Archive
Do Rents Really Actually Lead Home Prices?
The inflation thesis at this point has both a top-down and a bottom-up rationale (as all good theses do). The top-down rationale is that the extraordinary rise in the quantity of money over the last few years has yet to be fully reflected in the price level; ergo, inflation should continue for a while – even if money supply growth stops cold – because the price level has a lot of ‘catching up’ to do.
The bottom-up rationale depends a lot on what happens in the housing market. The first place that prices shot up was in the more flexible components of inflation, especially in goods. “Sticky” inflation followed, only turning north in 2021 and then accelerating in earnest especially as the eviction moratorium eventually ended and rents began to catch up. As the chart below (source: Atlanta Fed) illustrates, core “flexible” CPI (in white, right hand scale) is decelerating and is down to about 7% y/y…but core “sticky” CPI (red, left hand scale) is at 5.6% and shows no signs of even peaking.
An important part of the “sticky” basket is the weighting assigned to rents. Rents show up as both Rent of Primary Residence (you rent a place to live) and Owners’ Equivalent Rent of Residences (your opportunity cost is that you don’t have to pay for an apartment, so this is an imputed cost). Both rents move together, mostly because the Bureau of Labor Statistics reasons quite naturally that the best measure of the imputed rent a homeowner would pay is the market for rentals that he/she actually could pay. These two pieces of CPI are the biggest and the baddest, and they don’t even exercise. I always say that if you can forecast rents accurately, you will not be terribly wrong on overall inflation. Rents are the 800lb gorilla. Where they sit has a big influence on overall inflation.
Traditionally, observers of the inflation market have forecast rent based on a simple lag of home prices. There are reasons to suspect that’s not the whole story, but it has worked for a very long time. Here is a chart of the last 20 years or so, with the Case-Shiller index (lagged 18 months) in green and the Existing Home Sales Median Price y/y (lagged 15 months) in blue against Owners’ Equivalent Rent in red.
Even though inflation as a whole has been low and stable, home prices themselves have varied enough thanks to the housing implosion in the mid-2000s that you can see a reasonable outline of why inflation people tend to like this simple model. It’s at least suggestive.
Recently, that has been called into question by a researcher at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. Kevin Erdmann wrote a paper published this year entitled “Rising Home Prices are Mostly from Rising Rents.” When the paper came out I tweeted it with the note “I need to read the whole paper.” If Erdmann is right, then the entire market is doing it wrong and (a) home price inflation should not be slowing down right now, since rents are not, and (b) the way the market models rents is just plain useless. So, this was definitely worth looking at from my perspective!
Well, I’ve read the paper. I am sorry to report that in my view, the author makes very strong claims but supports his argument with very weak statistics. That being said, I still think this is a paper worth reading – some might come to a different conclusion than I have.
It isn’t like I think the author is completely out of his gourd. It is absolutely reasonable to expect home prices and rents to be related since they are both ways to acquire shelter services. It isn’t as if Erdmann is saying that they aren’t related, and some of his cross-sectional data and findings are interesting. The problem is that he starts with a mental model of how things work, and then proceeds to show information which, given his assumptions, seem to support what he is saying. The mental model isn’t absurd: a home can be thought of as a way to purchase a whole stream of shelter services in one lump. When home prices rise, it could mean that buyers are evaluating this stream of services as being worth more than they previously were because they are observing rising rents, or because they were priced out of the rental market and chose to buy an asset with a shelter services component instead.
But it could also be the case that home buyers are reflecting rising expectations of long-term rent inflation, in which case spot rents needn’t change at all. It might be the case that home buyers are making totally stochastic decisions, and it just happens that when lots of people buy homes it pushes up home prices which then displaces people into the rental market.
All of these stories would result in time series that are highly correlated. And Erdmann has a number of illustrations and data points showing that there is a correlation. For example, he pointed out that in 2021, “the metropolitan areas with the highest rents also had the highest prices.” However, Erdmann’s real claim isn’t that home prices and rents are closely related, but that rents lead home prices. The point about the connection of rents and prices in various metropolitan areas is not evidence supporting his claim that rents cause prices, but it doesn’t refute it either. The problem is, he takes such data as support of his claim, when it isn’t. This turns out to be his modus operandi – start with a mental model of how it works, show data that demonstrates the two things are connected, and then assert causality.
