Short Magic, Long Gravity

by Mr Juggles

From Bloomberg, Treasuries Fall on Concern Record Sales Will Overwhelm Demand:

Treasuries fell for a fourth day, pushing the difference in yields between two- and 10-year debt to a record amid concern record supply will overwhelm investor demand as the economy begins to show signs of stability.

“We are in a bit of a freefall,” said Kevin Giddis, head of fixed-income sales, trading and research at the brokerage Morgan Keegan Inc. in Memphis, Tennessee.

The decline pushed 10-year note yields to a record 2.75 percentage points more than two-year securities, surpassing the record of 2.74 percentage points set in August 2003.

The yield on the 10-year note rose 18 basis points, or 0.18 percentage point, to 3.732 percent at 4:19 p.m. in New York, according to data compiled by BGCantor Market Data. That’s the highest since Nov. 17.

Apparently, there is a finite limit to increasing the supply of something such that it will begin to become less dear. Some refer to this reversionary force as part of the unproven theory “supply and demand” wherein the basic concept is that if there is demand X for some thing T-Bill and there is supply Y then there will be price Z. If Y is decreased, then a new equilibrium price will be attained that will be higher than Z. If Y is increased, then a new equilibrium price will be attained that is lower than Z. Except for Giffen goods, never forget about Giffen goods.

Some people, and most politicians, insist that such forces and theories are not only unproven but are unlikely to exist. If they were to allow that “supply and demand” may exist, they would stress that it’s important that we do what we can to obviate our need for such burdensome natural laws. Is that not the mission statement of Government? To not only protect people from nature, from other people and more and more from themselves, but also eventually from gravity and its ilk? Progress.

Recommendation: We’re not sure but we don’t think the lowest Treasury yields in American history are sustainable forever, and that pushing them down now comes at a cost later. Long gravity, short magic.

Related Reseach:



Ad Sense Ad Sense

Comments

  1. rollformer
    May 28th, 2009 | 9:57 am

    You know, Mr. Joe Sixpack, since people are exposed to potential losses in the stock market and corporate bond market, we are now requiring that your 401(k) be invested in Treasuries.

    That should prop up demand for a little while, no?

  2. May 28th, 2009 | 10:03 am

    Barney Frank just wrote that in his notebook. Way to give him ideas!

  3. ajay
    May 28th, 2009 | 11:07 am

    the basic concept is that there is demand for some thing T-Bill there is demand X such that where there is supply Y then there will be price Z. If Y is decreased, then a new equilibrium price will be attained that will be lower than Z.

    You decrease the supply, and that reduces the price? That’s an interesting theory.

  4. May 28th, 2009 | 11:52 am

    Oh you pesky kids! With your internets and your attention to detales!

  5. Hans Moleman
    May 28th, 2009 | 6:14 pm

    Actually I think Juggles may be proposing an interesting behavourial theory whereby (when the product is a financial security) when the demand side participants see the suppliers decrease supply, they conclude that “they must know something we don’t about future demand” and conclude that future demand will decrease causing them to want the thing less, and creating a self-fulfilling prophesy. So you see, it works – it’s sort of like “don’t build it and they won’t come”

  6. May 28th, 2009 | 9:04 pm

    I believe what you’re looking for is a little SAT word puzzleness, let me step in:

    Pro:Progress::Con:____________

    Go wild, see if you can figure it out (bet ya can’t!)

  7. ajay
    May 29th, 2009 | 3:39 am

    6: is it “Con: Conservative”?

  8. May 29th, 2009 | 7:04 am

    It’s “Con: Air”. This is free association right? Put the bunny back in the box.

  9. May 29th, 2009 | 4:04 pm

    ajay and Juggles, I’m confused by both your submissions, please clarify the logic behind your respective responses.

  10. Bean Counter
    May 29th, 2009 | 8:23 pm

    I know, it’s Con: Conjugal Visit

  11. chin
    May 30th, 2009 | 9:18 pm

    pro:progress::con:congress

  12. Sho-Nuff
    May 30th, 2009 | 10:34 pm

    con:contango

  13. dittyesq
    May 31st, 2009 | 11:30 am

    we are now requiring that your 401(k) be invested in Treasuries. That should prop up demand for a little while, no?

    Barney Frank just wrote that in his notebook. Way to give him ideas!

    We actually did that on a voluntary basis during WWII — war bonds. The scary thing is, it worked. Patriotic sheep lined up to get fleeced.

  14. Chris D
    June 1st, 2009 | 9:52 am

    I’m not sure what all of you are talking about. I think the original Bloomberg article you excerpted was referring to music sales affecting the Treasury market. It is kind of day-one material.