Wall Street
Veteran
Sees Trouble Ahead
by Peter Grandich, President
Peter Grandich Company
It is my firm
belief that the new millennium will coincide with the single
most important turning point in our financial markets since the
early 1980s. Just like in the early '80s, the vast majority of
people will neither be in a position to take advantage of what
has just begun to unfold, nor will they be willing to recognize
it until the turn has already been underway for quite some time.
In the early '80s, the social, political, and
economic conditions caused most people to become anxiety-filled
when thinking of the future. Now, when looking into the new millennium,
the vast majority of people have an unusually high degree of
confidence, if not cockiness, so that their destiny is not only
pleasurable, but they control it.
Isn't it ironic that in 1982, the ten richest
people in the world were oil sheiks from the Middle East? The
near-universal belief in North America was that these people
would cause us great hardship due to their control of the world
oil supply. Now, however, it seems that gentler, kinder rich
men are at the top. People like Bill Gates and others, who made
their riches via technology, are perceived as not only harmless,
but could be models for us to follow. Perhaps we, too, could
open an Internet company and sell it to the public for millions.
After all, that seems to be the American dream now.
Seeing Is Believing?
It is fair
to say that the U.S. stock market, back in 1982, was indeed reflecting
the then current economic, social, and political environment.
It would also be fair to say that the dramatic rise in equity
prices since 1982 has been due to actual and perceived changes
for the better in regard to those environments. Like pondering
which came first, the chicken or the egg, we could debatedid
the market foresee the changes for the better first, or did it
react to them after they occurred?
Think for a moment. Could the people who actually
believe that we'll live happily ever after and will never come
close to the conditions back in the early '80s be wrong? If so,
then the question becomes, "Does the market anticipate the
next change before the events unfold, or does it wait for it
to become evident and falls sharply thereafter?"
Champagne Bubbles or Plain Old Market Bubble?
There has been
much talk of a market bubble. The "Don't worry, Be Happy"
crowd on Wall Street thinks the only bubble is the one that comes
from the champagne bottle each time the DJIA makes a new high.
There's a book out called Dow 36,000,
and the authors predict the number 36,000 is not too far off.
Show me an investment bubble in all of history and I will show
you experts from that time supporting the belief it was not a
bubble but a new era (where have we heard that before?). People
talk about the economist Irving Fisher and his "we're okay,
you're okay" market view just before the crash in 1929.
Well, there was also an article in 1929 in the then very popular
The Ladies Home Journal called "Everyone Ought to
be Rich." It hailed the stock market as the poor man's road
to riches. It spoke of a new industrial revolution that would
last for decades (sound familiar?) Twenty years later, the DJIA
was lower than it was in 1929. Such a possibility of the market
being lower twenty years from now is virtually impossible in
the eyes of just about everyone. This is a scary thought, but
needs to be considered to fully appreciate the difference of
undervalued versus overvalued. Most people agree that the great
bull market began in 1982. Okay, fair enough. But if it did,
that would also indicate that the last real long-term bear market
ended then as well. We assume stocks become greatly undervalued
at the bottom of a bear marketright? Well, here's the one sobering
thought all of us should keep in mind. If the DJIA was 3,600
right now, it would be a roughly 12xP/E. What P/E level was the
DJIA trading at in 1982? Below 12. Can't happen again? Wanna
buy a bridgecheap???
Hot Shot or Old Reliable?
Call me old-fashioned,
but I like to think that in the end, the stock market's single,
most influential factor is the economy. Now, some would like
us to believe that we are in a new era. Well, call me foolish,
but I am not about to get rid of factors that worked for a very
long time just because some 25-year-old, hot-shot analyst from
some investment house told me on CNBC-TV to throw all the old
books out.
Ex-fed Governor Lawrence Lindsey, a man I think
is far more qualified than Mr. Hotshot, recently made what I
think are some of the best objective observations regarding our
economy. He said there are three guideposts: the labor market,
the U.S. current account, and the yield curve. They all work
because they represent physical or financial constraints on the
ability of the economy to expand.
Let's start with the labor market. We are quickly
running out of workers. The number of unemployed people without
college experience has fallen from 2.7 million to 2.1 million
in the last four years. Seventeen years ago, when the expansion
began, there were 8.5 million such unemployed workers. At this
rate, this market is less than a year away from equaling the
already tight market for college-trained workers. The labor market
constraints are ceasing to be hypothetical ones and quickly becoming
a solid brick wall. Of course, markets tend to create an airbag
of soaring labor costs to cushion the economy before it hits
the brick wall. Recent employment cost index suggests that the
airbag is beginning to inflate.