In the paper, there is not a single test of causality. With time series, we can test whether one series statistically leads another in various ways; for example, with the Granger Causality Test (which doesn’t actually test causality but merely the lead-lag relationship). If the point of the paper is that (contrary to the usual assumption) movements in rents cause movements in home prices – which is a big claim – then at the very least I’d have expected to see a Granger test.
There is some evidence that statistical inference is not the author’s strong suit. He shows several clouds of data points where any reasonable person can see there is no clear trend, and then proceeds to run a regression line through them. The fact that we can calculate a regression slope – we can always calculate a regression slope – does not mean that it is statistically significant. And even if it is statistically significant, it may not be economically significant. Unfortunately, there are no such tests of significance in the paper and I suspect for several of the charts it would be impossible to reject the null hypothesis that there is no relationship at all between the variables despite a provocatively-drawn regression line.
He also has a figure (Figure 9 in the paper) which shows changes in prices and rents for a number of metro areas over time. Clearly, there is a positive relationship – but no one disputes that. The question is, does the relationship get better when you lag one of the variables? No such analysis is done.
In general, all the author “proves” is that there is a relationship between rents and home prices, which I think we already knew. The rest of it is storytelling, trying to persuade us that the causality makes sense his way. I don’t mean to suggest that the paper is a complete bust! The author does have some good ideas that I will borrow. He makes the point that discounting home prices by general inflation doesn’t really make sense because we don’t care about the general price level when we buy a home; we care about the price level of shelter. This is a simple point, but fairly profound in a way. It risks being somewhat circular if we aren’t careful, but it’s a good point.
And the funny thing is, despite the fact that I think the evidence is much stronger that the evidence for causality runs the other way, I agree with some of his policy conclusions. His main conclusion is that “…if rising rents are the more important factor [rather than temporary demand factors or monetary stimulus], then policies aimed at stimulating more construction may be more apt and may help increase real incomes for Americans in neighborhoods where rents have been rising.” I completely agree that, given the severe housing shortage that we seem to have in this country, that making it easier for builders to create homes and apartments would be good industrial policy.
But you don’t need to believe that rents lead home prices to think that is a good idea!
Summary of My Post-CPI Tweets (July 2022)
Below is a summary of my post-CPI tweets. You can (and should!) follow me @inflation_guy, but to get these tweets in real time on CPI morning you need to subscribe to @InflGuyPlus by going to the shop at https://inflationguy.blog/shop/ , where you can also subscribe to the Enduring Investments Quarterly Inflation Outlook. Sign up for email updates to my occasional articles here. Investors, issuers and risk managers with interests in this area be sure to stop by Enduring Investments! Get the Inflation Guy app in your app store! Check out the Inflation Guy podcast!
The tweets below have some deletions and redactions from what actually appeared on the private feed. But this is most of it.
- It’s #CPI Day again. I know we all get excited about #inflation day. Or maybe it’s just me.
- This month is special because we’re taking the CPI ‘broadcast’ private. Non-subscribers will get many – but not all – of these tweets in a summarized form, a couple of hours from now. But you get the whole shebang.
- Here’s how this will go: I will give my usual walk-up. Then at 8:30ET, when the data drops, I’ll be pulling that in and will post a number of charts and numbers, in fairly rapid-fire succession.
- Then I will start putting ‘replies’ to the charts with some remarks where necessary. At the same time, I’ll be running a live commentary on Zoom. (That live feed will go live just before 8:30).
- Here is the zoom link, for subscribers only: <<REDACTED>> You’ll be muted and cameras will be blocked as well, assuming I remember to do that. 🙂 But you can put questions in the chat (or on Twitter) if you like.
- If you prefer the phone, you can get to the conference line at (518) 992-1112, access code <<REDACTED>>. I’ll be on both. I’ll look better on the phone.
- I’ll also be tweeting some of the charts that are slower to generate and giving you my impressions on the fly. I think the whole post-CPI bit will take about 30 minutes, and my Zoom only goes 40 so that’s a pretty solid estimate!
- After my comments on the number, I will post a partially-redacted summary at https://inflationguy.blog and later will podcast a summary at https://inflationguy.podbean.com . And all of that also will be linked on the Inflation Guy mobile app.
- But of course, you get it first, and you get some things others won’t. Starting with my thanks for subscribing!
- With that, let’s start the walk-up. Going into last month, we’d seen a dramatic collapse of breakevens: -210bps on the 1y, -70bps on the 5y, -50bps on the 10y. Some of this was the decline in energy, but not all. Implied core inflation also fell.
