Kanebridge News
    HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $1,622,098 (+0.71%)       Melbourne $981,832 (-2.09%)       Brisbane $1,013,340 (-4.79%)       Adelaide $896,637 (+0.78%)       Perth $903,142 (+1.62%)       Hobart $735,716 (-0.79%)       Darwin $675,685 (-1.24%)       Canberra $972,155 (+0.42%)       National $1,049,225 (-0.40%)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $759,302 (+0.34%)       Melbourne $499,445 (+0.32%)       Brisbane $599,093 (-1.20%)       Adelaide $476,655 (+3.47%)       Perth $470,566 (-0.17%)       Hobart $509,944 (+1.17%)       Darwin $371,905 (-0.35%)       Canberra $475,100 (+0.41%)       National $542,432 (+0.34%)                HOUSES FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 10,955 (+356)       Melbourne 15,624 (+2,213)       Brisbane 8,222 (+1,548)       Adelaide 2,183 (+305)       Perth 5,974 (+540)       Hobart 1,113 (+77)       Darwin 281 (-8)       Canberra 1,025 (+339)       National 45,377 (+5,370)                UNITS FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 9,327 (+197)       Melbourne 8,761 (+154)       Brisbane 1,718 (-9)       Adelaide 407 (+8)       Perth 1,445 (-1)       Hobart 176 (+1)       Darwin 371 (+3)       Canberra 1,046 (+14)       National 23,251 (+367)                HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $800 ($0)       Melbourne $610 ($0)       Brisbane $640 ($0)       Adelaide $600 (-$20)       Perth $660 (-$10)       Hobart $550 ($0)       Darwin $725 (+$5)       Canberra $670 (-$5)       National $665 (-$3)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $750 ($0)       Melbourne $580 ($0)       Brisbane $620 ($0)       Adelaide $500 ($0)       Perth $620 (+$10)       Hobart $450 (+$10)       Darwin $580 (-$18)       Canberra $550 ($0)       National $593 (-$)                HOUSES FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 5,773 (-32)       Melbourne 6,547 (-53)       Brisbane 4,240 (-118)       Adelaide 1,353 (-76)       Perth 2,378 (-31)       Hobart 293 (-33)       Darwin 88 (+2)       Canberra 533 (-18)       National 21,205 (-359)                UNITS FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 10,090 (-221)       Melbourne 6,439 (-13)       Brisbane 2,285 (-27)       Adelaide 374 (-4)       Perth 671 (-47)       Hobart 120 (+1)       Darwin 160 (-3)       Canberra 799 (-17)       National 20,938 (-331)                HOUSE ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 2.56% (↓)     Melbourne 3.23% (↑)      Brisbane 3.28% (↑)        Adelaide 3.48% (↓)       Perth 3.80% (↓)     Hobart 3.89% (↑)      Darwin 5.58% (↑)        Canberra 3.58% (↓)       National 3.30% (↓)            UNIT ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 5.14% (↓)       Melbourne 6.04% (↓)     Brisbane 5.38% (↑)        Adelaide 5.45% (↓)     Perth 6.85% (↑)      Hobart 4.59% (↑)        Darwin 8.11% (↓)       Canberra 6.02% (↓)       National 5.69% (↓)            HOUSE RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 0.8% (↑)      Melbourne 0.7% (↑)      Brisbane 0.7% (↑)      Adelaide 0.4% (↑)      Perth 0.4% (↑)      Hobart 0.9% (↑)      Darwin 0.8% (↑)      Canberra 1.0% (↑)      National 0.7% (↑)             UNIT RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 0.9% (↑)      Melbourne 1.1% (↑)      Brisbane 1.0% (↑)      Adelaide 0.5% (↑)      Perth 0.5% (↑)      Hobart 1.4% (↑)      Darwin 1.7% (↑)      Canberra 1.4% (↑)      National 1.1% (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL HOUSES AND TREND       Sydney 31.2 (↑)      Melbourne 33.5 (↑)      Brisbane 32.9 (↑)      Adelaide 25.4 (↑)      Perth 35.6 (↑)      Hobart 37.5 (↑)        Darwin 42.9 (↓)     Canberra 33.5 (↑)      National 34.0 (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL UNITS AND TREND       Sydney 32.1 (↑)      Melbourne 34.5 (↑)      Brisbane 30.3 (↑)        Adelaide 25.0 (↓)     Perth 35.5 (↑)      Hobart 33.6 (↑)      Darwin 43.2 (↑)      Canberra 40.8 (↑)      National 34.4 (↑)            
Share Button

China’s Troubles Are Hitting Home for U.S. Companies

Multinationals like Starbucks and Marriott are taking a hard look at their Chinese operations—and tempering their outlooks.

By RESHMA KAPADIA
Thu, Sep 5, 2024 10:04amGrey Clock 4 min

For years, global companies showcased their Chinese operations as a source of robust growth. A burgeoning middle class, a stream of people moving to cities, and the creation of new services to cater to them—along with the promise of the further opening of the world’s second-largest economy—drew companies eager to tap into the action.

Then Covid hit, isolating China from much of the world. Chinese leader Xi Jinping tightened control of the economy, and U.S.-China relations hit a nadir. After decades of rapid growth, China’s economy is stuck in a rut, with increasing concerns about what will drive the next phase of its growth.

Though Chinese officials have acknowledged the sputtering economy, they have been reluctant to take more than incremental steps to reverse the trend. Making matters worse, government crackdowns on internet companies and measures to burst the country’s property bubble left households and businesses scarred.

Lowered Expectations

Now, multinational companies are taking a hard look at their Chinese operations and tempering their outlooks. Marriott International narrowed its global revenue per available room growth rate to 3% to 4%, citing continued weakness in China and expectations that demand could weaken further in the third quarter. Paris-based Kering , home to brands Gucci and Saint Laurent, posted a 22% decline in sales in the Asia-Pacific region, excluding Japan, in the first half amid weaker demand in Greater China, which includes Hong Kong and Macau.

Pricing pressure and deflation were common themes in quarterly results. Starbucks , which helped build a coffee culture in China over the past 25 years, described it as one of its most notable international challenges as it posted a 14% decline in sales from that business. As Chinese consumers reconsidered whether to spend money on Starbucks lattes, competitors such as Luckin Coffee increased pressure on the Seattle company. Starbucks executives said in their quarterly earnings call that “unprecedented store expansion” by rivals and a price war hurt profits and caused “significant disruptions” to the operating environment.

Executive anxiety extends beyond consumer companies. Elevator maker Otis Worldwide saw new-equipment orders in China fall by double digits in the second quarter, forcing it to cut its outlook for growth out of Asia. CEO Judy Marks told analysts on a quarterly earnings call that prices in China were down roughly 10% year over year, and she doesn’t see the pricing pressure abating. The company is turning to productivity improvements and cost cutting to blunt the hit.

Add in the uncertainty created by deteriorating U.S.-China relations, and many investors are steering clear. The iShares MSCI China exchange-traded fund has lost half its value since March 2021. Recovery attempts have been short-lived. undefined undefined And now some of those concerns are creeping into the U.S. market. “A decade ago China exposure [for a global company] was a way to add revenue growth to our portfolio,” says Margaret Vitrano, co-manager of large-cap growth strategies at ClearBridge Investments in New York. Today, she notes, “we now want to manage the risk of the China exposure.”

Vitrano expects improvement in 2025, but cautions it will be slow. Uncertainty over who will win the U.S. presidential election and the prospect of higher tariffs pose additional risks for global companies.

Behind the Malaise

For now, China is inching along at roughly 5% economic growth—down from a peak of 14% in 2007 and an average of about 8% in the 10 years before the pandemic. Chinese consumers hit by job losses and continued declines in property values are rethinking spending habits. Businesses worried about policy uncertainty are reluctant to invest and hire.

