Tag: market

  • Wall Street bets Powell will flinch on rate hikes once job market sours

    Wall Street bets Powell will flinch on rate hikes once job market sours

    [ad_1]

    The market’s expectation that the central bank will ease up is partly driven by the presence of new faces on the Fed’s seven-member board in Washington. In addition to reappointing Powell, President Joe Biden named three new members and promoted Lael Brainard, who in past years advocated for going slow on rate hikes, to Powell’s No. 2.

    Other new Fed officials outside Washington are economists who have long pushed for broad and inclusive employment. Among them: Austan Goolsbee, a onetime chief economist to former President Barack Obama who recently became head of the Chicago Fed and joined his first central bank policy meeting this week.

    “There’s a pretty strong view that they will ease sooner than they say they will,” said former Kansas City Fed President Thomas Hoenig, whose tenure included the 2008 financial crisis when the economy was losing more than 700,000 jobs a month. “The pressure would be to say, ‘Well, we’re just about there, we can ease back.’”

    Fed officials on Wednesday are expected to hike rates by another quarter of a percentage point, nearing the central bank’s target of 5 percent for its main borrowing rate. The aim is to get inflation down to 2 percent — less than half of where it is now.

    The Fed wants to ensure that it keeps rates high long enough to bring inflation fully to heel, fearing a repeat of the 1970s and ‘80s when the central bank backed off, only to see price spikes return.

    But investors are pricing in a greater than 75 percent chance that interest rates will be lower in December than in June, according to CME FedWatch. They aren’t convinced that the Fed will keep its key rate at a punishingly high level for long, particularly if inflation keeps falling and unemployment begins to spike.

    Inflation has dropped for six straight months, fanning hopes that the surge in prices is on its way to ending. Quarterly data on companies’ labor costs released Tuesday shows that wage growth, a driver of inflation, also continues to tick down.

    Yet even though consumer price increases have cooled, Fed officials are maintaining their tough talk with the idea of leaving borrowing costs high enough to keep inflation on its downward trend. They say wage growth will need to slow even further. And Fed policymakers have publicly been in lockstep on how fighting inflation is their most important priority.

    That tone could shift if economic indicators allow some members of the rate-setting committee to make the case that inflation is easing even without a significant rise in joblessness from 3.5 percent now. The Department of Labor on Friday will report January’s employment numbers, and they’re expected to show a slower, but still steady increase in job creation.

    “There is a growing contingent on the committee who will grow very uncomfortable in the second half of the year not cutting [rates] as unemployment rises,” said Derek Tang, an economist at LH Meyer Monetary Policy Analytics, a research firm chaired by former Fed Governor Larry Meyer. “By their own account, they think [the unemployment rate is] going to rise into the 4s. This is all in the service of trying to bring inflation down, but when the rubber meets the road, things might feel a bit different.”

    Brainard, the Fed’s vice chair, recently pointed to high profit margins that might give companies room to hold onto workers, particularly as supply chains continue to improve and help them save some costs. That means inflation could ease further without as much of a hit to the job market, she said.

    Meanwhile, getting inflation back to 2 percent in the short term might not even be feasible, depending on what’s causing it.

    Officials like Goolsbee say that if the Fed tries to counteract inflation that’s caused by supply problems, rather than by overspending, that could run the risk of a recession without actually cooling prices — what’s often termed “stagflation.” That makes the risks facing the central bank more complicated, he told CNBC last year, before he joined the central bank.

    “The Fed has got to balance out some things it doesn’t normally need to balance out,” Goolsbee said at the time.

    Other prominent regional Fed presidents, who have rotated out of a voting seat this year but are still part of the debate at rate-setting meetings, might also make the case for a gentler approach to the economy, such as Boston Fed chief Susan Collins. In 2019, Collins, then a professor at the University of Michigan, supported raising the central bank’s inflation target slightly above 2 percent to give more room for the job market to recover during downturns.

    Still, the ultimate stance of the committee will depend on how the economy actually evolves. Even Fed officials such as Brainard or San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly, who are historically considered to be “doves” — in central bank parlance, more worried about harm to the labor market than the risk of inflation — have been resolute in the face of price spikes.

    Policymakers across the board have said they don’t expect to cut rates this year because they will need to stay at a high level for a while to ensure that high inflation doesn’t become embedded in the economy. That could lead the Fed to keep the brakes on much longer than markets expect.

    Tim Duy, chief U.S. economist at SGH Macro Advisors, noted that more dovish officials haven’t shifted their rhetoric yet, “even given the extent to which data has turned in their direction.”

    And some officials have pushed for the central bank to be even more aggressive in the face of rising prices, including Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kashkari and St. Louis Fed President James Bullard. Kashkari, who before the pandemic was an outlier in advocating for particularly low rates, has during this bout of inflation pressed for raising rates higher than officials’ median forecast. He has a vote on rates this year, as does Goolsbee.

    “I’m just wary about assuming anybody’s priors anymore,” Duy said.

    Meanwhile, the direction of debate could also shift considerably if Brainard leaves; she’s currently a contender to replace Brian Deese as head of the White House National Economic Council, according to people familiar with the matter.

    “Given the working relationship that she and Powell have had over several years, I think she really plays an important part in the thought leadership and the direction things are moving,” said Claudia Sahm, a former senior economist at the Fed.

    Still, even given Brainard’s worker focus, she will be pragmatic about how much progress is being made against inflation, Sahm said. “Maybe later in the year it will matter, but for now, dove, hawk, moderate — they’re going after inflation.”

    [ad_2]
    #Wall #Street #bets #Powell #flinch #rate #hikes #job #market #sours
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Adani stock fall: LIC, SBI ‘lost over Rs 78k cr’ in market cap, FM still on ‘mute mode’, says Cong

    Adani stock fall: LIC, SBI ‘lost over Rs 78k cr’ in market cap, FM still on ‘mute mode’, says Cong

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: The Congress Saturday questioned the “silence” of the Union finance minister and probe agencies after LIC and SBI “lost over Rs 78,000 crore” in market capitalisation of their shares due to exposure in Adani Group.

    LIC and SBI continue to invest in the Adani group even after the Hindenburg research report alleged share price manipulation and financial misappropriation by the group, Congress general secretary Randeep Surjewala claimed.

    “LIC is public money! Post Hindenburg Report, the value of LIC investment in Adani Group shares have fallen from Rs 77,000 Crore to Rs 53,000 crore — loss of Rs 23,500 crore.

    “Also, LIC shares have lost Rs 22,442 Crore. Why is LIC still investing Rs 300 crore in Adani Group,” Surjewala asked.

    The Congress leader claimed that after the publication of the report, the SBI share’s market cap has declined by a whopping Rs 54,618 crore.

    Also, the loan exposure of SBI and other banks to Adani Group is Rs 81,200 crore, he claimed.

    “The question is, why are SBI Employees Pension Fund and SBI Life still investing Rs 225 crore in Adani Group,” Surjewala asked.

    The Rajya Sabha MP also claimed that between January 24 and 27, the SBI and LIC lost a market cap of Rs 78,118 crore in value of their shares alone.

    “The loan exposure of SBI and Invest Value decline of LIC in Adani Group is in addition thereto. Yet… RBI, SEBI, ED, SFIO, CBI, and the FM remain on ‘mute’ mode,” Surjewala said in a series of tweets.

    The Congress leader has earlier said that elsewhere “the prime minister would be asked to explain, the finance minister would be sacked and a full investigation would have been ordered.”

    The Hindenburg Report has pointed to the alleged manipulation of stock price by the Adani Group and alleged financial irregularities. The Adani Group has denied the allegations and termed it a campaign to defame the company ahead of its follow on a public issue.



    [ad_2]
    #Adani #stock #fall #LIC #SBI #lost #78k #market #cap #mute #mode #Cong

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Atal Dulloo reviews progress on linkage of J&K mandies with e-National Agriculture Market

    Atal Dulloo reviews progress on linkage of J&K mandies with e-National Agriculture Market

    [ad_1]

    Over 12,000 farmers, 1800 traders availing benefits from online linkage

    Jammu, Jan 25 (GNS): Additional Chief Secretary (ACS), Agriculture Production Department, Atal Dulloo, reviewed the status of linkage of mandis of Jammu and Kashmir with e-National Agriculture Market (e-NAM) in a meeting held at Civil Secretariat here today.

    Under e-NAM, Mandis or Agricultural Produce Market Committees (APMC) are provided an online pan-India electronic trading portal.

    In a PowerPoint Presentation given by Director Horticulture (P&M), Vikas Sharma, it was revealed that 9 mandis were onboarded in August 2022 in addition to the already onboard mandis of Narwal and Parimpora. He informed that DPRs have been submitted for adding more mandis.

    ACS had a detailed information regarding breakup of number of farmers, traders, commission agents and FPOs registered with the individual mandis. He was apprised that over 12 thousand farmers and more than 1800 traders are availing benefits from this online linkage.

    ACS was also apprised of thirty seven inter-state trade transactions being facilitated by e-NAM.

    Pertinently, eNAM has successfully achieved trade figures of over Rs. 30 crore as well as fostered encouraging outcomes in interstate trade.

    ACS enquired about the facilities being provided to the registered members and instructed the officers to ensure that trade volume of each mandi increases over time.

    ACS also had deliberations with the officers regarding the process of identification of suitable land in coordination with the District Administration for creation of new mandis at Kishtwar, Bandipora, Samba and Reasi for overall development of the agriculture sector.

    It was noted that all CA stores and warehouses can be declared as sub market yards and that this process would be fast-tracked in the coming month. Also, it was decided that e-auctioning of the unallotted shop sites in various Mandis will be done.

    Further, it was revealed that the State Agriculture Marketing Board (SAMB) is going to meet twice a year to take important decisions for overall development of Horticulture sector, functioning of fruit and vegetable markets and for regulation of agriculture marketing in the UT.

    It was informed found that there are a total of 36 mandis in the state, with 22 currently functional and 14 in various stages of development.

    The meeting was attended by Secretary in Agriculture Production Department, Shabnam Kamili, Joint Director Horticulture Planning & Marketing, Digvijay Gupta, Deputy Director Jammu (Horticulture Planning & Marketing), Ayaz Ahmad Natnoo, Area Marketing Officers of various districts, President and members of Fruit Association Narwal, Jammu and GMI Horticulture (Planning & Marketing), Dr Sudhanshu Gupta.

    Officials of Horticulture (Planning & Marketing) from Kashmir and a representative from SFAC Delhi were also present virtually.(GNS)

    [ad_2]
    #Atal #Dulloo #reviews #progress #linkage #mandies #eNational #Agriculture #Market

    ( With inputs from : thegnskashmir.com )

  • Google accused of monopolizing $250B U.S. digital ad market

    Google accused of monopolizing $250B U.S. digital ad market

    [ad_1]

    image

    It is the first major antitrust lawsuit against a tech company in the Biden administration, continuing efforts started under former President Donald Trump.

    It’s also the latest in a barrage of antitrust lawsuits against Google. It’s both the DOJ’s second case, and the second case targeting its ad business. The DOJ and a group of state attorneys general sued in October 2020 over Google’s dominance in web searches, and a Texas-led group of state attorneys general challenged its advertising business later that year. Yet another case was filed by a Utah-led group of states in 2021 over Google Play, its mobile app store.

    “Today’s lawsuit from the DOJ attempts to pick winners and losers in the highly competitive advertising technology sector,” said Google spokesperson Peter Schottenfels. “It largely duplicates an unfounded lawsuit by the Texas Attorney General, much of which was recently dismissed by a federal court. DOJ is doubling down on a flawed argument that would slow innovation, raise advertising fees, and make it harder for thousands of small businesses and publishers to grow.”

    Progressives applauded the case. “As the Justice Department’s suit meticulously documents, Google is a buyer, broker, and digital advertising exchange with pervasive conflicts of interest,” said Matt Stoller with the American Economic Liberties Project. “Google regularly abuses this power, manipulating markets, muscling out any form of competition, and inspiring fear across the commercial landscape.”

    Filed in a Virginia federal court with a reputation for speedy resolutions, the lawsuit contends that Google’s dominance in all facets of online advertising, which it achieved in part through a series of acquisitions dating back nearly 15 years, gives the company too much control over tools used to buy, sell, and display ads. Those tools are the primary source of revenue for much of the web.

    According to data from eMarketer, a digital advertising data service, Google is the largest company in the digital ad market that’s estimated to be worth nearly $280 billion in 2023. That’s up from $250 billion for 2022.

    Google’s dominance allows the company to collect 30 cents for every dollar advertisers spend through its tools that place ads across the web, according to Tuesday’s case, which cites internal Google documents.

    “New York consumers and small businesses are paying the price of Google’s actions,” said Attorney General Tish James. “When website publishers get less ad revenue because of Google’s monopolies, they have to either lower the quality of their website, or pass on costs to consumers.”

    The new lawsuit is similar to the Texas case, which is also focused on so-called display advertising, or the images, text and videos that often run on news, sports, and smaller ecommerce websites and some blogs. Google owns many of the most widely-used tools that advertisers and publishers use to sell space and place ads online. It also owns AdX, one of the most widely used exchanges that match advertisers and publishers in automatic auctions occurring in the milliseconds it takes to load a webpage.

    Both the DOJ and Texas-led cases use high speed electronic stock trading as an analogy to describe Google’s business. The cases accuse Google of conflicts of interest by working on behalf of publishers and advertisers as well as operating the leading electronic advertising exchange that matches the two, and selling its own ad space on sites like YouTube.

    “The analogy would be if Goldman [Sachs] or Citibank owned the New York Stock Exchange,” Jonathan Kanter, head of the DOJ’s antitrust division said Tuesday at a press conference.

    Google has previously said the online ad market is intensely competitive, and pointed to a number of startups and tech giants like Amazon, Meta and Microsoft that all compete in the sector.

    Citing the U.S. Army an advertiser, including for recruitment ads, Kanter said the federal government itself is a victim of Google’s conduct. This allows the department to seek damages, something that it’s not typically able to do in civil antitrust cases.

    Some parts of the Texas-led case were dismissed last year by a federal judge in Manhattan, but much of the case is continuing.

    “In the complaint, the department alleges that Google engaged in 15 years of sustained conduct that had and continues to have the effect of driving out rivals diminishing competition, inflating advertising costs, reducing website publisher revenues, stymieing innovation and flattening our public marketplace of ideas,” Kanter said at the press conference.

    Google’s online advertising operations were largely pieced together through a series of acquisitions, which is a key focus of Tuesday’s case. DOJ’s case goes into more exhaustive detail about Google’s acquisition history, calling out specific businesses it wants sold off, including Google’s advertising exchange, which matches publishers and advertisers in real time for the billions of ads across the web.

    The deals date back to Google’s 2008 acquisition of DoubleClick, which helps websites sell ad space. In 2011 it bought AdMeld, another tool used by websites. In 2010 it bought Invite Media, used by large companies for placing online ads, and in 2009 it acquired mobile ad company AdMob.

    Through this extensive control of the market, DOJ said Google is able to manipulate advertising prices to its advantage and steer publishers and advertisers to use its ad tools. Google then is able to take an outsize cut of the money, raising costs for advertisers, and lowering revenue for publishers.

    Google’s supporters however called the case misguided.“Google’s online ad market share is now at an all time low, and it just laid off 12,000 employees in the midst of a declining advertising market — so this DOJ case seems pretty disconnected from economic reality,” said Adam Kovacevich, CEO of the tech-funded Chamber of Progress. “As the tech sector and advertising industry shed jobs, the Biden administration should be looking for ways to support these sectors rather than undermine what’s left.”

    Tuesday’s suit, in the works since 2019, is just the latest piece of the global backlash against the market power of the world’s largest technology companies — one of the rare issues in recent years that garners broad bipartisan support. Google, Apple, Meta’s Facebook and Amazon are facing investigations and lawsuits on six continents. European lawmakers recently passed legislation designed to curb the companies’ dominance and pressure is building in the U.S. for Congress to pass similar laws.

    “The harm is clear,” the new complaint states. “[W]ebsite creators earn less, and advertisers pay more, than they would in a market where unfettered competitive pressure could discipline prices and lead to more innovative ad tech tools that would ultimately result in higher quality and lower cost transactions for market participants.”

    Josh Gerstein contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #Google #accused #monopolizing #250B #U.S #digital #market
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )