets Forex Blog

By HY Markets Forex Blog

EUR/CHF continues to fall after the recent reversal from the lower boundary of the resistance zone lying between the resistance levels 1.2225 and 1.2250.  Both of these resistance levels stand close to the corresponding Fibonacci Correction levels of the preceding sharp intermediate impulse wave (1) from the start of January (38.2% and 50%).

The latest corrective wave (2) stopped at the top of the aforementioned resistance zone – interesting with the upper resistance trendline of the daily up channel from March. EUR/CHF is set to fall to the next sell target at 1.2150.

The post HY MARKETS News: Forex Report: EUR/CHF appeared first on | HY Markets Official blog.

Article provided by HY Markets Forex Blog

By HY Markets Forex Blog

Silver recently reversed up sharply from the sell target 19.00 that was set in our earlier report for this instrument. Given the strength of the support level 19.00 (which has earlier reversed the price strongly in last December and in January, February and April of this year, as you can see below) – Silver immediately corrected up from 19.00 – continuing the upward moment from today’s open.

The price just broke the resistance trendline from March and is expected to rise further to the next correction target at 20.50 (upper boundary of the sideways price range from December).

The post HY MARKETS News: Commodities Report: Silver appeared first on | HY Markets Official blog.

Article provided by HY Markets Forex Blog

By HY Markets Forex Blog

HSCE recently fell below the downward correction target 10000.00 what was set in our previous report for this index. The breakout of this round support level accelerated the (C)-wave of the latest intermediate corrective wave (2) from April.

The index is currently trading close to the support level 9750.00. The support zone near this support level is strengthened by 61.8% Fibonacci Correction of the preceding sharp intermediate impulse wave (1). If HSCE breaks below 9750.00 – it can be expected to fall further to the next sell target at 9500.00. Alternately, HSCE might retest the broken support at 10000.00.

The post HY MARKETS News:Index Report: HANG SENG CHINA ENTERPRISES IND appeared first on | HY Markets Official blog.

Article provided by HY Markets Forex Blog

By HY Markets Forex Blog

Bank of America recently fell strongly inside the intermediate ABC correction (4) from March. The (C)-wave of this ABC correction stopped at the strong support level 15.00 (former strong resistance level which reversed Bank of America down in July of last year, acting as support now after it was broken in last November).

The support area surrounding 15.00 is strengthened by 50% Fibonacci Correction of the upward impulse from last June and the support trendline of the daily down channel from March.Bank of America is set to rise further to the next buy target at 16.00.

The post HY MARKETS News : Stocks Report:Bank of America Corp appeared first on | HY Markets Official blog.

Article provided by HY Markets Forex Blog