<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>PermanentWealthinvestor.Com &#187; Russia</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/tag/russia/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com</link>
	<description>Martin Hutchinson</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:15:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Russia: Is it Time to Invest in One of the Coldest Countries on Earth?</title>
		<link>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/invest-in-russia/</link>
		<comments>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/invest-in-russia/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 19:18:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Hutchinson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Martin Hutchinson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRIC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business/Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Exchange-traded funds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Financial economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Goldman Sachs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Stock Exchange]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[P/E ratio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Source]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yukos]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/?p=7118</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Source MoneyMorning.com:<a title="Permanent link to Russia: Is it Time to Invest in One of the Coldest Countries on Earth?" rel="bookmark" href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/08/26/russia-2/"><br /> Russia: Is it Time to Invest in One of the Coldest Countries on Earth?</a> Of all the unpleasant societies in which to live, Vladimir Putin&#8217;s Russia is among the nastiest. Journalists and businessmen [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p>Source MoneyMorning.com:<a title="Permanent link to Russia: Is it Time to Invest in One of the Coldest Countries on Earth?" rel="bookmark" href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/08/26/russia-2/"><br />
Russia: Is it Time to Invest in One of the Coldest Countries on Earth?</a></div>
<div>Of all  the unpleasant societies in which to live, Vladimir Putin&#8217;s Russia is among the  nastiest. Journalists and businessmen disappear, a knock on the door at 3:00am  can prove fatal, and nothing gets done without endless side-payments to obscure  fixers.</div>
<div>
<p>Still,  Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (NYSE: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=GS" target="_blank">GS</a>)  in 2001 identified Russia as one of the four great &#8220;BRIC&#8221; growth economies. And  while much of its gilt has been worn off, Russia still has many supporters in  the investment world. So the question is:  Provided you don&#8217;t have to live  there, is it worth devoting a few of your investment dollars to the country?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div></div>
<p><!--/post-further-content--></div>
<p><!--/post-further--></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div><strong><em>The  Economist</em></strong> <a href="http://www.economist.com/countries/russia/" target="_blank">is reasonably bullish on  Russia</a>. Its panel of experts predicts the country&#8217;s economy will expand by  4.8% in 2010 and 4.0% in 2011, after shrinking by 8% in 2009. That&#8217;s better  than it looks, because Russia &#8211; unlike many emerging markets &#8211; has negative  population growth of around 0.4% annually. That means a 4.8% expansion in 2010  gross domestic product (GDP) would actually translate into 5.2% growth per  capita. That would boost living standards at a pretty rapid clip.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s  more is that Russia&#8217;s inflation problem seems to have stabilized. The inflation  rate is expected to run at just 6.4% in 2010, compared to 12% a year ago. The  current account balance is heavily positive because of high oil prices, and  while the projected budget deficit &#8211; at 3.9% of GDP &#8211; is a worry, it&#8217;s not out  of control.</p>
<p>In fact,  with oil at a range of $70 to $80 per barrel, the flow of resources into Russia  is sufficient even for the public sector. And the economy is open enough that  business can survive and flourish. That sets it apart from other oil-dependent  countries, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/2009/05/13/venezuela-oil/" target="_blank">like  Venezuela</a>.</p>
<p>Finally,  Russian stocks are relatively cheap. The market trades at roughly 9-times  earnings and it&#8217;s just about flat on the year. It remains about 30% below its  peak of early 2008. So with decent growth and reasonable valuation, there ought  to be a few bargains around.</p>
<p>However,  property rights pose a bit of difficulty. Time and again, attractive assets  have been swallowed up by state-owned entities with connections to the  Kremlin.  Admittedly, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/2008/05/09/with-the-new-russian-president-vowing-to-steer-a-steady-ship-us-investors-can-look-to-profit/" target="_blank">President  Dmitry Medvedev</a> is attempting to open up the economy. But with only 21  months to go in his term, and Putin waiting in the wings, he probably won&#8217;t  achieve very much in the short time remaining.</p>
<p>As a  small retail investor, the danger to your property rights comes not from  somebody ripping off your 500 shares (at least, not if you buy them in New  York), but from somebody ripping off the company you&#8217;ve invested in. A lot of  Western investors were left without compensation after the <a href="http://moneymorning.com/2007/09/19/the-new-%E2%80%9Ccold%E2%80%9D-war-how-russia-has-turned-its-energy-exports-into-weapons-of-diplomacy/" target="_blank">great  dismemberment of Yukos Oil Co.</a>, for example.</p>
<p>Investing  in Russia thus requires the opposite approach to investing in China, where the  state also is corrupt and inefficient but property rights are well respected.  There is little point in buying shares of medium sized private companies &#8211;  particularly at exalted valuations &#8211; because of the danger that a change in  regulations or simple expropriation by some greedy politician could destroy the  business.</p>
<p>Conversely,  where valuations are low, the sluggishness of the big state companies is not  such a disadvantage, particularly in the oil and gas sector where Russia is  highly globally competitive. (However in steel for example, the 13.2-times  earnings of Russia&#8217;s Mechel OAO (NYSE ADR:<a href="http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&amp;q=NYSE:MTL" target="_blank">MTL</a>) looks  overpriced given the alternatives elsewhere such as South Korea&#8217;s Posco (NYSE: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=PKX" target="_blank">PKX</a>)<strong>, </strong>which trades at  just 9-times earnings.)</p>
<p>In any case,  the extractive sector is the area where Russian management has a high skill  level and where the country&#8217;s abundance of natural resources give it the most  advantage.</p>
<p>Some  suggestions would be:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Lukoil (PINK: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=PINK%3ALUKOY" target="_blank">LUKOY</a>): </strong>Lukoil is a major oil producer,       primarily in Western Siberia. It also operates refineries and filling       stations, some of them in the United States. The stock trades at 5.2-times       earnings and has a 3.4% dividend yield. At current levels, it&#8217;s still less       than half its 2008 high. That makes it a risky but beautifully priced oil       play, which will do very well f prices rise.</li>
<li><strong>Gazprom OAO</strong> <strong>(PINK: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=OGZPY" target="_blank">OGZPY</a>): </strong>Gazprom<strong> </strong>is       the successor to Russia&#8217;s state-owned natural gas company. It extracts and       transports natural gas through pipelines extending increasingly into       Western Europe. At just 5-times earnings, it&#8217;s even cheaper than Lukoil.       However, the increased ability to extract shale gas, large deposits of       which exist in Poland, may reduce gas prices as well as the chokehold       Gazprom has on its customers in Europe. I prefer Lukoil.</li>
<li><strong>Wim-Bill-Dann-Foods OJSC</strong> <strong>(NYSE ADR: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AWBD" target="_blank">WBD</a>):</strong> Outside       the oil sector, WBD is one of the few attractive companies available to       invest in. It manufactures and sells dairy, baby food and beverage       products, primarily in the Russian Federation. However, it&#8217;s not cheap at       23-times this year&#8217;s earnings &#8211; although earnings are expected to rebound.</li>
</ul>
<p>Finally,  for general exposure to the Russian market, there&#8217;s the <strong>Market Vectors  Russia ETF (NYSE: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=RSX" target="_blank">RSX</a>),</strong> which with a volume of $1.9 billion and a price/earnings (P/E) ratio of 10 may  well be the best entry into the Russian market.</p>
<p>Even  your money probably doesn&#8217;t want to live in the Russian market full-time. But  the occasional visit, to the oil sector or through RSX, could be lucrative.</p>
<div><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Action to Take</span></strong>: Consider wading into the Russian market, but do so cautiously. With a  history of corporate interference, it&#8217;s anything but a safe bet. The Market  Vectors Russia ETF (NYSE: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=RSX" target="_blank">RSX</a>)  offers general exposure, while Lukoil (PINK: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=PINK%3ALUKOY" target="_blank">LUKOY</a>) Gazprom OAO  (PINK: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=OGZPY" target="_blank">OGZPY</a>) and  Wim-Bill-Dann-Foods OJSC (NYSE ADR: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AWBD" target="_blank">WBD</a>) offer opportunities  for the more adventurous investors.</div>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">News and Related Story Links</span></strong>:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Money       Morning:</strong> <a title="Permanent link to How to Profit From the Russian Wheat Shortage" href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/08/24/russian-wheat-shortage/" target="_blank"><br />
How       to Profit From the Russian Wheat Shortage</a></li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning:</strong><br />
<a title="Permanent link to Cold-Weather Investing: Coal, Natural-Gas and Heating-Oil Investments Will Pack a Punch in January" href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/08/23/cold-weather-investing/" target="_blank">Cold-Weather       Investing: Coal, Natural-Gas and Heating-Oil Investments Will Pack a Punch       in January</a></li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning:</strong><br />
<a title="Permanent link to With the New Russian President Vowing to Steer a Steady Ship, U.S. Investors Can Look to Pro " href="http://moneymorning.com/2008/05/09/with-the-new-russian-president-vowing-to-steer-a-steady-ship-us-investors-can-look-to-profit/" target="_blank">With       the New Russian President Vowing to Steer a Steady Ship, U.S. Investors       Can Look to Profit</a></li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning:</strong><br />
<a title="Permanent link to The New Cold War: How Russia Has Turned Its Energy Exports Into Weapons of Diplomac " href="http://moneymorning.com/2007/09/19/the-new-%E2%80%9Ccold%E2%80%9D-war-how-russia-has-turned-its-energy-exports-into-weapons-of-diplomacy/" target="_blank">The       New Cold War: How Russia Has Turned Its Energy Exports Into Weapons of       Diplomacy</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/invest-in-russia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The CIVETS: Windfall Wealth From the ‘New’ BRIC Economies</title>
		<link>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/the-civets-windfall-wealth-from-the-%e2%80%98new%e2%80%99-bric-economies/</link>
		<comments>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/the-civets-windfall-wealth-from-the-%e2%80%98new%e2%80%99-bric-economies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 19:18:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Hutchinson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Martin Hutchinson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brazil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRIC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business/Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Colombia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comedia Gen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Egypt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emerging Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gross domestic product]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Indonesia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Africa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Turkey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vietnam]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/?p=7089</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Source MoneyMorning.com:</p> <p>First it was the &#8220;<a href="http://moneymorning.com/archives/#topic.b.t.bric.2" target="_blank">BRICs</a>.&#8221; Now it&#8217;s the &#8220;CIVETS.&#8221;</p> <p>In fact, the CIVETS are the &#8220;new&#8221; BRICs: Expect some of the CIVETS economies (Colombia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey and South Africa) to be among the world&#8217;s hottest markets in the decade to come. They have the potential to generate the same [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><strong>Source MoneyMorning.com:</strong></p>
<p>First it  was the  &#8220;<a href="http://moneymorning.com/archives/#topic.b.t.bric.2" target="_blank">BRICs</a>.&#8221;  Now it&#8217;s the  &#8220;CIVETS.&#8221;</p>
<p>In fact,  the CIVETS are the  &#8220;<em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">new</span></em>&#8221; BRICs: Expect some of the CIVETS  economies (Colombia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey and South Africa) to be  among the world&#8217;s hottest markets in the decade to come. They have the  potential to generate the same kind of windfall wealth as the BRIC markets of  Brazil, Russia, India and China did over the last 10 years &#8211; but only if you  pick the right markets at the right time.</p>
<p>So let&#8217;s  figure that out right now.</p></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><!--/post-further-content--></div>
<p><!--/post-further--></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div></div>
<div>
<div>
<h3>The  Birth (and Rebirth) of &#8216;The BRICS&#8217;</h3>
<p>It&#8217;s  been almost a decade &#8211; 2001, to be exact &#8211; since Goldman Sachs Group Inc.  (NYSE: <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=gs" target="_blank">GS</a>) economist <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_O%27Neill_(economist)" target="_blank">Jim O&#8217;Neill</a> conceived the  &#8220;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRIC" target="_blank">BRICS</a>&#8221; acronym  as a marketing vehicle that would convey the exciting investment potential of  four key emerging markets (<a href="http://moneymorning.com/2008/08/04/bric-2/" target="_blank">Brazil,  Russia, India and China</a>).</p>
<p>O&#8217;Neill  is back &#8211; with a new list <em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">and</span></em> a new acronym: The  &#8220;CIVETS.&#8221; Given  how much money investors have made from the BRICs, that suggests the CIVETS  (Colombia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey and South Africa) deserve a closer  look. Potentially, they <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE63Q26Q20100427" target="_blank">may be the great  growth markets of the new decade</a> &#8211; or not!</p>
<p>O&#8217;Neill&#8217;s  thesis is that growth is now spreading beyond the BRICs, whose stock markets  have been pretty heavily explored at least by institutional investors, and that  the CIVETS economies are the next chunky economies where growth seems likely  and there is money to be made. Personally, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/2009/12/22/investing-in-chile/" target="_blank">I would buy Chile</a> before any of them. But I suppose O&#8217;Neill would complain that the Chilean  market was not big enough for the titanic wealth of Goldman Sachs!</p>
<h3>The CIVETS Magical  Mystery Tour</h3>
<p>So allow  me to lead us on a tour of the CIVETS markets, during which I will actually <em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">rate</span></em> the profit potential (in standard Wall Street style), and will even expose any  pitfalls that could render that potential moot.</p>
<p>Our  CIVETS tour begins with<strong> <a href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/06/30/chile-and-columbia/" target="_blank">Colombia</a></strong>,  which looks like an excellent candidate for future growth. In fact, I said as  much to <strong><em>Money Morning</em></strong> readers just last month, mere days after  the voters confirmed center-right candidate Juan Manuel Santos (whose resume  includes degrees from Harvard, the <a href="http://fletcher.tufts.edu/default.shtml" target="_blank">Fletcher School of Law and  Diplomacy</a> and the <a href="http://www2.lse.ac.uk/home.aspx" target="_blank">London School  of Economics</a>) as its new president. With 44 million people and a gross  domestic product (GDP) of $231 billion, Colombia is certainly big enough to be  worth considering.  In a world in which resources prices are likely to  trend upwards because of Chinese and Indian demand, I like the country&#8217;s  agricultural and natural-resources orientation. What&#8217;s more, should the U.S.  Congress ever actually ratify the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (<a href="http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/colombia-fta" target="_blank">signed  all the way back</a> in November 2006), there should be a further boost to the  Columbian market. <strong><em>The Economist</em></strong>&#8216;s panel of forecasters projects  growth of 2.5% this year and 3.8% in 2011. But that looks much too low to me.  The projected 2010 budget deficit equal to 3.9% of GDP and the payments deficit  of 1.6% of GDP look reasonable, as does the 2.6% inflation rate. The market&#8217;s  Price/Earnings (P/E) ratio is 19.5, which is a little high. But when you sum it  all up, <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Colombia</span> is a  &#8220;BUY.&#8221;</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/04/20/indonesia-bubble/" target="_blank">Indonesia</a> </strong>is another country I have liked  for a long time, particularly under its current, competent government of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susilo_Bambang_Yudhoyono" target="_blank">Susilo Bambang  Yudhoyono</a>, in power since 2004. With 243 million people and a GDP of $521  billion, it&#8217;s a substantive-enough economy to invest in.  It&#8217;s well diversified, with agriculture,  natural resources and substantial manufacturing. The level of corruption in the  society is too high to be comfortable, but it remains lower than Russia. And  it&#8217;s strategically situated between China and India, meaning it should benefit  as both those behemoths grow. <strong><em>The Economist</em></strong> is pretty optimistic  about growth, with forecasters calling for a 5.6% advance this year and 5.9%  next year. The budget deficit is a reasonable 2.1% of GDP, and the current  account is in surplus. With a P/E of 18, Indonesia&#8217;s stock market &#8211; like the  aforementioned Colombia &#8211; is a bit pricey. Even so, <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Indonesia</span> is  definitely a  &#8220;BUY</strong>.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>Vietnam</strong> is hailed as the next China. And  with good reason: Vietnam has a culture that&#8217;s similar to the Red Dragon, it&#8217;s  an ex-Communist, one-party state, and attracts foreign investment because of  its cheap labor costs. Vietnam has a population of 90 million, but a GDP of  only $92.4 billion. The problem here is that the old East Asian route to riches  of cheap manufacturing is pre-empted by the behemoths China and India, so  Vietnam may find it much more difficult to succeed than its East Asian  predecessors did during the half-century that spanned 1950-2000. <strong><em>The  Economist</em></strong> is optimistic about Vietnam&#8217;s growth prospects, predicting a  6.2% advance in 2010 and 7.0% in 2011. But the budget deficit is substantial at  7.7% of GDP, as is the payments deficit at 7.8% of GDP. Also highly worrisome:  The inflation rate is expected to exceed 10%. Given that the stock market is  small and highly speculative, and it&#8217;s very difficult for a U.S. investor to  buy directly, I wouldn&#8217;t rush in too fast here. Still, keep an eye on this  market: <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Vietnam</span> is currently a  &#8220;HOLD/BUY.&#8221;</strong></p>
<p><strong>Egypt </strong>makes the CIVETS  acronym work nicely, but I can&#8217;t see why you would regard it as a growth  economy. What&#8217;s more, it is essentially a one-party dictatorship in which the  dictator &#8211; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosni_Mubarak" target="_blank">Hosni Mubarak</a> &#8211; is 82. With 80 million people and a GDP of $190 billion, Egypt is  surprisingly poor &#8211; especially given its geographical location close to Europe. <strong><em>The Economist</em></strong> expects this country to grow at 5.2% in 2010 and  5.4% in 2011 (but with population growth of a full 2% annually, that&#8217;s less  impressive than it looks). The economy is heavily government controlled, and  has few natural resources, given its excessive population. With a budget  deficit of 8.7% of GDP, a payments deficit of 3.7% of GDP, an expected  inflation rate of 12%, and an 82-year-old dictator, this market just doesn&#8217;t  look attractive to me. Thus, I must say that <strong>Egypt is currently an  &#8220;AVOID.&#8221;</strong></p>
<p><strong>Turkey </strong>is a pretty  decent growth economy, albeit without many natural resources. But it now faces  significant political risk. With 78 million people and a $608 billion economy,  Turkey is (economically speaking) the largest of the CIVETS. In office since  2002, the current government of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recep_Tayyip_Erdo%C4%9Fan" target="_blank">Recep Erdogan</a> has done a good job on the economy. <strong><em>The Economist</em></strong>&#8216;s forecasters  say Turkey will grow at a 4.8% clip this year and another 4.0% in 2011. But  that looks low &#8211; especially given that first-quarter growth ran at an annual  rate of 11.7%. The budget deficit is 4.5% of GDP, the trade deficit 4.8% of GDP  and inflation is expected to run at 10.1% in 2010. Also a concern: The public  debt/GDP ratio &#8211; while well below its 2002 levels &#8211; is at 46%.  Turkey has  two possible paths down which it may travel, but they represent very different  outcomes to investors: One is an opportunity, the other a danger. The opportunity  is that Turkey finally gets a really decent free trade agreement with the  European Union (EU) &#8211; without full membership &#8211; that allows it to manufacture  for tariff-free sale throughout the EU market. The danger is that Erdogan  reorients Turkish foreign policy towards the economic deadbeats of the Middle  East. That makes Turkey a high-risk proposition. But the Turkish market&#8217;s P/E  is only 11. It&#8217;s speculative, but on the whole I have to say that <strong>Turkey is  a risky  &#8220;BUY.&#8221;</strong></p>
<p><strong>South  Africa </strong>is  another resource-rich economy, which I believe to be a better basis than cheap  labor for market emergence in the 2010s. With 49 million people, a barely  growing population, and a GDP of $280 billion, South Africa is a decent-sized  economy. However, <strong><em>Economist</em></strong> forecasters have it growing at a rate  of only 2.8% in 2010 and 3.7% in 2011. With a budget deficit of 6.3% of GDP,  and a payments deficit of 5.0%, this country&#8217;s finances are unattractive &#8211; even  with the fact that <strong><em>The Economist</em></strong> expects inflation to run only at  a tolerable 5.8%. The problem is management: The post-1994 South African  governments have not shown they can run the economy well, in spite of South  Africa&#8217;s resource advantages. What&#8217;s more, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient" target="_blank">Gini coefficient of  inequality</a> is 65 &#8211; the world&#8217;s second highest &#8211; which makes the society  highly unstable.  The market&#8217;s not cheap, either, given its P/E of 16. You  may want to dabble in a gold mine or two, but even there the risks are less in  places like Canada and the better bits of Latin America. For me, <strong>South  Africa is too risky &#8211; and is a  &#8220;HOLD,&#8221; at best</strong>.</p>
<p>All the  BRICs would have made investors good money in the 2001-2010 time frame. Even  so, I would have invested neither in Russia under Vladimir Putin, nor in Brazil  until about 2006: The risks in both places were too high for the rewards. But I  would have invested modestly in China as far back as 2001. And I did invest &#8211;  very profitably &#8211; in India.</p>
<p>Like the  BRICs, the CIVETS don&#8217;t offer a sure-fire recipe for investment profits. All  the same, I think we&#8217;d be foolish not to look at possibilities in Colombia and  Indonesia, and perhaps even Turkey, for now. And don&#8217;t forget about Vietnam,  which will be very interesting when it opens further.</p>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">News and Related Story Links</span></strong>:</p>
<ul type="disc">
<li><strong>The       Permanent Wealth Investor</strong>:<br />
<a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/research-reports/PBI/PBI0510.php?pub=PBI&amp;code=WPBIL505" target="_blank">Official Website</a><strong>.</strong></li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning News Archive</strong>:<br />
<a href="http://moneymorning.com/archives/#topic.b.t.bric.2" target="_blank">BRICS News</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning Special Research Report (Part I of II): </strong><br />
<a title="Permanent link to Special Report: Hit the BRICs for a Global-Investing Double Play" href="http://moneymorning.com/2008/08/04/bric-2/" target="_blank">Special       Report: Hit the BRICs for a Global-Investing Double Play</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning Special Research Report (Part II of II): </strong><br />
<a title="Permanent link to Special Report: Hit the BRICs for a Global-Investing Double Play" href="http://moneymorning.com/2008/08/05/bric-3/" target="_blank">Special       Report: Hit the BRICs for a Global-Investing Double Play</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Wikipedia</strong>:<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRIC" target="_blank">The BRICS</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Wikipedia</strong>:<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_O%27Neill_(economist)" target="_blank">Jim       O&#8217;Neill</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Wikipedia</strong>:<br />
<a href="file:/agorahomeUserDataLSmithTopStoriesSpecial%20Report:%20Hit%20the%20BRICs%20for%20a%20Global-Investing%20Double%20Play" target="_blank">Civets       (the African Mammal)</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Reuters</strong>:<br />
<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE63Q26Q20100427" target="_blank">After       BRICs, look to CIVETS for growth &#8211; HSBC CEO</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning News Analysis</strong>:<a title="Permanent link to South Africa Takes Aim at Both Short and Long-Term Goals with World Cup Bid" href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/05/18/south-africa-world-cup/" target="_blank">South       Africa Takes Aim at Both Short and Long-Term Goals with World Cup Bid</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning Global Markets Tour</strong>:<br />
<a title="Permanent link to Four Ways to Profit From the World's Shrewdest Government" href="http://moneymorning.com/2009/12/22/investing-in-chile/" target="_blank">Four       Ways to Profit From the World&#8217;s Shrewdest Government</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning Global Markets Tour</strong>:<a title="Permanent link to It's Time to Invest in Chile and Colombia – Latin America's Reigning ‘Good Guys'" href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/06/30/chile-and-columbia/" target="_blank">It&#8217;s       Time to Invest in Chile and Colombia &#8211; Latin America&#8217;s Reigning &#8216;Good       Guys.&#8217;</a></li>
<li><strong>Office       of the U.S. Trade Representative</strong>:<br />
<a href="http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/colombia-fta" target="_blank">Columbia       FTA Pending Congressional Approval</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Wikipedia:<br />
</strong><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosni_Mubarak" target="_blank">Hosni Mubarak</a>.</li>
<li><strong>London       School of Economics and Political Science</strong>:<a href="http://www2.lse.ac.uk/home.aspx" target="_blank">Official Website</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Wikipedia: </strong><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient" target="_blank"><br />
Gini       Coefficient</a><strong>.</strong></li>
<li><strong>The       Fletcher School of Law &amp; Diplomacy</strong>:<a href="http://fletcher.tufts.edu/" target="_blank"><br />
Official Website</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning Global Markets Tour</strong>: <a title="Permanent link to Despite Talk of a Bubble, Indonesia Is Still a Profit Haven for Investors" href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/04/20/indonesia-bubble/" target="_blank"><br />
Despite       Talk of a Bubble, Indonesia Is Still a Profit Haven for Investors</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Wikipedia</strong>: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susilo_Bambang_Yudhoyono" target="_blank"><br />
Susilo       Bambang Yudhoyono</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Wikipedia</strong>: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recep_Tayyip_Erdo%C4%9Fan" target="_blank"><br />
Recep       Erdogan</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning News Analysis</strong>:<br />
<a title="Permanent link to The Global Double-Dip Recession: Which Markets to Hold... And Which Ones May Fold" href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/07/09/double-dip-recession-2/" target="_blank">The       Global Double-Dip Recession: Which Markets to Hold&#8230; And Which Ones May       Fold</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning Global Markets Tour</strong>: <a title="Permanent link to Six Ways to Invest in Korea – Asia's Can't-Miss Market" href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/07/07/invest-in-korea-2/" target="_blank"><br />
Six       Ways to Invest in Korea &#8211; Asia&#8217;s Can&#8217;t-Miss Market</a>.</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/the-civets-windfall-wealth-from-the-%e2%80%98new%e2%80%99-bric-economies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The CIVETS: Windfall Wealth From the &#8216;New&#8217; BRIC Economies</title>
		<link>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/the-civets/</link>
		<comments>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/the-civets/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 13:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Hutchinson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Martin Hutchinson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brazil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRIC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business/Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Colombia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comedia Gen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Egypt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emerging Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gross domestic product]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Indonesia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inflation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Africa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Turkey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vietnam]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/?p=7094</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Source MoneyMorning.com: <a href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/07/31/civets-2/" target="_blank">The CIVETS: Windfall Wealth From the ‘New’ BRIC Economies</a> Forget the BRICs&#8230; the term coined by Goldman Sachs economist Jim O&#8217;Neill coined to identify the potential of the emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India and China. <p>There&#8217;s a new acronym in town: CIVETS.</p> <p>Haven&#8217;t heard of it? You will.</p> <p>It refers [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><strong>Source MoneyMorning.com:</strong></div>
<div><a href="http://moneymorning.com/2010/07/31/civets-2/" target="_blank">The CIVETS: Windfall Wealth From the ‘New’ BRIC Economies</a></div>
<div></div>
<div>Forget the BRICs&#8230; the term coined by Goldman Sachs economist Jim O&#8217;Neill coined to identify the potential of the emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India and China.</div>
<div>
<p>There&#8217;s a new acronym in town: CIVETS.</p>
<p>Haven&#8217;t heard of it? You will.</p>
<p>It refers to Colombia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey and South Africa&#8230; the new kids on the block that promise to deliver even bigger windfall wealth than the BRICs ever did.</p>
<p>But, only if you pick the right markets at the right time&#8230;</p>
<p>Read on to find out where the real potential in the CIVETS lies&#8230; and which markets should be avoided&#8230;</p>
<h3>The Birth (and Rebirth) of &#8216;The BRICS&#8217;</h3>
<p>It&#8217;s been almost a decade &#8211; 2001, to be exact &#8211; since Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (NYSE: GS) economist Jim O&#8217;Neill conceived the &#8220;BRICS&#8221; acronym as a marketing vehicle that would convey the exciting investment potential of four key emerging markets (Brazil, Russia, India and China).</p>
<p>O&#8217;Neill is back &#8211; with a new list and a new acronym: The &#8220;CIVETS.&#8221; Given how much money investors have made from the BRICs, that suggests the CIVETS (Colombia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey and South Africa) deserve a closer look. Potentially, they may be the great growth markets of the new decade &#8211; or not!</p>
<p>O&#8217;Neill&#8217;s thesis is that growth is now spreading beyond the BRICs, whose stock markets have been pretty heavily explored at least by institutional investors, and that the CIVETS economies are the next chunky economies where growth seems likely and there is money to be made. Personally, I would buy Chile before any of them. But I suppose O&#8217;Neill would complain that the Chilean market was not big enough for the titanic wealth of Goldman Sachs!</p>
<h3>The CIVETS Magical Mystery Tour</h3>
<p>So allow me to lead us on a tour of the CIVETS markets, during which I will actually <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em>rate</em></span> the profit potential (in standard Wall Street style), and will even expose any pitfalls that could render that potential moot.</p>
<h3>Colombia</h3>
<p>Our CIVETS tour begins with <strong>Colombia</strong>, which looks like an excellent candidate for future growth. In fact, I said as much to <em><strong>Money Morning </strong></em> readers just days after the voters confirmed center-right candidate Juan Manuel Santos (whose resume includes degrees from Harvard, the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and the London School of Economics) as its new president. With 44 million people and a gross domestic product (GDP) of $231 billion, Colombia is certainly big enough to be worth considering. In a world in which resource prices are likely to trend upwards because of Chinese and Indian demand, I like the country&#8217;s agricultural and natural-resources orientation. What&#8217;s more, should the U.S. Congress ever actually ratify the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (signed all the way back in November 2006), there should be a further boost to the Columbian market. <em><strong>The Economist</strong></em>&#8216;s panel of forecasters projects growth of 2.5% this year and 3.8% in 2011. But that looks much too low to me. The projected 2010 budget deficit equal to 3.9% of GDP and the payments deficit of 1.6% of GDP look reasonable, as does the 2.6% inflation rate. The market&#8217;s Price/Earnings (P/E) ratio is 19.5, which is a little high. But when you sum it all up, <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Colombia</span> is a &#8220;BUY.&#8221;</strong></p>
<h3>Indonesia</h3>
<p><strong>Indonesia</strong> is another country I have liked for a long time, particularly under its current, competent government of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, in power since 2004. With 243 million people and a GDP of $521 billion, it&#8217;s a substantive-enough economy to invest in. It&#8217;s well diversified, with agriculture, natural resources and substantial manufacturing. The level of corruption in the society is too high to be comfortable, but it remains lower than Russia. And it&#8217;s strategically situated between China and India, meaning it should benefit as both those behemoths grow. <em><strong>The Economist </strong></em> is pretty optimistic about growth, with forecasters calling for a 5.6% advance this year and 5.9% next year. The budget deficit is a reasonable 2.1% of GDP, and the current account is in surplus. With a P/E of 18, Indonesia&#8217;s stock market &#8211; like the aforementioned Colombia &#8211; is a bit pricey. Even so, <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Indonesia</span> is definitely a &#8220;BUY.&#8221;</strong></p>
<h3>Vietnam</h3>
<p><strong>Vietnam</strong> is hailed as the next China. And with good reason: Vietnam has a culture that&#8217;s similar to the Red Dragon, it&#8217;s an ex-Communist, one-party state, and attracts foreign investment because of its cheap labor costs. Vietnam has a population of 90 million, but a GDP of only $92.4 billion. The problem here is that the old East Asian route to riches of cheap manufacturing is pre-empted by the behemoths China and India, so Vietnam may find it much more difficult to succeed than its East Asian predecessors did during the half-century that spanned 1950-2000. <em><strong>The Economist </strong></em> is optimistic about Vietnam&#8217;s growth prospects, predicting a 6.2% advance in 2010 and 7.0% in 2011. But the budget deficit is substantial at 7.7% of GDP, as is the payments deficit at 7.8% of GDP. Also highly worrisome: The inflation rate is expected to exceed 10%. Given that the stock market is small and highly speculative, and it&#8217;s very difficult for a U.S. investor to buy directly, I wouldn&#8217;t rush in too fast here. Still, keep an eye on this market: <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Vietnam</span> is currently a &#8220;HOLD/BUY.&#8221;</strong></p>
<h3>Egypt</h3>
<p><strong>Egypt</strong> makes the CIVETS acronym work nicely, but I can&#8217;t see why you would regard it as a growth economy. What&#8217;s more, it is essentially a one-party dictatorship in which the dictator &#8211; Hosni Mubarak &#8211; is 82. With 80 million people and a GDP of $190 billion, Egypt is surprisingly poor &#8211; especially given its geographical location close to Europe. <em><strong>The Economist </strong></em> expects this country to grow at 5.2% in 2010 and 5.4% in 2011 (but with population growth of a full 2% annually, that&#8217;s less impressive than it looks). The economy is heavily government controlled, and has few natural resources, given its excessive population. With a budget deficit of 8.7% of GDP, a payments deficit of 3.7% of GDP, an expected inflation rate of 12%, and an 82-year-old dictator, this market just doesn&#8217;t look attractive to me. Thus, I must say that <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Egypt</span> is currently an &#8220;AVOID.&#8221;</strong></p>
<h3>Turkey</h3>
<p><strong>Turkey</strong> is a pretty decent growth economy, albeit without many natural resources. But it now faces significant political risk. With 78 million people and a $608 billion economy, Turkey is (economically speaking) the largest of the CIVETS. In office since 2002, the current government of Recep Erdogan has done a good job on the economy. <em><strong>The Economist</strong></em>&#8216;s forecasters say Turkey will grow at a 4.8% clip this year and another 4.0% in 2011. But that looks low &#8211; especially given that first-quarter growth ran at an annual rate of 11.7%. The budget deficit is 4.5% of GDP, the trade deficit 4.8% of GDP and inflation is expected to run at 10.1% in 2010. Also a concern: The public debt/GDP ratio &#8211; while well below its 2002 levels &#8211; is at 46%. Turkey has two possible paths down which it may travel, but they represent very different outcomes to investors: One is an opportunity, the other a danger. The opportunity is that Turkey finally gets a really decent free trade agreement with the European Union (EU) &#8211; without full membership &#8211; that allows it to manufacture for tariff-free sale throughout the EU market. The danger is that Erdogan reorients Turkish foreign policy towards the economic deadbeats of the Middle East. That makes Turkey a high-risk proposition. But the Turkish market&#8217;s P/E is only 11. It&#8217;s speculative, but on the whole I have to say that <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Turkey</span> is a risky &#8220;BUY.&#8221;</strong></p>
<h3>South Africa</h3>
<p><strong>South Africa</strong> is another resource-rich economy, which I believe to be a better basis than cheap labor for market emergence in the 2010s. With 49 million people, a barely growing population, and a GDP of $280 billion, South Africa is a decent-sized economy. However, <em><strong>Economist </strong></em> forecasters have it growing at a rate of only 2.8% in 2010 and 3.7% in 2011. With a budget deficit of 6.3% of GDP, and a payments deficit of 5.0%, this country&#8217;s finances are unattractive &#8211; even with the fact that <em><strong>The Economist </strong></em> expects inflation to run only at a tolerable 5.8%. The problem is management: The post-1994 South African governments have not shown they can run the economy well, in spite of South Africa&#8217;s resource advantages. What&#8217;s more, the Gini coefficient of inequality is 65 &#8211; the world&#8217;s second highest &#8211; which makes the society highly unstable. The market&#8217;s not cheap, either, given its P/E of 16. You may want to dabble in a gold mine or two, but even there the risks are less in places like Canada and the better bits of Latin America. For me, <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">South Africa</span> is too risky &#8211; and is a &#8220;HOLD,&#8221; at best</strong>.</p>
<h3>Investing in the CIVETS</h3>
<p>All the BRICs would have made investors good money in the 2001-2010 time frame. Even so, I would have invested neither in Russia under Vladimir Putin, nor in Brazil until about 2006: The risks in both places were too high for the rewards. But I would have invested modestly in China as far back as 2001. And I did invest &#8211; very profitably &#8211; in India.</p>
<p>Like the BRICs, the CIVETS don&#8217;t offer a sure-fire recipe for investment profits. All the same, I think we&#8217;d be foolish not to look at possibilities in Colombia and Indonesia, and perhaps even Turkey, for now. And don&#8217;t forget about Vietnam, which will be very interesting when it opens further.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/the-civets/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>As Problems in  India and Russia Escalate, Let&#8217;s Drop the BRIC</title>
		<link>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/bric-economies/</link>
		<comments>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/bric-economies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:24:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Hutchinson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Main Essay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Martin Hutchinson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brazil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRIC economies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Goldman Sachs Group]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[India and China.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moneymorning.com/?p=5516</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By <a title="About Martin O. Hutchinson" href="../martin-hutchinson/">Martin Hutchinson</a><br /> Editor, <a title="Permanent Wealth Investor" href="../"> Permanent Wealth Investor</a><br /> <a title="Original Article" href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2009/03/06/bric-economies/" target="_blank">Money Morning, Investment News</a><br /> </p> <p>When Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (<a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=gs" target="_blank">GS</a>) coined the term “BRICs” in 2003 to cover Brazil, Russia, India and China. This group of four countries was [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By <a title="About Martin O. Hutchinson" href="../martin-hutchinson/">Martin Hutchinson</a><br />
Editor, <em><a title="Permanent Wealth Investor" href="../"> Permanent Wealth Investor</a></em><br />
<strong></strong><a title="Original Article" href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2009/03/06/bric-economies/" target="_blank"><em>Money Morning</em>, Investment News</a><strong><br />
</strong><strong></strong></p>
<p>When Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (<a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=gs" target="_blank">GS</a>) coined the term “BRICs” in  2003 to cover Brazil, Russia, India and China. This group of four countries was  supposed to represent the enormous potential of the emerging markets, and their  populations would provide most of the world’s growth in the decades ahead. For  a year or two, Goldman’s theory seemed to work and the “BRIC” acronym became  immensely fashionable.</p>
<p>But now that the global downturn  has hit, the four countries have diverged, and it is no longer clear what they  have significantly in common. <strong><em>Money Morning</em></strong> actually raised some  of these concerns in a <a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2008/08/05/bric-3/" target="_blank">two-part  series</a> that ran in August – back even before the downturn reached crisis  proportions, or <a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2009/03/03/bric-russia/" target="_blank">analysts  began questioning the BRIC concept</a>. So let’s revisit the four countries  again right now, take a look at each one, and see for ourselves whether there’s  still any merit to the BRIC concept.</p>
<h3>Brazil: Staying Strong</h3>
<p>Brazil is one of the real economic  success stories of the last six years. In 2003, it had just elected a socialist  president and appeared close to default – its membership in the BRIC group was  highly tentative. The commodity boom of 2004-2008 was highly beneficial to  Brazil, the country’s government worked hard to bring down the budget deficit,  while its central bank kept interest rates far above the rate of inflation.  Consequently, when the commodity bubble burst in mid-2008, the central bank was  able to keep domestic demand growing by relaxing its interest rate policy.</p>
<p>Brazil’s economy – as measured by  gross domestic product (GDP) – advanced at a 5.3% annual clip in 2008. The  forecasting panel of <strong><em>The Economist</em></strong> only expects Brazil to grow at  a 1.6% pace this year, but that’s much better than most places. Its inflation  rate is 6% – too high, but at least it avoids deflation.</p>
<p>Brazil’s short-term interest rates  remain suitably restrictive at 12.5%, and its stock market is down only 4% this  year, which is more than investors can say for Wall Street.</p>
<p>Brazil remains a successful growth  story, albeit at a moderate rate. What’s more, its oil company, Petroleo  Brasileiro SA (Petrobras) (ADR: <a href="http://finance.google.com/finance?q=pbr" target="_blank">PBR</a>), has found offshore reserves of oil that from 2012 (when  production begins) onward seems likely to make Brazil one of the world’s  premier oil exporters.</p>
<p>Whenever someone assembles a list  of the world’s great growth economies – no matter what parameters are used –  Brazil is virtually certain to be part of it.</p>
<h3>Russia: Shooting Star Flames Out.</h3>
<p>While Brazil has emerged as a  success story, Russia’s early promise has given way to a somewhat bleak  reality. Indeed, since that Goldman paper was written in 2003, Russia has been  transformed from a successful emerging market into a corrupt kleptocracy  without the rule of law and with only oil exports propping it up. Now that oil  prices have dropped, Russia is in trouble. Its consumer prices are rising at a  14% clip on fudged official data, its currency is collapsing – down by a third  in the past year – and stock prices are down 80% from their high last spring.  Even Russia’s population is declining.</p>
<p>The bottom line: Russia is neither  emerging, nor a market. Unless oil prices recover rapidly, or the country  undergoes a sudden conversion to secure property rights, it seems fated to  remain impoverished, and to have its economic vigor diverted into military  adventurism. It should be on nobody’s list of growth opportunities.</p>
<h3>India: Political Ineptitude Blunts Growth</h3>
<p>India did well in 2004-2008,  thanks largely to the reforms carried out by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatiya_Janata_Party" target="_blank">Bharatiya Janata  Party</a> (BJP) government of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atal_Bihari_Vajpayee" target="_blank">Atal Bihari Vajpayee</a> in 1998-2004. However, the current <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_Party" target="_blank">Indian National  Congress-I (Congress) Party</a>-dominated  government has made almost no further reforms, and the Indian economic machine  is showing clear signs of running down.</p>
<p>While 2009 growth is still  expected to be around 5%, estimates of the consolidated budget deficit range as  high as 12% of GDP. India is not China: It does not have the huge foreign  exchange reserves to finance such a deficit. Thus, the rating agencies are  considering downgrading India’s debt to “junk” status.</p>
<p>Given the financing difficulties  India is likely to run into, it must be probable that growth will once again be  thwarted by lack of foreign exchange, so that India reverts to the traditional  “Hindu rate of growth” of 3 to 4% &#8211; a growth rate that’s nowhere near enough to  lift its rapidly growing population out of poverty. Another election is to be  held in the spring, but it seems unlikely that the BJP will win a government  majority (Vajpayee has in any case retired) – in which case the government  overspending and opposition to reform of the last five years will continue.  India would then remain an enormously frustrating enigma, a country with huge  growth possibilities that is shackled by a corrupt and incompetent government.</p>
<h3>China: The Leader of the Pack</h3>
<p>My colleague, Keith Fitz-Gerald,  has christened China as the main engine of world growth, and that role seems  likely to continue – in spite of the current difficulties the emerging Asian  giant appears to be facing. China’s government has pledged an enormous stimulus  plan of more than $600 billion, far larger in terms of the Chinese economy than  the U.S. counterpart proposed by American President Barack Obama.</p>
<p>However, with roughly $2 trillion  in foreign-exchange reserves, huge domestic savings and a budget that is close  to being balanced, it seems likely that China can afford its stimulus, and that  by increasing domestic demand the stimulus will pull the country out of  recession without causing excessive financing difficulties.</p>
<p>The aforementioned <strong><em>Economist</em></strong> panel expects China to grow at a 6% pace this year, but that number may well be  conservative. China’s shares are still down 60% from their peak, but they have  risen by 20% this year and look attractive at these levels.</p>
<p>Thus, the BRIC group of  emerging-growth economies has become merely a capital ‘C,’ with a modest ‘B’  trailing behind. There is some possibility of an ‘I’ rejoining our growth  acronym, but there’s apparently no current hope for ‘R.’</p>
<p>In fact, when it comes to the  BRICs, there’s only one conclusion to reach: The acronym is broken.</p>
<p><strong>[<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Editor's Note</span>: </strong>When it comes to either banking or  the international financial markets, there's no one better to hear it from than <em><strong>Money Morning</strong></em> Contributing Editor <a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/contributors/" target="_blank">Martin  Hutchinson</a>, for he brings to the table the kind of high-level expertise  that our readers have come to expect. In February 2000, for instance, when he  was working as an advisor to the Republic of Macedonia, Hutchinson figured out  how to restore the life savings of 800,000 Macedonians who had been stripped of  nearly $1 billion by the breakup of Yugoslavia and the Kosovo War.</p>
<p>Just last month, Hutchinson published an analysis on the <a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2009/02/18/us-banks/" target="_blank">"Top  12 U.S. banks" report</a>. If you missed story, which enjoyed a big  response when it was published last Wednesday, <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2009/02/18/us-banks/" target="_blank">please  click here</a></span> to access it and check it out. The report is free of charge.  The follow-up story on that story was <a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2009/02/20/fifth-thrid/" target="_blank">his  analysis of Fifth Third Bancorp</a> (<a href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:FITB" target="_blank">FITB</a>).  The report on Fifth Third <a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2009/02/20/fifth-thrid/" target="_blank">appeared  last Friday</a>. Both reports may be well worth your time to read.</p>
<p>And back in August, well before the ongoing global financial  crisis reached the depths it has now achieved, Hutchinson authored a two-part  series that detailed the strengths and weaknesses of the four “BRIC” nations.  If you missed it – or just want to read the stories again – please click here to read Part I (Brazil and Russia), or <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2008/08/05/bric-3/" target="_blank">click here</a></span> to  read Part II (<a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2008/08/05/bric-3/" target="_blank">India  and China</a>). The reports are free of charge.</p>
<p>Hutchinson also writes regularly for our monthly newsletter, <em><strong>The  Money Map Report</strong></em>, in which he and other <em><strong>Money Morning</strong></em> colleagues also make investment recommendations for subscribers. To find out  more about <em><strong>The Money Map Report</strong></em> - including a special offer  that includes <em><strong>The New York Times</strong></em> bestseller, "<a href="http://www.oxfonline.com/MMR/MMR0109crash.html?pub=MMR&amp;code=EMMRK105" target="_blank">Crash Proof</a>" - <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://www.oxfonline.com/MMR/MMR0109crash.html?pub=MMR&amp;code=EMMRK105" target="_blank">please click here</a></span>.<strong>]</strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">News and Related Story Links</span></strong>:</p>
<ul type="disc">
<li><strong>Money       Morning Special BRICS Report Part I of II):<br />
</strong><a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2008/08/04/bric-2/" target="_blank">Special Report: Hit       the BRICs for a Global-Investing Double Play</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning Special BRICS Report (Part II of II)</strong>:<br />
<a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2008/08/05/bric-3/" target="_blank">Special Report: Hit       the BRICs for a Global-Investing Double Play</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Wikipedia</strong>:<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatiya_Janata_Party" target="_blank">Bharatiya       Janata Party</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Wikipedia</strong>:<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atal_Bihari_Vajpayee" target="_blank">Atal Bihari       Vajpayee</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Wikipedia</strong>:<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_Party" target="_blank">Indian National Congress-I       (Congress) Party</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Money       Morning News Analysis</strong>: <a href="http://www.moneymorning.com/2009/03/03/bric-russia/" target="_blank"><br />
Russia’s       Economic Demise Could Turn “BRIC” to “BIC”</a>.</li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.permanentwealthinvestor.com/archives/bric-economies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