- This month has seen a bit of a rationalization, and stability returning. Short breakevens still contracted because of gasoline, but longer inflation swaps/breakevens actually rose a smidge.
- Since gasoline ‘caught up’ in a way, core inflation implied by swaps increased a bit. Right now, the curve implies 3.7% core CPI over the next year, 3.2% the year after that, then 2.95%, and so on. Actually, NOT pricing in that core will get back to the Fed’s target.
- As an aside, to me this still looks low. There should be asymmetry to outcomes (5% higher inflation is more likely than 5% lower inflation) that implies these should have some option value and trade above our raw expectations for inflation’s path. Still, it’s not horrible.
- Although I think the 3.7% for the next 1y DOES look quite low. We’re at 6%-ish right now on both core and median. It isn’t just one thing that needs to revert to some mythical mean. It’s the whole dang distribution. That seems challenging.
- Especially since rents, both primary and OER, continue to surge. I’ll be honest: when I first sat down to think about this month’s CPI, I thought there was a chance for a small deceleration in rents, which jumped from 0.6% to 0.7% m/m on OER and slightly more on Primary Rents.
- That was a big part of the upside surprise in core last month. But when I look at it…I’m not convinced that was necessarily an outlier. Yes, rents will eventually decelerate. But not yet I think. The chart here is census for asking rents and Reis for effective.
- The gap between them came about during the eviction moratorium. I thought it would close. But asking rents are moving higher, not converging back. (Some other private surveys suggest asking rents may sag, but it seems speculative at the moment).
- There’s another reason I’m concerned about rents, and I’ll talk about it on Zoom after the number when I’m working through the charts.
- For this number today, the consensus is for 0.5% on core and 0.2% on headline because of the decline in gasoline. The OTC market has core around 0.54% and economists are at 0.49%, basically; they both round to 0.5% but the market is more bullish.
- I’ve mentioned why I don’t think the downside risks from rents will necessarily materialize. But there are a couple of other downside risks.
- Airfares, which is essentially energy services because it tracks jet fuel (see chart), will very likely decline this month. Some of this is seasonal, though – I adjust for that in the chart – which means that raw airfares could fall and not bring down airfare CPI.
- Used cars seems overextended too and I’ve been expecting a correction there. The Black Book index Jan-June was -2% vs CPI for Used Cars +3%. FWIW, the Black Book index was down this month. So that’s another potential drag.
- But…all of that sort of seems to be ‘in the price’ as they say. The last 3 core CPIs were 0.57%, 0.63%, and 0.71%, and the consensus this month is around 0.5%. So some of that is in the pudding already. I don’t know that I’m short at 0.5%.
- Reaction function? Well, a strong core…I think even an 0.6% may qualify…is going to be rough on stocks and bonds. Another 0.7% and you’ll hear talk about an intermeeting move (I don’t think that’s likely).
- Softer core, 0.4% print, will be initially taken well by the market. But be careful about jumping in. If we get an 0.3% or lower and the market rallies, sell into it because most likely there is a one-off that is pushing it lower. Watch the real-time Median I produce, to tell.
- The market’s currently pricing in lots of good news, which is why I’d be leery about riding a pop higher. After all, the next 2 core readings to roll out of the y/y will be 0.18% & 0.26%…core will keep rising, so Fed heads are safe to react hawkishly to a modest core surprise.
- That’s all for the walkup. I have to go refresh my coffee and turn on the conference line and zoom. Good luck and thanks again for subscribing.
- 0.313% on core…definitely a surprise and we have to see why.
- m/m CPI: -0.0193% m/m Core CPI: 0.313%
- Last 12 core CPI figures
- M/M, Y/Y, and prior Y/Y for 8 major subgroups
- Here is my early and automated guess at Median CPI for this month: 0.53%
- Core Goods: 6.98% y/y Core Services: 5.54% y/y
- Primary Rents: 6.31% y/y OER: 5.83% y/y
- Further: Primary Rents 0.7% M/M, 6.31% Y/Y (5.78% last) OER 0.63% M/M, 5.83% Y/Y (5.48% last) Lodging Away From Home -2.7% M/M, 1.2% Y/Y (10.1% last)
- Primary rents were 0.78% m/m last month, so the 0.7% was a modest deceleration but not exciting. OER was 0.70% last month so also a deceleration.
- Some ‘COVID’ Categories:
- Airfares -7.83% M/M (-1.82% Last)
- Lodging Away from Home -2.74% M/M (-2.82% Last)
- Used Cars/Trucks -0.41% M/M (1.61% Last)
- New Cars/Trucks 0.62% M/M (0.65% Last)
- The big story for ‘why the tail’ in core comes mostly from here, and maybe a bit in apparel (down on the month). An 8% drop in airfares is a big deal. Lodging Away from Home. And Used Cars wasn’t really a surprise, as I mentioned in my walkup.
- Used cars could have been down more. I expected a decline, but there was room for more underperformance than that.
- Piece 1: Food & Energy: 18.5% y/y
- Piece 2: Core Commodities: 6.98% y/y
- Core commodities is where we find Used Cars and Apparel. New cars was still strong. We knew that as supply chain constraints cleared, this would moderate.
- Piece 3: Core Services less Rent of Shelter: 5.26% y/y
- Medical care was +0.44% m/m after 0.95% last month. Pharma +0.58% (0.38% last month). Doctors’ Services +0.27%, hospital services +0.49%.
- Piece 4: Rent of Shelter: 5.76% y/y
- Core ex-housing 6.04%, which is down from 7.6% in Feb, and dragged down by the same stuff the overall core was. But still pretty high.
- a little surprised stocks holding as much onto their gains…this was soft for some really obvious reasons. It’s good news for the Fed but not GREAT. I guess it does take 75bps off the table probably.
- It’s not time for a victory lap but I guess it does help to remove the sense of panic.
- We’re still going to get higher core over the next couple of comps are easy and since the central tendency of this distribution is still strong, there’s no reason to think we’re going to keep getting 0s on core.
- Checking my Median CPI. The median category as I said was Midwest OER, and since I manually seasonally adjust the OERs I could be a bit off. But looks like it will still be somewhere between 0.52 and 0.57 m/m…so again, no crash in the broad distribution.
- Car and truck rental was also really weak, although a very small weight. Public Transportation, Lodging AFH, Misc Personal Goods, and on the Apparel side Infants/Toddlers and Men’s/Boys were all negative m/m.
- Communication was also -0.33% m/m. Internet Services and electronic information providers was -0.81% m/m. That’s 1% of CPI, so that’s about 1bp of the core miss right there.
- Also weak were various furnishings categories. Major appliances were -1.8% NSA m/m. Indoor plants and flowers…which has about the same weight as major appliances – check your understanding by answering why…were -1.2% NSA m/m.
- “Other Furniture” was -4.3%! Other linens -1.8%. These are all NSA m/m figures. And this is where the supply chain squeeze lessening is going to show.
- Here is major appliances PRICE LEVEL. Yes, they’re down, but they’re not going all the way back. The price level is permanently higher. What remains to be seen is how much of this is permanent and how much is ‘transitory’ due to supply constraints.
- Same message from apparel – seasonally we tend to get a decline in July but this was larger than the normal seasonal which is why apparel was down m/m. And we import almost all apparel.
- The message from the people who say inflation will go back down with recession is that unintended inventory accumulation is going to cause retailers to cut prices. Apparel is where you expect to see that first, because the seasons change quickly.
- Here is the distribution of the CPI weights. There is more weight in the left tail, and that’s why core declined. But it’s REALLY in many cases that the weight in the left tail moved further left.
- And here’s why I make that statement: the weight of categories inflating above 5% y/y went down only a tiny bit. So this is a left-tail event…which again is what median inflation is telling us.
- The ongoing question is, “have inflation pressures peaked?” and “are we now in a disinflationary mode?” On the former, it’s too early to say but median at 0.53% rather than 0.7% is at least hopeful.
- On the latter question, also too early BUT one small positive sign is that core inflation moved below median. It’s just one month, but remember: inflationary environments tend to have long upper tails (core>median), and v.v.. So watch this.
- Median is going to get to about 6.27% y/y this month. And when the Quarterly Inflation Outlook comes out in a couple of days, you’ll see (if you are a client, or subscribe to it) that the midpoint of our 2022 median CPI forecasts have been moved WAY up to 6.3%. And 5.2% for 2023.
- I think this is the last chart. The Enduring Investments Inflation Diffusion Index remains very high, no real sign of retracement yet.
- So wrapping up. Stocks at this hour remain ebullient, while bonds have retraced some of the initial spike. It makes sense to reduce the probability of 75bps at the next FOMC meeting, even though this was mostly a left-tail event. >>
- To be sure, I think the Fed still needs to reduce its balance sheet an awful lot, but if it just levels off then the price level will eventually converge to the rise in money growth. There’s a lot more to go there, though, which is why we’re not going back to 2% core soon.
- So, I understand why stocks are excited. But I would be loathe to jump aboard unless the S&P can get above 4200 decisively and/or stay there for a few days. There’s a lot of optimism priced in. And CPI was nice…but the IMPORTANT parts aren’t yet “good news.”
- In any event, thanks very much for subscribing and if you have any feedback, please write me at <<REDACTED>> and let me know! Have a good day.
Stocks at this hour continue to celebrate, and not entirely without reason. The Fed is much less likely to tighten by 75bps this month than they were before the number. However, we have some doves scheduled to speak today (Evans and Kashkari) so be attentive and if they’re still talking about 75bps, and keeping in mind there’s one more CPI print before the next FOMC meeting – it’s a sign that they really are focused on the bigger picture.
And the bigger picture is this: the economy is headed into a recession, but the signs on that will be unclear and/or people will be able to explain the signs away for a while. Meanwhile, inflation remains high and sticky, despite today’s number. I’m pleased that median CPI, which exploded to 0.7% m/m in June, was back down to “only” 0.53% or so in July. But that’s still a 6.4% rate, and looking over the last several months you certainly can’t say there are any signs that inflation pressure is lessening or narrowing. At best, leveling off…and it’s even too early to be sure about that, given the continued acceleration in rents.
A year ago, I would have said that the Fed will take advantage of the weaker inflation data to back off of tightening some. But the Fed has been far more hawkish than I expected, and if they really do want to “get ahead” of inflation then they need to do it sooner rather than later since once core inflation starts to drop because of base effects, and the employment situation starts to weaken, there will be much more resistance to 75bp hikes. If Unemployment is at 5% and rising, they will not be hiking 75bps per meeting, no matter where inflation is.
So I’d repeat my admonition above – be careful jumping on board this equity rally. If stocks can sustain above 4200, then I have to reluctantly go along with the momentum. But I’d be careful about being too excited about inflation just because airfares dropped 8% this month.
Restructuring the Inflation Guy Content Offering
For many years, I’ve been producing a blog and pushing free content. Before that, I wrote Sales and Trading commentary for Natixis, and before that Barclays, and before that Deutsche Bank, and before that, Bankers Trust. I never charged for any of that and neither did the banks, at least directly.
Writing, at least with respect to the blog itself, was part of my process of thinking through the economic and investing environment. I had to do that anyway, so distributing those thoughts was easy and the feedback/pushback I got was important and useful as well. It still is.
But over the years, my content offering (which is congruent to the set of Enduring Investments’ content offering) has widened to different channels and even different media. There is now an Inflation Guy podcast, an Inflation Guy mobile app, and even an Inflation Guy album of ‘80s hits. (Okay, not that one.) I’ve written two books and am contemplating a third. And then there’s Twitter. And as the number of content outlets and offerings metastasized, it has also become clear that I have gone way beyond just the idle penning of my musings and that this takes a lot of time. Some other things I would like to do would take even more time. So there needs to be a business purpose!
The hope has always been that some people who find these thoughts useful would become investing or consulting clients of Enduring Investments. Some have! And more will, in the future. But others may want some content and be willing to pay for the value, but not be willing or able to become clients. Consequently, I’ve been discussing with a bunch of my advisors how to capture the value that people are willing to pay, but not in the single avenue we presently offer (that is, becoming a client).
So I took a survey, and many of you participated. I want to tell you that I really appreciate the answers you gave and the time you took to answer the survey. It was well worth the two Visa gift cards (which, incidentally, haven’t yet been claimed – check your spam folders, folks, as I have written to two of you who are winners!). There were some very thoughtful comments and some good ideas. There was also some humor: one person put my address in for the raffle (I didn’t win). And then there was a bot! All of a sudden, one day I received a deluge of hundreds of responses. Some of these responses indicated that Inflation Guy content was worth $50,000 per month. I am flattered, robot, but money means different things to humans I guess. Fortunately, it was easy enough to cleanse the data of bot responses, which were fairly obvious…and, in retrospect, there is probably a thriving business out there of people pouring bot responses into raffles to tilt the odds. Live and learn.
On the basis of the responses, this is what we have decided to do with “Inflation Guy/Enduring Investments” content going forward.
First of all, free stuff:
- The E-piphany Blog, which was at https://mikeashton.wordpress.com and now can be reached at https://inflationguy.blog . It has always been free, and will remain free. You can subscribe to email alerts of the content. The monthly summary of my CPI-day tweets will continue to appear here, a couple of hours after the release.
- Cents and Sensibility: the Inflation Guy podcast. Free wherever good podcasts are found. There may someday be advertisements but the podcast itself will remain free.
- My weekly Investing.com column, which is unique to http://www.investing.com . They have subsidized it so that you don’t have to.
- The Inflation Guy mobile app. While there may be “premium content” on the app, the app itself will remain free as well as will a goodly amount of its content.
- @inflation_guy on Twitter will remain a free follow. My blog columns and podcasts and other free content will funnel through that channel. The monthly CPI tweets, though, will not (see below).
And now, the new offerings. These, and any others we add in the future, are available on the blog site at https://inflationguy.blog/shop/ . Please note that Enduring Investments clients pay nothing for these offerings.
- Inflation Guy Plus on Twitter – Private Twitter account subscription. I am moving the real-time analysis of the CPI report to a private, subscription-only Twitter account. I will release my charts as soon as possible after the number, and will also have a private live audio broadcast as I comb through the charts and data. (I haven’t figured out whether this will be on Discord, Google meet, Zoom/Skype, but will probably start as a simple conference number). @InflGuyPlus will also have other daily/weekly charts and commentary not available on @Inflation_Guy. The cost of a monthly subscription will be $99/month with a discount for an annual subscription. This is in line with other private Twitter offerings. For example, Damped Spring offers a private Twitter feed for $80/mo with similar content though of course less concentrated on inflation. And the results of the survey we took suggested this price is not inappropriate for the people who require the real-time analysis to make trading decisions.
I do know that some people will be disappointed this isn’t cheaper. It’s an unfortunate characteristic of walls: unless there are people on both sides, you don’t need a wall. (Again, Enduring Investments clients are automatically catapulted over the wall. Although that is an unfortunate metaphor come to think of it.)
- Quarterly Inflation Outlook – I have been writing the QIO for more than a decade now. It comes out on the ‘refunding’ cycle: February, May, August, and November, within a couple of days after the CPI reports in those months. I decided to make single-issue subscriptions available, at least for now, hoping that after trying an issue people will sign up for the discounted monthly subscription. The current issue is $80 (right now, you can buy the August issue, which will be delivered via email when it is published); the preceding issue is $70 (in this case, that is the May issue) for an immediate download; earlier issues may be made available once I have time to sort through them and find ones with staying power. To test whether there’s any demand, I listed the Feb 2022 issue for $50. I also listed the 2020Q4 QIO, in which I look prospectively at the incoming Biden/Harris Administration, for $40. A recurring subscription gets a discount to $75/issue, which seemed to be acceptable to most of the respondents to the survey.
We are going to start with those two paid offerings, and see how it goes. There seemed to be some interest in a $2.99 monthly subscription which would update your personally-weighted inflation index, and in a $20 monthly subscription to a collection of model portfolios, but we will see how the response is to these products before adding other options.
One other quick comment about the prices: being a markets person, I will be attentive to dynamics that suggest I should raise or lower the price. But for you, if the price is acceptable there is no reason to delay subscribing. That’s because if I raise the price, all existing subscribers will be grandfathered at the original price; if I lower the price, I will lower it for all existing subscribers as well. So there is no price risk to you in deciding to buy now.
Now, let me mention one final offering. This has a very narrow audience but which audience seemed, in the survey, to be enthusiastic about deeper access to Inflation Guy.
“You take the blue pill—the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill—you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes. Remember: all I’m offering is the truth. Nothing more.”
Morpheus, The Matrix
Let’s call this “Inflation Guy Prime.” It is really for the institutional investors and traders who want regular forecast updates and detail, some relative-value metrics and possibly trading signals, subcomponent forecasts/curves, and two-way communication with the Inflation Guy. Because of the two-way communication bit, this offering is capacity-constrained and so will be capped at a yet-to-be determined number of subscribers; the price will increase as we get more subscribers who want to be “Prime.” The current price is shown on the shop.
And so now…we see what happens. Thanks again to everyone who participated in the survey and offered independent, helpful suggestions. The offering will change and hopefully improve over time. We will add other offerings for readers/investors who have different needs. And we will figure out the right price points, eventually…but we had to start somewhere. Please let me know of any questions and/or suggestions you may have!