- Democratic U.S. lawmakers said on Thursday they reintroduced credit card legislation aimed at curbing "unfair and deceptive" practices against consumers hit by unexpected rate increases and other fees.
- The action comes almost one month after the Federal Reserve approved final rules to prohibit a number of highly criticized practices starting next year but lawmakers said the Fed rules failed to go far enough sooner to rein in the industry.
- The Fed's rules take effect on July 1, 2010. They prohibit raising the annual percentage rate (APR) on existing balances except under certain circumstances, and give consumers 45 days notice before a rate increase and 21 days to pay. Among other changes, Fed rules will ban a practice known as universal default, in which card terms are changed based on how the holder performs on other bills, such as utilities or gym memberships. The Fed also approved a disclosure plan that was drafted after extensive focus group tests that even covered the size of type on credit card statements.
- Maloney, who chairs the House Financial Services Subcommittee on financial institutions and consumer credit, said she was unhappy with the July 2010 implementation date and wanted Congress to act sooner. She is seeking to have the rules go into effect 90 days after enacted instead of a full year as the bill previously stated.
...or the stocks could simply be a reflection on the weakening consumer in developed countries worldwide. Either way, the stocks are telling us bad things are happening.

Mastercard (MA), a former long holding for us, was one of the names we identified as a potential short at the beginning of 2009 [Jan 2: Potential Short Setups]This is yet another nail in the coffin of the U.S. consumer, and consumer disretionary stocks; not just in the short run but in the long(er) run as we embark on a structural shift in spending/habits and credit availability.
You can also see a complete lack of bounce in the 3 major "credit card" brands (who not only carry the legistlative risk but also the consumer default risk) This is an area we've been highlighting since '07 as a potential mine field. I'd love to get my hands on these on the short side on any bounce... but they are dead in the water. Please note - the last name is now under the protective shield of the government ("bank holding company")... and still sucking wind. Just as telling as stocks that are holding steady or up during corrections, are stocks that cannot make any headway upward during good periods. These are "Danger Will Robinson" stocks.


No positions







5 comments:
Do you think it is what is dragging EZPW down today?
No, it should push people into pawn shops
but EZPW not has a horrific chart. I might have to short it to hedge myself. haha.
The way pawn shops win is when credit dries up, people will be driven to them. BUT if things get REALLY dire even the pawn shops lose because they won't have anyone to sell pawned stuff off to... but that would require a really really really bad world.
Yes, I agree with all that, but those are facts about what SHOULD (and likely will) happen.
I should have been clearer in my comment though - do you think that SENTIMENT/THESIS is driving EZPW down today because traders view government moves to regulate (i.e., limit) credit card companies as a negative for pawn shop and payday loan operators? Realizing, of course, that the new administrations plans intentions in this area were already signaled a week or two ago.
In any event, the chart isn't good, and I agree with your most recent post explaining why you are cutting to 0.1%
I don't really ask why :) I just respect the herd. The herd is not jumping into EZPW - so I could be intellectually right all day. I am more concerned with making money than being intellectually correct.
CSH is also week and FCFS is still "ok" but prone to break down. so the group is not faring so great.
good point - trying to force the market to obey your logic can be a losing game - that has killed bill miller recently - "no brain, no pain" can yield better results sometimes. :-)
thanks again for the great commentary here.
Post a Comment