Rick Rule, Chairman of Sprott Global Resource
Investments Ltd., has been involved in natural resource for four decades.
Rick says he expects some familiar patterns to
emerge in the coming year.
See below for his most recent comments.
Photo credit: Cambridge House International
Sprott Global: Rick, you’ve predicted an impending
bear-market bottom in precious metals and natural resources. Are we there now?
Rick Rule: I believe we are.
We’ll see a rising market with higher highs and higher lows. We’ll also see
high volatility — which one day will elate you and another day will terrify
you. That’s the way this works.
As we’ve discussed before,
bear markets lead to bull markets; and this bear market will end at some point.
Let’s take a look back to 2003. The first third of the year was truly
terrifying. Buyers were exhausted and a lot of people were selling. The price
charts of both commodities and equities looked like ski hills, falling rapidly
from the upper left to the lower right of the page.
In the middle part of the year, we had a
‘flat-line’ experience. Sellers were exhausted but buyers were exhausted too.
So the stock charts were horizontal.
At the end of the year, we began to see
‘bifurcation.’ The best of the issuers and some of the commodities caught bids.
In the absence of sellers this caused dramatic price moves upwards on
relatively small volume. Some of the juniors — like Eurasian Minerals Inc.,
Almaden Minerals Inc., or B2Gold Corp. — went up by double-digits with only
minor buying.
That was a classic sign that the bear market bottom
had been passed. Today, we have seen this ‘flat-line’ period in 2013. To
signal a start of a new bull market, we should see rising volumes and higher
prices.
In the past, a new bull market was preceded by
‘issuer capitulation.’ The better players among small exploration and mining
companies – ‘juniors’ — understand that you cannot simply survive. You have to
advance your project and grow. You need to deliver value to investors. And for
that you must raise money.
In July of 2000, the very best of the exploration
companies, which were run by such mining legends today as Ross Beatty, Bob
Quartermain, or Lukas Lundin, said:
“We need to raise money. We need to advance our
projects, whatever it takes.”
When that decision was made in 2000, it kicked off
a spectacular rally in some of the juniors – mainly those that received financing.
Meanwhile, the ‘worst’ of the juniors continued
downwards. But the best of the juniors produced high returns during this
period. And that is ultimately what kicked off the bull market.
Rick, back in October you mentioned that investors
should reorganize their portfolios at the bottom. What is it they need to do?
People – including me — don’t want to admit
defeat.
Somebody who bought a stock at $4 that is selling
at 40 cents today will often think: “I can’t sell this stock at 40 cents. If I
do, I’ll lose $3.60.” The truth is you’ve already lost the $3.60.
All that matters is what you do with the 40 cents.
It doesn’t matter that you paid $4 for this stock. If you believe it’s selling
for 40 cents and it’s worth 90 cents, that’s OK. You have made a decision with
the 40 cents you have left in the stock. But don’t hold on because it’s too
painful to sell.
Getting rid of such a stock is difficult. But the
price you paid for a stock is irrelevant to your decision today.
Today, what asset classes do you think will lead a
natural resource recovery?
The safest commodities to buy are those that are
selling below what it costs to produce them. In these cases, the commodity
price must go up or the industry that produces them will go out of business.
For example, platinum and palladium are priced
below production cost, so the industry will likely start to decrease
production. But platinum and palladium are highly valuable, for one reason
because they purify the air coming out of cars’ exhaust pipes.
Uranium is another example. It cost us $70 a pound
to mine. It sells for $35 a pound. Either the price goes up or nuclear power
plants shut down – and the lights go out. It’s that simple.
With commodities like platinum, palladium, and
uranium, if the prices do not go up, we will stop enjoying the benefits they
produce.
15 years ago, I made a similar call on copper. It
cost the industry a buck and a quarter to make a pound of copper, but copper
was selling for 80 cents a pound. Either the price of copper had to go up or we
would run out of copper. Copper is essential to modern life – especially in
providing electricity. Sure enough, the price of copper went up.
To me, these are ‘comfortable’ speculations. But
the exploration stocks, where you take a lot more risks, is where you can also
make much higher returns – if you are right.
In this ‘ragged edge’ of the speculation spectrum,
there is one critical task: to identify the best of the companies – those with
real assets, proven management expertise, and solid prospects. I believe even
the worst of these will probably triple in price over three or four years. The
best may generate tenfold or fifteen fold returns.
But you’re going to have to take a lot of risk to
get those big returns. In order to get these 10 or 15-fold returns, you’re
going to have to take several individual losses to your portfolio.
And you’re going to contend with a lot of
volatility that is beyond your control. I believe the decline in the gold price
from $1,900 to $1,200, for instance, was not the end of a secular bull market.
I think it was a cyclical decline within a secular
bull market.
The great bull market of my youth, in the 1970s and
1980s, was truly an epic bull market. The gold price rose from $351 an
ounce to $850 per ounce2. Natural gas prices rose from 25 cents a
thousand cubic feet to over $2.53.
In that 10 or 12-year bull market, there were
probably 10 or 12 price declines in gold of 20 percent or more — cyclical
declines in a secular bull market.
In the middle of that bull market, at the end of
1975, and in 1976, the gold price had run from $35 an ounce to $200 an ounce,
and fell by fully 50 percent — from $200 an ounce to $100 an ounce. Many
people lost their courage or their conviction and got shaken out of the gold
trade — missing the move in gold from $100 an ounce to $850 an ounce over the
next five and half years.
In the current recovery, we will see higher highs
and higher lows. We will see 20 percent perturbations in price that will either
elate or terrify you depending on your individual positions.
Rick, will we then see higher volatility from here
on out?
Well, I was surprised by the lack of volatility
since the events of 2008. I had expected the market to experience much more
volatility than it has.
What happened is that the market was sedated —
injected with substances in the form of quantitative easing and short-term
credits. But artificial benefits of short-term credit will be less and less
effective in the market just as increasing doses of heroin are less and less
felt by the addict. One of the results of this addiction will be volatility.
You have said that investors must be willing to do
the work to understand their investments. What if they entrust this task to
someone else, like a financial advisor? What would you tell an investor to ask
their financial adviser?
First of all, ask “Why you?”
There are hundreds of thousands of people who are
willing to tell you what to do with your money and make a commission.
The answer had better include a specific focus on
whatever sector you want to invest in.
If you are interested in financial services stocks,
then your adviser had better know something about the financial services
sector. The institution that he or she works for had better have a specific
focus on these stocks as well.
In an investment world as diverse as it is today, no
institution — let alone any individual — has sufficient expertise across the
length and breadth of the market.
If your adviser doesn’t have specific expertise
with regards to the topic that you are asking him or her to address, fire them.
The second thing to ask your adviser is to describe
their view of current market conditions. What circumstances do they believe are
driving the market? What are the correct strategic moves for an investor? If
the adviser can’t give a good response, fire the adviser.
The third thing is you need to ask is: “What
specific support do you get from your institution that makes you competitive?”
Take Sprott as an example. We are probably the
world’s largest investor in micro-cap natural resource equities. We have the
ability to address these companies either as investors or as lenders. But our
size and scale mean that we are able to focus more on evaluating resources by
employing geologists, geophysicists and engineers than any of our competitors.
Our strategic advantage is simply that we are a
$7-billion institution in terms of assets under management and largely focus on
natural resources.
But if somebody came to Sprott and asked us,
“Should I buy a thousand shares of General Electric?” they shouldn’t listen to
our response because we have no experience or focus pertaining to General
Electric.
On the other hand, if somebody asks us a question
about small-cap or micro-cap oil and gas or mining shares, we are probably
better prepared than any competitor in the world to answer those questions.
You mentioned that in the earlier years of the
firm, you would spend around 20 percent of the company’s revenues on research –
for example analyzing the geology of deposits or the economics of a mine. Why
is this research so important?
In the natural resource exploration business, it’s
not really about physical assets. I would call these companies the research and
development businesses of the natural resource sector. They are trying to
answer research questions that will create value to someone – like determining
the nature of a geological anomaly, the size of an ore body, or whether a
deposit is economic to mine.
The human resources of these small companies are
their most important assets.
How do you evaluate the potential of a project and
a research team?
First, you want to know what question they are
trying to answer.
Is it the question that will add the most value,
when answered? What thesis do they currently have, and is it supported by the
facts that are available? Is their process to prove or disprove their theory
valid? How will they know that they have answered the question pursued in their
research?
In other words, if a company raises $10 million for
a drilling program, will they have the good sense after spending $3 million to
understand that their thesis isn’t valid? Will they save the $7 million dollars
left for some other useful purpose? Or will they spend the whole $10 million because
they raised it?
The success that I have enjoyed in natural
resources has really come from a fairly small number of extremely good
decisions that yielded extraordinary returns.
Getting an answer to the research question requires
18 months. A project as a whole, where there are multiple questions that must
be answered, can take half a decade.
This is why we devote so many resources to
acquiring knowledge about projects and management teams. We need to determine
what management teams actually know their stuff; what their plan is; how well
they stick with their plan; and what the value of their research might be.
Ben Graham pointed out that in the short term the
market is a voting machine. It’s a source of noise. It represents people’s
intuition and feelings. In the long term, it’s a weighing machine. It values
what things are worth. You make money in the market by exploiting the gap
between how people feel about things in the short term, and what they are
really worth.
You need to establish a basis for evaluating these
projects in order to decide whether the market’s current price is cheap or
expensive. For me, that involves spending lots of money on geologists and
engineers to help figure that out.
Rick, when we look at the broad stock market today,
represented by the Dow Jones and the S&P 500, are you seeing an impending
bear market? How will that impact the nascent recovery in natural resources?
When I look at the balance sheets and income
statements of the largest industrial and financial companies in United States,
I am struck by what great companies they are.
They responded to the 2008 collapse by
strengthening their balance sheets. They are holding excess cash. Their
operating margins are very strong.
But is this strength sustainable? Are their margins
at all-time highs because they have become better businesses? Or is this
because interest rates are artificially low, so demand is higher and their cost
of borrowing is lower?
The yields on certificates of deposits and
long-term bonds are artificially low now. This drives more people into stocks,
which may explain these companies’ performance.
If interest rates rise, it will raise costs for
companies that rely on debt to run their businesses. At the same time, it will
lower their attractiveness to investors because bonds and savings will pay
higher yields.
The impact that a rise in interest rates could have
on these markets makes me nervous to think about. I expect it would either be
very negative or catastrophic.
Rick, how do you view water as an investment
opportunity?
You need to know a few things about the water
market. You don’t have a water market in places like British Columbia where the
challenge is to make it go away.
You have a water market in places like the west and
southwest United States. For water markets to emerge water must be scarce and
the society must be rich enough to pay for water.
There’s a shortage of water in Djibouti but it
doesn’t matter because you can’t sell it to anybody. You want to focus on a
place like California or Texas where water’s value is highest because it is
most scarce, and the population can afford to pay for it.
Throughout most of our history, water has been
cheap because there was more supply than there were uses. But that reality is
coming to an end.
Water’s cheapness has caused it to be used
inefficiently. As a result, here in California for example, 85 percent of the
water that we use contributes to 3.5 percent of GDP — in agriculture.
Only 15 percent of the water in the State of
California contributes to the other 96.5 percent of GDP.
Why such an imbalance? Water has been allocated by
voters rather than the market. 80 years ago, when farmers and the State held
the political power, they created a water rights system that kept water cheap
for farming. Today, the political fight necessary to reverse these decisions
and to deregulate the price of water hasn’t happened in California, because of
the political cost of going against the rural constituents. Meanwhile, there
has been ample water.
The last time we had a big drought in California
was in 1977. It was an enormously disruptive event. People had to do things
like ration how many times they flushed their toilets. A considerable
inconvenience!
And in 1977, there were almost 12 million fewer
people in the state. In other words, there were 12 million fewer straws in the
barrel. We offset the shortage of water in the state by overdrawing our
allotment of Colorado River water. But that was before lots of people lived in
places like Las Vegas or Phoenix.
When we finally get a full-blown water shortage in
California – probably sometime in the next decade — water will change in price
dramatically. I believe it could go up ten-fold.
Rick, you have said this will be your last big
cycle in natural resources. As a Director of Sprott Inc., how do you hope to
shape the organization for the future?
Financial companies like Sprott are really just
made up of people. Sure, you can look at our balance sheet, at our physical
addresses, and at our wonderful art collection. But when the last person goes
home, all we have left are desks and phones.
Our investment in the future involves recruiting
and training new people. We need to grow our human resources because they’re
the only real resources we have.
Yes, we have a potent balance sheet. We have
important mandates from individual investors, institutions and even nations. Our real
hope is to nurture the next generation and the subsequent generation of
investors who will take the mantle from investment leaders like Marc Faber,
Eric Sprott, John Embry, or me.
Our outreach programs aim to convey the paradigm
gained by 35 years of investment experience at Sprott to investors who can
employ it profitably and enhance the reputation of this firm.
Sprott will aim to continue the critical contrarian
thinking that has led to the success of investors in my generation, and took
Sprott from being one man to a multi-billion-dollar organization. We want to
arm the second and third generation with the knowledge and the attitudes that
are part of the Sprott franchise. And it’s going to be a lot of fun.
One of the huge benefits I’ve gotten from my affiliation
with Sprott was unintended. I have received great personal joy from mentoring
younger talent. I didn’t realize the psychological and intellectual benefit
that I would get from that.
It is at least equal to the gratification that I’ve
gotten from analyzing stocks. And the benefit that I have enjoyed from that has
been tremendous in the last 35 years.
I am one of those guys who never really worked a
day in his life. I get up and I am eager to go to work. I now have the
opportunity to imbue other people with that advantage, while profiting
monetarily in my declining years as a large shareholder of Sprott. It is almost
fictionally good fortune for me.
Rick Rule, Chairman of Sprott US Holdings Inc.
Thanks for your comments.
Thank you for the opportunity.
Rick Rule has
devoted over 35 years to natural resource investing. His involvement in
the sector is as broad as it is long; his background includes mineral
exploration, oil & gas exploration and production, water, agriculture, and
hydro-electric and geothermal energy. Mr. Rule is a sought-after speaker at
industry conferences, and a frequent contributor to numerous media outlets
including CNBC, Fox Business News, and BNN. He founded Global Resource
Investments in 1993 and is now a Director of Sprott Inc., a Toronto-based
investment manager with over $7 billion in assets under management, and CEO and
President of Sprott US Holdings Inc., where he leads a team of skilled earth
science and finance professionals who enjoy a worldwide reputation for resource
investing.
2 http://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-golds-price-drop-just-the-beginning/
3 http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n9190us3m.htm
The video recording of our talk with Rick will be
published shortly.
You can also view Rick’s recent take on the market
with smallcappower.com here.
This information is for information purposes only
and is not intended to be an offer or solicitation for the sale of any
financial product or service or a recommendation or determination by Sprott
Global Resource Investments Ltd. that any investment strategy is suitable for a
specific investor. Investors should seek financial advice regarding the
suitability of any investment strategy based on the objectives of the investor,
financial situation, investment horizon, and their particular needs. This information
is not intended to provide financial, tax, legal, accounting or other
professional advice since such advice always requires consideration of
individual circumstances. The products discussed herein are not insured by the
FDIC or any other governmental agency, are subject to risks, including a
possible loss of the principal amount invested.
Generally, natural resources investments are more
volatile on a daily basis and have higher headline risk than other sectors as
they tend to be more sensitive to economic data, political and regulatory
events as well as underlying commodity prices. Natural resource investments are
influenced by the price of underlying commodities like oil, gas, metals, coal,
etc.; several of which trade on various exchanges and have price fluctuations
based on short-term dynamics partly driven by demand/supply and nowadays also
by investment flows. Natural resource investments tend to react more
sensitively to global events and economic data than other sectors, whether it
is a natural disaster like an earthquake, political upheaval in the Middle East
or release of employment data in the U.S. Low priced securities can be very
risky and may result in the loss of part or all of your investment.
Because of significant volatility, large dealer spreads and very limited
market liquidity, typically you will not be able to sell a low priced
security immediately back to the dealer at the same price it sold the stock to
you. In some cases, the stock may fall quickly in value. Investing in foreign
markets may entail greater risks than those normally associated with domestic
markets, such as political, currency, economic and market risks. You should
carefully consider whether trading in low priced and international securities
is suitable for you in light of your circumstances and financial resources.
Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. Sprott Global, entities
that it controls, family, friends, employees, associates, and others may hold
positions in the securities it recommends to clients, and may sell the same at
any time.
Sprott
Group offers a wide range of investment products and services to U.S.,
Canadian, and International investors: www.sprottgroup.com/?ref=smallcappower
Disclaimer: This
article was posted with the permission of a third-party contributor
and the opinions contained therein do not necessarily reflect
those of Smallcappower. Smallcappower does not endorse any investment advice
provided by these third-party contributors. Please consult
your investment advisor before making any investment decisions.
Ubika Corporation
and its divisions Smallcappower, Ubika Communication and Ubika Research are not
registered with any financial or securities regulatory authority in
Ontario or Canada, and do not provide nor claims to provide investment advice
or recommendations to any visitor of this site or readers of any content
on this site. – See more at: http://www.smallcappower.com/posts/small-cap-power-disclosure#.UoJQkZEq_vw