In the U.S., we have seen our current account
deficit explode. We are borrowing $300 billion a year. If the
savings and borrowing trend continues as is, our deficit will
double in just 18 months. Make no mistake about it, no government
official is going to discuss the acuteness of this problem. I
believe the recent decline in the U.S. dollar is directly related
to the alarming account deficit. At some point, foreign creditors
are going to demand that America demonstrate the ability to finance
itself.
This brings us to the American dollar. The
fed knows all too well how much we are dependent on foreign borrowing.
They know that any significant fall in the U.S. dollar can only
increase the pull on the already strained string with which they
have managed to secure the dollar with.
Despite what some have reported to be the best
economic times in the modern era, we still have one of the highest
real interest rates. If there is truly no fear of inflation,
then shouldn't there be a no-risk premium associated with the
term of lending to creditworthy borrowers? If the risk premium
could not be withered down during these "boom times",
what will become of it if the "Don't Worry, Be Happy"
crowd is wrong about the new millennium?
Is it just me, or does anyone else feel that
"Ex-Fed Governors" seem to be more "realistic"
after they have left office?
A recent Internet news service report said,
"Former Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Alan Blinder stated
that the burgeoning U.S. trade deficit has had benign consequences,
but added that a sharp adjustment to the dollar to help reduce
that deficit is looming.
In testimony before a special panel examining
U.S. trade policy, Blinder said that he expects that a lower
dollarmake that a much lower dollarwill ultimately play a major
role in whittling our trade deficit down to manageable size.
He went on to suggest that the dollar will be worth only about
70 yen a decade from now."
The report went on to say that Blinder had
"incipient worries" about the U.S. trade deficit. He
concluded by stating that the trade deficit, "may be setting
the dollar up for a big fall."
Gazing in the Crystal Ball
One of the
finest gentlemen ever to grace the stage of Wall Street is Kennedy
Gammage, Editor of The Richland Report. Old FNN viewers
will recall Kennedy and his regular words of wisdom. Well, I
have graciously used one of his sayings a million times (Thank
God there's no royalty payment), "Those of us who live by
the crystal ball will learn to eat a lot of broken glass".
Translation: Market forecasters will be wrong!
So, while I once received acclaim and fame
for forecasting market movements, I have had enough cuts in my
mouth now to know it's pure fantasy to think one will beat it
by trying to trade the ups and downs correctly all the time.
Rather, I try to act within an overall investment climate outlook
and try to remember it's, "always better to be a live chicken
versus a dead duck."
When I was just starting out in the business,
Howard Knapp, the man who discovered me at my investment club
and who I later went to work for, dealt a lot with an economist
named Elliott Janeway (now deceased). He was once an advisor
to president Johnson and a feature speaker at investment conferences.
Elliott was outspoken. At one of his speeches, the question was
asked, what do you think the market is going to do? He replied,
"go up or down, but not right away." The crowd thought
it was a joke, but he was serious.
I feel too many people get caught up with market
timing, and end up reacting emotionally, not rationally, to their
overall portfolio. Yes, it's true, that in a rising bull market,
most ships (stocks) get lifted by the tide. And in a bear market
the tide drowns many victims. However, if history has proven
anything, it's those who made serious money in the market were
investors who did so from individual stock selection and not
overall market timing.
The great bull market has allowed literally
millions of people to live off it. The world is awash with financial
advisors, all sorts of companies providing a million different
services and products related to the markets, and a Pandora's
box full of "used car salesman types", who peddle everything
from investing in ostrich farms, to cures for baldness (I know,
I bought a bottle) at investment conferences, direct mail and
the Internet. Getting simple, but effective advice, is a lost
art. Not here!
Would Tiny Tim Tip Toe Through These Tulips?
The Financial
Times recently published a superb article entitled, "Tiptoeing
Through the Tulips." It had such a compelling theme. In
essence, it noted that during the "Dutch tulip market"
mania back in 1634, just about everyone was drawn into the mania.
the article described how back then (as it is now), the Dutch
economy of the 1630s was strong due to a thriving stock market,
rising home prices, and a consumer boom (sound familiar?).
Here in the U.S., consumers are spending more
because they feel wealthier as a result of gains in stocks and
real estate. More Americans now own more shares than ever before.
Figures from the Federal Reserve show that equities now make
up a record portion of ordinary Americans' total financial assets:
more than 60%.
