The credit crunch in pictures?
July 20, 2008Thanks to Rob @ Money Watch I didn’t miss this comprehensive overview of the credit crunch by the BBC. It is essentially a collection of key graphs to represent the economic changes in the last 12 months and I wanted to cherry-pick my favourites to share with you - but not necessarily because I agree with the message they are intending to bring across (hence the question mark in the title…)
Let’s start with a picture highlighting the key changes in our economy since the start of the credit crunch. The message is clear - petrol and food, two essential cost factors in nearly every household, have increased significantly in price over the last twelve months while the value of our homes has been eroded by approximately 4.4%.

With the rise in petrol prices come further cost increases in related fields such as energy or holidays (think airfares…). But did anyone ever stop to think that this has actually nothing to do with the credit crunch per se? Through an unfortunate coincidence we see a boom in commodities prices at the same time as our economy is already suffering from the aftermath of the subprime crisis - yet that doesn’t mean one caused the other.
Similarly, the food inflation we witnessed in the last couple of months originated in the commodities boom that saw prices in wheat and other agricultural produce reach heights of unprecedented nature. I agree that it has been rather extreme and that certain products seem to have been increasing at the rate of a penny a day, nevertheless that doesn’t automatically mean it’s a direct cause of the credit crisis.

More importantly I’m starting to wonder whether conditions like this couldn’t have been avoided if only people/businesses would have appropriately used hedging. Only today I read that South West Airlines still bought its fuel for $26 a barrel at a time when the market price had reached $80 (slightly old example, but it illustrates my point). How come the likes of Tesco’s, Sainsbury’s or Marks & Spencer’s didn’t come up with a clever idea like that? After all, hedging was introduced for companies to sell their risk in exchange for a small premium and stable input prices.
Before I rant even further, let’s move on to the last category in the summary picture: housing. If you have been reading this blog for longer than just a few days, you will know that I join forces with all the other people struggling to get their foot on the housing ladder and hence eagerly awaiting a double-digit drop in house prices. I totally emphasise with anyone who is worried about negative equity but if you are living in your house because it is your home then you have almost no reason to be overly worried. Hopefully nobody will be forcing you to sell any time soon, hence you can simply wait it out and I’m certain that we will see prices returning to their historic levels (with the only difference that hopefully a few more first-time buyers will have joined the ranks of home owners). And even if you are looking to sell and for whatever reason you cannot wait a few more months or a year until you do so, there are a one-hundred and one things you can do to enhance the value of your home.
In any case, my actual point was related to the graph below. After you got over the fact that house prices have officially been falling since April, have a closer look at the second graph with details of house prices over the last 10 years. Note that it charts the annual change in house prices - that means, as long as the graph runs above the 0 line, your home will have increased in value. Looking at your portfolio or pension account - how many investments can you quote that haven’t fallen in value once over the last 10 years? I doubt there will be many.

What I’m trying to say is that a house purchase has always been a good and solid investment with annual returns of anywhere up to nearly 30%. Now, for the first time in over 10 years we’ve seen a careful reversal of this trend and the world is in panic. As I said before, I totally emphasise with people worried about negative equity, especially as a house purchase is such a major investment, maybe the biggest one many of us will make in our life. However, that put aside, any investment bears the risk of losing as well as gaining in value. Why should property be different?

















Hey, thanks for the link - glad to see somebody
Rob Lewis | July 20, 2008 | 10:12 pmHey, thanks for the link - glad to see somebody keeps an eye on the daily links I post!
But of course! :-)
Kirsten | July 21, 2008 | 6:12 amBut of course!
As someone who bought at what can only be described
plonkee | July 21, 2008 | 8:43 pmAs someone who bought at what can only be described as the worst possible time (last summer) I completely agree. House prices might be steady, decreasing or marginally increasing depending on where you live, but they are considerably more than they were 5 years ago.
I don’t know how long the trend will last, but on average house prices have been rising at 2% above inflation since the 1970s, and the typical boom-bust cycle lasts 13 years (peak to peak, taking into account inflation). If that’s repeated, any time between in the next 2-7 years would be a good time to buy.
It's nice to see a discussion of the credit crunch
Jimbo | July 21, 2008 | 8:54 pmIt’s nice to see a discussion of the credit crunch in layman’s terms. I like your thinking about the moral side of wishing for a fall in house prices - and you shouldn’t feel guilty. We are unhappy when the cost of pretty much anything goes up, so why are some of us happy when the cost of our largest single expense (housing) rises? We have a distorted view of what represents “wealth” nowadays.
However, I don’t think I can agree with the comment that the credit crunch and commodities inflation are unrelated. Don’t you think that the credit crunch has moved commodity prices? (due to both a shift in investors’ cash to more predictable assets and also a devaluation of both the US$ and GBP). It’s not the only reason of course for food price inflation, another of which I think is the social shifts in developing nations. One thing that painfully few people in the West have accepted is that food prices for us are still very low (we spend far less of our money on food than our parents or grandparents did). Real oil prices are also lower than the peak in the 1970s, although that’s little comfort to most people.
The point about retailers hedging is interesting - but is there really scope for e.g. Tesco to hedge against the rise in food price inflation? If this were possible (do banks offer egg derivatives?), then is it really desirable?
We as a society must accept that over the past decade, the supermarkets have delivered incredibly cheap food through sophisticated logistics and very shrewd buying. The supermarkets have thin margins (hence the enormous efforts to push up volumes and cruel treatment of suppliers) and seem unlikely candidates to incur the expense of hedging input costs when the future is so hard to predict. Given the financial markets’ bullish sentiment towards agriculture over recent years, anyone selling call options on food prices would have been setting high prices anyway.
Anyway sorry for rambling and I look forward to reading more posts.
Thanks!
@ plonkee: I'm impressed that you can take such a
Kirsten | July 21, 2008 | 10:08 pm@ plonkee: I’m impressed that you can take such a calm view on the situation and I sincerely hope that you bought your house as a home for the long(er) run so that you can comfortably wait it out…
@ Jimbo: Many thanks for your - very - long comment. Let me try to respond to every aspect you raised (this might turn into a “slightly” longer comment as well).
I wouldn’t want to go to the extreme and call the commodities boom completely unrelated to the credit crunch or vice versa, but I’m generally not agreeing with people who claim it’s a simple and straight-forward result. I genuinely believe that the increase we’ve seen in the oil price (or generally any other commodity) has a lot to do with fundamentals - i.e. a shift in supply and demand. If you look at the OPEC’s production figures you will notice that they are actually decreasing. All the while China and India experience a major phase of industrialisation that has seen a large increase in energy demand, fuelled even further by substantial government subsidies in those countries… at some point the price just had to shoot up?!
I should certainly think hedging would be feasible for the large grocery stores. If it’s not a product yet, it would certainly be something that could be structured. The banking industry - just like any other - evolves around client’s needs and if they ask for it, they’d get it.
Whether it’s desirable is an interesting question. You’re absolutely right to say that these large buyers have an incredibly price power on their suppliers and operate on very thin profit margins that might be too precious to spend on hedging. With the oligopoly (few large buyers in co-existence) status the large supermarket chains have, it’s easy for them to adjust prices upwards and blaim input prices.
In fact, you could argue that one single retailer couldn’t cope with the demand it would generate by offering lower prices at constant quality compared to the rest of the market… So one thing’s for sure: it’s NOT an easy yes or no question…
What do you think?
@ kirsten haha oh yeah sorry for the enormous post. and
Jimbo | July 22, 2008 | 9:50 pm@ kirsten
haha oh yeah sorry for the enormous post. and thank you for the equally grand reply!
You’re right to point out that the subtleties of the relationship between the liquidity/risk crisis and the commodities “supercycle” (as some are calling it) and you’re quite right to mention the whole subsidies point (which I kinda forgot). I agree that much of the rise in commodities is tied to fundamentals. I think the world is changing and we in the West will have to get used to
(i) more competition from BRIC for this world’s resources (and maybe that means we have to accept more expensive food / oil)
(ii) perhaps a change in attitudes to aid/trade, as we see that rising prices for staples (like rice) hit the poorest countries. we might need to overhaul our (arguably pointless) agricultural subsidies to EU farmers and instead focus on how we will maintain living standards for the world’s poor. just because there is a burgeoning middle class of hundreds of millions in BRIC doesn’t release us from the need to help the poor (and that includes not just food importers, like in Haiti, but also the poor of food-exporters like India, where social frictions might pop up and test those societies in the same way that our industrial renaissance tested ours?).
I think the UK food derivatives issue is tricky (and I wonder if anybody who makes derivatives is reading this and can enlighten us…). The thought that came to mind, and perhaps I didn’t elaborate on it well, is that if the institutions creating derivatives (e.g. banks) look ahead (and I think that the trends in recent years of e.g. farmland prices, BRIC development and rising population will be in their minds), they might themselves anticipate that food inflation is long-term. This could lead them to set the food futures prices so high (or the fees) that supermarkets might find them unattractive. After all, if you were a bank creating, let’s say, a Dec 2008 eggs call option (doesn’t that sound odd?), wouldn’t you set the bar pretty high? You’d probably price in so much of an increase that there would be only a small scope for the retailer to profit - in my experience mainstream commercial companies (i.e. companies using derivatives for risk insurance on costs/prices/inflation/fx etc. rather than as a separate trade) can profit from derivatives in fixing short- and mid-term fluctuations but are unlikely to beat long-term price trends unless they achieve the art of managing to forecast better than the bank (and that is why the banks will charge such a premium for longer-term derivatives, especially those like options that offer no downside).
Hmmm and in terms of whether a single retailer would keep prices stable when others inflate… I very much suspect that if any one retailer had hedged their prices in a market where the others hadn’t, they probably would still pass on some of the rise and take the opportunity to just raise their prices slightly slower than their competition - in other words they’d probably take the profit there and then and pass on most of the rise. They are, as you say, an oligopoly! This week’s co-ordinated petrol price cuts are pretty good evidence methinks. Supermarkets may have delivered consumer benefits in recent years, but they also focus on shareholder returns (as they are obliged, of course).
ah ok that’s another hefty post. phew!
Don't even get me started on EU agricultural subsidies... i
Kirsten | July 22, 2008 | 10:07 pmDon’t even get me started on EU agricultural subsidies… i remember learning about them in school years ago and it just didn’t make sense to me (and still doesn’t) - paying a fixed price, storing tons and tons of food until it is rotten enough to be thrown away while millions of people continue to starve. It’s downright cruel and I would have thought that people would have realised by now that it’s certainly not a long-term solution. Apparently I was wrong…
Your point about pricing derivatives in such a way as to accommodate long-term inflation is a very sensible one and makes a lot of sense to me. To be honest with you - I don’t know the answer and all I’m doing is thinking out loud and speculating wildly. On the other hand, I happen to be meeting someone in a few weeks time who is in the Commodities Trading business, so maybe I’ll get to throw in a question regarding food derivatives and long-term inflation to hear his thoughts. I just hope I’m not going to make an utter fool out of myself… :-S
But to be honest, I somehow like the sound of “December eggs call” - so if we start reading prices for it in the FT in a few year’s time, you know where you read it first!
Hey you know it would be good to hear what
Jimbo | July 23, 2008 | 8:15 pmHey you know it would be good to hear what your trader friend has to say on it all..!! do keep us posted!
anyway i’ll spare you another enormous post. keep up the good work bloggin!
This is a great post, good to see it
Frugal Trenches | July 27, 2008 | 1:29 pmThis is a great post, good to see it all in pictures. I don’t buy any of the food mentioned but fruit and as of yet haven’t seen an increase which is interesting. Could be where I purchase though!
Can anyone explain why Eggs have jumped up so much
Uncommonadvice | August 18, 2008 | 2:18 pmCan anyone explain why Eggs have jumped up so much in price? Surely they are produced relatively locally and therefore should be effected by fuel prices the least!
'empathise' not 'emphasise'
ben | August 29, 2008 | 1:24 pm‘empathise’ not ‘emphasise’