The trouble goes beyond frugal consumers. Xi is changing the economy’s growth model, relying less on the infrastructure and real estate market that fueled earlier growth. That means investing aggressively in manufacturing and exports as China looks to become more self-reliant and guard against geopolitical tensions.

The shift is hurting western multinationals, with deflationary forces amid burgeoning production capacity. “We have seen the investment community mark down expectations for these companies because they will have to change tack with lower-cost products and services,” says Joseph Quinlan, head of market strategy for the chief investment office at Merrill and Bank of America Private Bank.

Another challenge for multinationals outside of China is stiffened competition as Chinese companies innovate and expand—often with the backing of the government. Local rivals are upping the ante across sectors by building on their knowledge of local consumer preferences and the ability to produce higher-quality products.

Some global multinationals are having a hard time keeping up with homegrown innovation. Auto makers including General Motors have seen sales tumble and struggled to turn profitable as Chinese car shoppers increasingly opt for electric vehicles from BYD or NIO that are similar in price to internal-combustion-engine cars from foreign auto makers.

“China’s electric-vehicle makers have by leaps and bounds surpassed the capabilities of foreign brands who have a tie to the profit pool of internal combustible engines that they don’t want to disrupt,” says Christine Phillpotts, a fund manager for Ariel Investments’ emerging markets strategies.

Chinese companies are often faster than global rivals to market with new products or tweaks. “The cycle can be half of what it is for a global multinational with subsidiaries that need to check with headquarters, do an analysis, and then refresh,” Phillpotts says.

For many companies and investors, next year remains a question mark. Ashland CEO Guillermo Novo said in an August call with analysts that the chemical company was seeing a “big change” in China, with activity slowing and competition on pricing becoming more aggressive. The company, he said, was still trying to grasp the repercussions as it has created uncertainty in its 2025 outlook.

Sticking Around

Few companies are giving up. Executives at big global consumer and retail companies show no signs of reducing investment, with most still describing China as a long-term growth market, says Dana Telsey, CEO of Telsey Advisory Group.

Starbucks executives described the long-term opportunity as “significant,” with higher growth and margin opportunities in the future as China’s population continues to move from rural to suburban areas. But they also noted that their approach is evolving and they are in the early stages of exploring strategic partnerships.

Walmart sold its stake in August in Chinese e-commerce giant JD.com for $3.6 billion after an eight-year noncompete agreement expired. Analysts expect it to pump the money into its own Sam’s Club and Walmart China operation, which have benefited from the trend toward trading down in China.

“The story isn’t over for the global companies,” Phillpotts says. “It just means the effort and investment will be greater to compete.”

Corrections & Amplifications

Joseph Quinlan is head of market strategy for the chief investment office at Merrill and Bank of America Private Bank. An earlier version of this article incorrectly used his old title.



MOST POPULAR
11 ACRES ROAD, KELLYVILLE, NSW

This stylish family home combines a classic palette and finishes with a flexible floorplan

35 North Street Windsor

Just 55 minutes from Sydney, make this your creative getaway located in the majestic Hawkesbury region.

Related Stories
Money
Why Berkshire Hathaway Might Stop Selling Bank of America Stock Once It Reaches This Number
By ANDREW BARY 07/09/2024
Money
Boeing Stock Got Hammered. Why This Analyst Downgrade Terrified Investors.
By AL ROOT 04/09/2024
Money
How to Lose Money on the World’s Most Popular Investment Theme
By JAMES MACKINTOSH 02/09/2024
Why Berkshire Hathaway Might Stop Selling Bank of America Stock Once It Reaches This Number

When will Berkshire Hathaway stop selling Bank of America stock?

By ANDREW BARY
Sat, Sep 7, 2024 3 min

Berkshire began liquidating its big stake in the banking company in mid-July—and has already unloaded about 15% of its interest. The selling has been fairly aggressive and has totaled about $6 billion. (Berkshire still holds 883 million shares, an 11.3% interest worth $35 billion based on its most recent filing on Aug. 30.)