The article went on to note how U.S. investors
feel insulated against any long-term declines. 96% said they
viewed shares as long-term investments and 83% do not worry about
short-term fluctuations. The theory that retail investors will
always "buy the dips", seems to be supported by the
confidence U.S. investors have shown. A Paine Webber and a Gallup
monthly investor optimism index, shows that investors expect
returns from the equity market in the coming year of 15.7% and
average returns over the next 10 years of 16%. It's easy to see
why, with such a belief, that investors are not likely to take
any negative warnings seriously. (That's why we are seeing a
number of formerly bullish market analysts who have turned bearish
get the boot from their firms.)
The article concluded by saying, "The
problem is that while investors in large U.S. company stocks
have seen a compound annual rate of return in the 1980s and 1990s
of more than 17%, only two other decades since the First World
War, the 1920s and 1950s, have registered double figures. Both
of those were followed by years of poor equity performance.
I know, I know, this time it's different. And
so was it different this time to the then so-called experts in
The Mississippi Scheme in France in the early 1700s, and the
South Sea Bubble in England about the same time. Or, how about
to the Japanese investors a decade ago or the pyramid scheme
in Albania in 1997?
In all past bubbles, the public was willing
to discard reason (and those who dare to try and reason with
them) and put a value on an object well beyond any historic value.
When the Tulipmania hit its peak, a single bulb was being exchanged
for four oxen, eight swine, 12 sheep, two hogheads of wine, four
tons of butter, four tons of beer, one thousand pounds of cheese,
a bed, a suit of clothes and a silver drinking cup.
Charles Mackay wrote a book in 1841 called
"Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds."
In it, he stated, "Men, it has been well said, think in
herds. It will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they
only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."
Words
From a Member of
Soothsayer Anonymous
Remember when
I mentioned what happens to those of us who try to live by what
we've seen in the crystal ball? It has been several years since
I had to eat glass (and a lot of crow) over my market calls.
There was a period of time when I literally couldn't hit the
side of the barn (unless I was playing golf). By recognizing
that the bull market couldn't end until there were at least four
straight weeks of net redemptions out of equity funds, I managed
not to stand in front of the runaway bull train on Wall Street
for a long, long time. However, the time has arrived, that despite
an air of near certainty that the punch bowl will remain full
forever, this old soothsayer says it's time to start erring on
the side of caution.
I would no longer count on the overall market
to support your equity exposure, but rather narrow your concentration
down to a value-oriented portfolio approach. Translation, sell
the high PE growth stocks and concentrate on stock with significant
PE discounts to the market and have either had a bear market
already in their share price and are demonstrating improving
fundamentals and/or technicals. You may keep a few of your Internet
darlings, but there are too many investors with pure growth portfolios
who need to cut back sharply. Do not lose sight of the musical
chair game; if you want to try to win and be the one who manages
to milk the bull for all its worth, just remember the taste of
sour milk. If there's one motto to take with you while going
forward into the new millennium, it is this "It's better
to be a live chicken than a dead duck."
Exit-Stage Left
Before I review
the other markets I follow and some individual stocks, I want
to tell you about a virtual tidal wave of money fleeing the shores
of North America. It has been reported that one-third of all
the world's money and half of the world's business transactions
are now being done in offshore banks. Why? Because people in
the know recognized that no one single country is a safe haven
for their wealth. Feeling threatened, certain governments, particularly
Canada and the U.S., continue to react with ever-harsher means
of extracting wealth from people who they seem to have forgotten
their government jobs were created to protect.
There are four main reasons why offshore investing
is exploding:
The first is financial privacy. In the U.S.,
privacy virtually doesn't exist anymore. Your private bank statements,
phone logs, credit card purchases, brokerage statements, and
so forth, are largely available to those who might want to harm
you. Information on your property holdings, leases, credit financing,
credit information and the like is readily available. Predatory
lawyers and government employees are free to draw adverse conclusions
from their records as they build a profile on you.
Asset protection is the second reason. 1-800-Sue-the
Bastards seems to be the first number we think of when something
goes wrong. I doubt that our forefathers wanted to see our legal
system turned into the out of control monster it has become.
It used to be that a baby simply cried when the doctor who delivered
it gave it a slap on the behind. Now, if the doctor dare slap
it to begin with, the parents just may want to sue for assault,
and there will be an attorney more than willing to take the case.
Why has the system gone astray? Here's why:
- 70% of all the world's lawyers reside in the U.S.
- 94% of the world's lawsuits are in the U.S.
Litigation
on commission, or what is better known as contingency, is illegal
virtually everywhere in the modern world except the U.S.
And the #1 system destroyer is the fact that
there are as many law students in school right now as there are
practicing attorneys. In just a few years, the number of practicing
lawyers is expected to double. They will all need work, won't
they?
The third reason people are moving offshore
is tax-free and tax-deferred advantages. Notice, I didn't say
tax evasion. That will never be a valid reason in my book!
In the U.S., 25% of the wage earners carry
80% of the tax load. Our liberal media would like us to believe
that the so-called rich don't pay their fair share, but the fact
is, that $4 out of every $5 collected in taxes is paid by only
25% of the taxpayers. I, in no way want to belittle the lower
earners, but the bottom 50% of income earners contribute only
4.8% of American tax receipts, while the top 10% of income earners
pay 58.2% of total taxes.
I want to stress by going offshore people have
found legitimate tax relief. Our government has created an air
that it is illegal to even have a bank account offshore. Not
reporting it is, but having one isn't!
And the fourth reason people are flocking offshore
is the fact that there are certain attractive investment vehicles
not available in the U.S.
There is a revolution going on in North America.
It doesn't involve bullets or blood, but is about education and
economics. Smart investors who have taken the time to learn something
beyond the party line and carefully act upon their newly found
knowledge, move rapidly beyond the rank and file. They literally
have become members of a new class of enlighted, self-directed,
financially solvent, independent and prudent citizens.
Markets and Outlooks
Bonds --
Shhhthere's been a bear market in bonds underway, but the
"Don't Worry, Be Happy" crowd is doing its best to
deny it. Look, just as interest rates were prudently driven artificially
higher by ex-Fed Chairman Volcker to curb runaway inflation,
rates were also driven past their fair equilibrium by current
Fed Chairman Greenspan in order to achieve a more vibrant economy.
And both men did great jobs. The problem now is Greenspan believed
at 6300 on the DJIA we had a fairly priced market and began his
`verbal' assault on the runaway beast. As noted earlier, the
loose reigns on the money supply has created a financial bubble.
Now my take on the bubble is different than some hard-core bears.
I don't think Greenspan has created a 1929 scenario at this point
and that is why he is trying to jawbone the market back down,
but in a rollover effect, not a steep dive. Therefore, I believe
the rise in rates will continue, so long as the rise in equities
continue. I have been looking for a 7% long bond by the summer
of 2000. I would stick with T-bills and begin to stagger some
maturities in municipal bonds. There are some discounted, closed-end
municipal bonds funds to start investigating.
Perish the thought that government numbers
on inflation may not be telling the real story. The Economic
Cycle Research Institute's (ECRI) monthly U.S. future inflation
gauge (FIG) posted a new four year high recently. The annualized
growth rate shot up to 8.9 percent. The report said, "the
FIG is now at a four year high, indicating that underlying pressures
are in a clear cyclical uptrend." But hey, what does some
non-government agency know anyway?
Commodities -- from just about the bottom
in the CRB index, I have advocated that commodities were in a
new bull market that will eventually go higher than most people
think. One of the surprising stories to many in the next decade
is going to be an actual shortage of food and water. The commodities
market will see that beforehand. The reliquifying of the world
has also given a solid floor to many commodities going forward.
The anticipated declining U.S. dollar will also add to an improving
picture overall.
This doesn't mean one goes out and mortgages
the house on wheat futures or pork bellies. What it does mean
is to consider this area in your overall investment portfolio,
as well as your day to day life.
Precious MetalsT -- here seems to be
mounting evidence that the gold market has been manipulated for
several years now. This is not sour grapes. People like Bill
Murphy of GATA, and newsletter writer Ted Butler, have clearly
demonstrated to many a convincing circumstantial case. However,
there's no smoking gunyet.
On the basis that prices have been negatively
impacted by a series of designed programs by bullion houses and
the like, and based on the belief that the lid has been lifted
and it's only a matter of time until the can of worms opens up,
one can anticipate the price of gold to work its way higher in
the next 12 months. Minimum expectations can be $325. That is,
of course, nothing to write home about, but looks a whole lot
better than $250. The threshold to a true blue bull market is
$350. North of that and we will most likely see a swelling of
interest that can snowball to the multi-decade highs of around
$500 an ounce.
Now there will continue to be a negative bias
against gold due to its poor performance, which just may have
been artificially depressed. But before you say no to the thought
of owning some, try to remember what it was like to convince
someone to buy stocks in 1982 or a 15% CD. And if the market
has been artificially depressed, and demand is outstripping production,
it won't take much movement into gold for it to rally strongly.
All the gold in the world that is above groundin the form of
coins, jewelry and central banks "ingots"amounts to
about 120,000 tons, valued at present at US $1.3 trillion. Compare
this to the market values of the six largest U.S. technology
companiesMicrosoft, Intel, IBM, Cisco, Lucent and Dellwhich total
$1.6 trillion (up twelve-fold from $133 billion in 1995). The
global bond market is $30 trillion and its annual supply is $3
trillion.
The strongest argument against gold seems very
valid on the surfaceit doesn't generate any income. (Well, the
bullion houses proved that wrong, didn't they?) Yes, that's true,
but the vast majority of stocks don't pay any dividend. What
would happen, God forbid, if the stock market actually went down
for a while? Perish the thought that one could lose 10%, 20%,
or more of their portfolio in the next couple of years. Would
they have wished they just kept their principal in tact?
Silver is the poor man's gold and will remain
trapped in gold's shadow until if and when gold breaks above
$325. Platinum and palladium are in need of a correction.
Oil -- I am personally delighted that
when it was in the low teens, I had the wisdom to foresee it
going back to the mid-20s. Like the belief that food and water
will become a crisis of sorts in the next decade, the fundamentals
for oil appear to only grow more bullish over the next decade.
Now a decade is a long time, but I think it's safe to say the
days of really cheap oil are behind us. Please try to remember
that oil is the single most-used commodity outside of food and
water. It will have an impact on prices paid for goods over time.
CRB Index -- I see the index over 500
in the next decade. Yes, that's a long way off. For now, I see
it working itself higher to test 225 next summer.
Individual Equity Ideas
As noted earlier,
I think it would be wise for most to move away from pure growth
stocks and instead concentrate on value-oriented plays. I agree
it's not exciting to watch paint dry, but, I truly believe that
while the red zone on the danger button could have some more
room in it to move before triggering the alarm, many investors
are not financially or mentally prepared for the perceived highly
unlikely event of equities in general not doing well once we
get well into the year 2000. I think it's every financial advisors
duty to forgo any personal economic benefit if it means not making
transactions for their clients that don't at least take into
account the possibility that the punch bowl may spring a leak
at any moment. Yes, I have learned from past experience that
some clients really don't care through hindsight that you were
trying to do the right thing if it meant them not partaking in
the party. However, I urge all those responsible for other people's
money to be extra careful, as we are all potential victims of
the speculative bubble we now live in. Yes, I repeat again, that
the bubble can grow bigger, but if it does, like the game of
musical chairs, there will be less and less chances of finding
a comfortable seat in time.
Sticking with the commodities and value theme,
there are several stocks that are selling at a nice discount
to the S&P 500 PE, offer either a decent dividend yield or
double-digit projected annual earnings growth over the next 3
to 5 years (Analysts projections and a buck will get you a cup
of coffee, so tread carefully). If earnings disappoint on these
stocks, they may not move down sharply as poor expectations are
already built into the share price. However, positive earning
surprises could allow these type of stocks to be among the better
performing stocks, no matter what type of market we have in front
of us (and if anyone truly knows for sure, please call me ASAP).
Brush Wellman -- NYSE (NYSE BW $15 Dividend
Yield 3.2%) is the world's only fully integrated producer and
supplier of beryllium. Products include copper and nickel-based
beryllium alloys, ceramics, specialty metals, and precious metals
products. Their major markets are the auto, electronics, aerospace,
and telecommunications industry.
Here, too, we look for weaker 1999 earnings,
but improving fundamentals in the new millennium. The stock has
strong support between 10-12, is selling near book value, and
has an attractive yield.
Cleveland-Cliffs -- (NYSE CLF $29-1/2
Dividend Yield 5%) is the world's largest producer of iron ore
pellets. It is not having a good year due to significant levels
of low-priced imported steel and inventories have grown substantially.
Earnings will clearly fall for 1999, but expectations out into
2002-2004 are quite strong. The stock has a very nice dividend
yield. The 20-24 area has been a multi-decade support zone. It
may not get that low so half a loaf now and another half if it
gets there, seems to be a good way to go. The stock is selling
at an estimated 30% discount to book value.
Federal-Mogul -- (NYSE FMO $18 Dividend
Yield Nil) is among the most compelling turnaround potentials
in the group. They make and distribute components and replacement
parts for the auto, machinery, farm and construction-equipment
industries. They have been acquiring earnings growth through
acquisitions and recently disappointed investors who "puked"
the stock to levels that seem to have discounted all but the
end of the world, as we know it.
This (and many of the others here) is the type
of stock that money managers and mutual funds don't want to show
owning at years-end, but can rebound early in the New Year.
Louisiana-Pacific (NYSE LPX $12-3/4
Dividend Yield 4.4%) is the largest manufacturer of Oriented
Strand Board (OSB) in North America. It also produces other building
products and market pulp. Like all commodity-driven companies,
this stock carries economic cyclical risk. But unlike the speculative
mania in the technology stocks. LPX's discount to market, attractive
dividend yield and earnings outlook going forward, warrants attention
to these levels. Very strong support in the 10-12 area. Rumors
of a takeover surfaced in December but if it isn't technologyWho
Cares!
Mattel (NYSE MAT) $12-3/8 Dividend Yield
2.9%) is the largest U.S. toy maker. It recently reported that
its The Learning Company (TLC) operation, which MAT purchased
in May for $3.5 billion in stock, had failed to complete an expected
licensing agreement. Expected bad-debt write-offs and discontinued
contracts with distributors are expected.
Further weakness would appear to be a speculative
buying opportunity. A takeover or merger is not out of the question.
Mckesson HBOC (NYSE MCK $20 Dividend
Yield 1%) distributes drugs and medical items and provides software
and services. Traded as high as 96 in 1998, the company would
be the likely winner for the biggest financial scandal in 1999.
It purchased the medical software firm of HBO & Co. earlier
this year for $12 billion, only to discover that HBO had been
cooking the books. Wall Street decided to boil its shares of
MCK and sent it to a low of 18-9/16 and it has since been building
a new base of support. This stock is also among the compelling
turnarounds for speculative investors with iron-clad stomachs
and the ability to say, "I was wrong."
Pennzoil-Quaker State (NYSE PZL $9-1/2
Dividend Yield 7.5) was formed just eleven months ago when the
Pennzoil Products group was spun off from Pennzoil Company, and
simultaneously merged with Quaker State. PZL is an automotive
consumer products company. The company's product line includes
motor oil, specialty industrial products, and a full range of
maintenance chemicals, engine treatment, and air-freshener products.
It also operates and franchises over 2,000 fast lube centers
under the Jiffy Lube and Q-lube brand names.
It has been a transitional year for PZL. It
has had a degree of disappointments both in the fast lube and
refinery section of its business. I expect the mix results to
carry over into 2000, but with a handsome dividend yield already,
the stock seems to have fairly limited downside risk. Of all
the stocks mentioned, this is my favorite.
Some stocks to simply monitor at this time
include Beverly Enterprises, Humana, Maytag, Philip Morris, Raytheon,
V.F. Corp., Waste Management, and Xerox. I also think the biotech
industry can become Wall Street's next darling industry group.
Final Thought
Like second opinions in medicine, now is a good time to get someone who is not emotionally tied to your financial portfolio to evaluate it. While it's a new Millennium, we must not forget the many lessons the first twenty centuries taught us. Remember the old saying, "He who hesitates may be lost." God Bless and remember we are only stewards for our Lord. Be wise as he would.
Editor's Note: Mr. Peter Grandich is President of Peter
Grandich Company and Grandich.com. The Peter Grandich Company
provides corporate development services to publicly-held corporations.
He is the editor and publisher of The Grandich Newsletter,
The North of the Border Newsletter, and The High Flyer
Report. As the previous Head of Investment Policy for leading
Wall Street firms, the portfolio manager for The Peter Grandich
Contrarian Fund and four gold hedge funds, Mr. Grandich has had
extensive experience advising several hundreds of millions of
dollars in assets. He has appeared on numerous television and
radio programs and has been quoted in leading financial publications
and financial Web sites.
Mr. Grandich is a Board of Director member
of several publicly-held companies. He is a member of The Society
of Quantitative Analysts and The New York Society of Security
Analysts. Mr. Grandich provides money management services. Mr.
Grandich can be contacted at: Peter Grandich Company, 11 Somer
Court, Englishtown, NJ 07726. Phone: 732-792-7724, Fax: 732-792-7725,
E-mail: pgrandich@hotmail.com, Web site: www.grandich.com.