The selling has prompted speculation about when CEO Warren Buffett, who oversees Berkshire’s $300 billion equity portfolio, will stop. The sales have depressed Bank of America stock, which has underperformed peers since Berkshire began its sell program. The stock closed down 0.9% Thursday at $40.14.

It’s possible that Berkshire will stop selling when the stake drops to 700 million shares. Taxes and history would be the reasons why.

Berkshire accumulated its Bank of America stake in two stages—and at vastly different prices. Berkshire’s initial stake came in 2017 , when it swapped $5 billion of Bank of America preferred stock for 700 million shares of common stock via warrants it received as part of the original preferred investment in 2011.

Berkshire got a sweet deal in that 2011 transaction. At the time, Bank of America was looking for a Buffett imprimatur—and the bank’s stock price was weak and under $10 a share.

Berkshire paid about $7 a share for that initial stake of 700 million common shares. The rest of the Berkshire stake, more than 300 million shares, was mostly purchased in 2018 at around $30 a share.

With Bank of America stock currently trading around $40, Berkshire faces a high tax burden from selling shares from the original stake of 700 million shares, given the low cost basis, and a much lighter tax hit from unloading the rest. Berkshire is subject to corporate taxes—an estimated 25% including local taxes—on gains on any sales of stock. The tax bite is stark.

Berkshire might own $2 to $3 a share in taxes on sales of high-cost stock and $8 a share on low-cost stock purchased for $7 a share.

New York tax expert Robert Willens says corporations, like individuals, can specify the particular lots when they sell stock with multiple cost levels.

“If stock is held in the custody of a broker, an adequate identification is made if the taxpayer specifies to the broker having custody of the stock the particular stock to be sold and, within a reasonable time thereafter, confirmation of such specification is set forth in a written document from the broker,” Willens told Barron’s in an email.

He assumes that Berkshire will identify the high-cost Bank of America stock for the recent sales to minimize its tax liability.

If sellers don’t specify, they generally are subject to “first in, first out,” or FIFO, accounting, meaning that the stock bought first would be subject to any tax on gains.

Buffett tends to be tax-averse—and that may prompt him to keep the original stake of 700 million shares. He could also mull any loyalty he may feel toward Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan , whom Buffett has praised in the past.

Another reason for Berkshire to hold Bank of America is that it’s the company’s only big equity holding among traditional banks after selling shares of U.S. Bancorp , Bank of New York Mellon , JPMorgan Chase , and Wells Fargo in recent years.

Buffett, however, often eliminates stock holdings after he begins selling them down, as he did with the other bank stocks. Berkshire does retain a smaller stake of about $3 billion in Citigroup.

There could be a new filing on sales of Bank of America stock by Berkshire on Thursday evening. It has been three business days since the last one.

Berkshire must file within two business days of any sales of Bank of America stock since it owns more than 10%. The conglomerate will need to get its stake under about 777 million shares, about 100 million below the current level, before it can avoid the two-day filing rule.

It should be said that taxes haven’t deterred Buffett from selling over half of Berkshire’s stake in Apple this year—an estimated $85 billion or more of stock. Barron’s has estimated that Berkshire may owe $15 billion on the bulk of the sales that occurred in the second quarter.

Berkshire now holds 400 million shares of Apple and Barron’s has argued that Buffett may be finished reducing the Apple stake at that round number, which is the same number of shares that Berkshire has held in Coca-Cola for more than two decades.

Buffett may like round numbers—and 700 million could be just the right figure for Bank of America.

MOST POPULAR
11 ACRES ROAD, KELLYVILLE, NSW

This stylish family home combines a classic palette and finishes with a flexible floorplan

35 North Street Windsor

Just 55 minutes from Sydney, make this your creative getaway located in the majestic Hawkesbury region.

Related Stories
Money
Superannuation funds deliver 9.1 percent return for FY24
By Bronwyn Allen 19/07/2024
Property
Will a cap on international students make housing more affordable?
By Bronwyn Allen 05/09/2024
Lifestyle
Aston Martin Refines Its Exotic Family Car
By Jim Motavalli 15/06/2024
0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop