Re: Tema: PPCC - Pisitófilos Creditófagos - Primavera 2023

[Benzino Napaloni]

El CD no deja de ser un formato digital. Aunque fuese el primero con suficiente volumen como para que una obra musical entera entrase en un CD (o unos pocos), no era el primer almacenamiento digital.

En el momento en el que se mejora el almacenamiento, y tienes pendrives y tarjetas de memoria con gigas de capacidad, e internet de banda ancha... todos tendemos a aligerar peso.

Con los videojuegos hace mucho que pasa algo parecido con los vinilos. Sobre todo en los de PC, ya nadie compra en formato físico si no es por los coleccionables o el merchandising. Valor añadido, vamos. Porque también pasa que como los estudios cada vez sacan los desarrollos de forma más atropellada, y luego hacen falta mil parches, el riesgo de que la copia en físico esté inservible es altísima.


Lo irónico de toda esta historia es que fueron las grandes discográficas las que precipitaron los cambios. Al lanzar el CD y digitalizar la música, con internet rondando ya por ahí, hicieron inevitable el paso al streaming. En un momento en el que no estaban preparadas para eso. No les quedó más narices porque era ya la única forma de poner coto a la piratería.

[...] Si compras 3 vinilos al año, has pagado la cuota anual de un streaming de audio. Pero eso es ya pensar demasiado para los que buscan respuestas emocionales.

El streaming sería uso (nuda propiedad, usufructo...) y el vinilo, o CD, la propiedad.




y ya sabemos que estamos resucitando al nuevo modelo... (Orientado a la propiedad, a lo físico... a la libertad.)   

Esto también es muy cierto. Si el artista de turno borra sus canciones de Spotify, au revoir. Lo mismo si un estudio de videojuegos cierra o le da por borrar sus juegos. Los amantes del Pet Society en Facebook lo descubrieron en su momento.

[wanderer]

Un pequeño off-topic...

... cosas veredes amigo Sancho.

Saludos.

Yo creo que lo que ocurre más bien es que ya casi no se vende música en formato físico (casi toda la música que escuchamos viene de radios en internet, Spotify o YouTube). Por ejemplo, yo tengo una colección de CD's hecha a lo largo de los años que se acerca al millar de títulos, pero a menudo escucho música clásica en YouTube, dónde puedo elegir entre versiones modernas, versiones de referencia, etc, y mediante el expeditivo método de usar un bloqueador de anuncios, accedo a todo tipo de contenidos con una más que aceptable calidad sonora y por 0€ (lo digo por si alguien ha picado con subscribirse a YouTube Premium). Ahora tanto vinilos como CD's son para nostálgicos, y los vinilos para nostálgicos retro, que mola más.

Aún así, yo prefiero de largo los CD's (que todavía compro de vez en cuando) sobre el vinilo, pero para gustos, los colores.

[Raf909]

Ojo con esto, que en vinilo no se vende la misma música que se puede encontrar en CD o en Spotify.

En géneros como la electrónica, hace un par de décadas, se publicaban en vinilo referencias de 2 o 3 canciones que básicamente eran las que usaban los Dj's. En CD se sacaban álbum del artista en cuestión, o recopilaciones.

Lo que puede ser actualmente es una mezcla de factores:

- Discos en vinilo que sólo encuentras en Vinilo o en digital pero en tiendas online especializadas (como Beatport)
- Discos en vinilo para el romántico, que puestos a ser romántico, prefiere el vinilo al CD.
- Discos en vinilo ara el nerd, que ya no le parece cool tener un IPOD enchufado al sistema de sonido en el comedor, y prefiere tener platos y vinilos para instagram.

[puede ser]

La gente que se dedica a la música (djs...) lo que hace es comprar directamente el archivo en alta calidad (luego en una memoria puedes transportar miles de discos...)

https://es.digitaltrends.com/entretenimiento/mejores-webs-de-audio-de-alta-resolucion/

[puede ser]

https://www.expansion.com/fiscal/2023/05/03/6451595c468aeb4c048b45c8.html

Saludos.

Leed atentamente la noticia: es el inicio de lo que se lleva pidiendo en este foro durante años

[puede ser]

https://www.expansion.com/economia/financial-times/2023/05/02/64511856468aebb67e8b4629.html

Saludos.

Y en geopolítica esto: el nuevo modelo que aquí se ha vaticinado parece que comienza a volar.

Coincido con el articulista, como ya expresé en el foro de Ucrania, si es imposible que Rusia se rinda completamente solo queda la negociación. Y los términos de la paz siempre deben ser aceptados por las principales potencias.

[Benzino Napaloni]

https://www.expansion.com/fiscal/2023/05/03/6451595c468aeb4c048b45c8.html

Saludos.

Leed atentamente la noticia: es el inicio de lo que se lleva pidiendo en este foro durante años

Cuando el "artefacto" se convierte en el obstáculo a la economía real en que se ha convertido, normal que se acabe haciendo esto. Ya se han dado casos en los que un gran propietario tenía edificios enteros muertos de risa, hasta que la AAPP de turno le dio a elegir entre ponerlo en uso o exponerse a multas e incluso expropiaciones forzosas.

Allá donde el espacio, no solo la vivienda, es un bien escaso, el colectivo no se puede permitir el lujo de que un especulador esté cerrándolo a cal y canto. Al norte de los Pirineos esto lo tienen claro, y se reprime a base de bien la ociosidad de los inmuebles donde son un bien escaso.


Pero exigirlo es precisamente la muerte de la especulación. Normal que estén echando fuego los que se comerían la patata caliente.

[el malo]

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2023/05/03/de-dollarization-not-a-matter-of-if-but-when/

The United States may have a powerful military, but its true strength lies in the value and status of its currency.

With the U.S. dollar seen and accepted as the world reserve currency, America has the privilege to control the global financial system, run federal deficits without having to worry about consequences, and literally print trillions of dollars out of thin air.

This unique advantage also allows the U.S. to keep interest on its accumulated debt low and provide its citizens a standard of living that would not otherwise be possible. But how long will it last?

Since the end of World War II, the U.S. has held what is often referred to as an “exorbitant privilege” over the global economy. From the destruction of the war came America’s rise and, with it, the acquisition of most of the world’s gold reserves and half the world’s GDP. Its wealth gave the U.S. the power to dictate the terms of the Bretton Woods Agreement between 44 countries.

This agreement stipulated that the dollar would be pegged to gold, while all other countries’ currencies would be pegged to the dollar. The essence of it was that the dollar was as good as gold, backed by its reserves. Countries could rest assured that they could at any time exchange their dollars for physical gold.

For a few decades, the agreement worked well. But the U.S. began running large deficits during Lyndon Johnson’s “Guns or Butter” policy of the late 1960s, which led certain European countries, particularly France, to begin to exchange their dollars for gold. In 1971, concerned that its gold reserves were being depleted, the Nixon administration made a unilateral decision to temporarily close its gold window, turning the dollar into a fiat currency.

This marked the end of Bretton Woods and ushered in an era of floating exchange rates that still exists today.

The U.S. avoided the economic hardship of essentially devaluing its currency by implementing the ingenious plan of creating the petrodollar. This simple but far-reaching idea had significant financial and geopolitical consequences. In essence, the U.S. and Saudi Arabia entered into an agreement whereby the Saudis agreed to exclusively sell their oil in dollars and invest those dollars in U.S. treasury bills. In return, America provided the Saudis a security guarantee.

Oil is the most widely traded commodity in the world, and by pricing it in dollars, there was an ensured global demand for American currency.

Needless to say, the Europeans were not pleased with America’s broken promise. To fight back, some European nations began discussing the possibility of returning to a gold standard which excluded the U.S. dollar.

The U.S. administration became aware of the European plan and, according to the minutes of the 1974 meeting between Henry Kissinger and Assistant Secretary Thomas Enders, it was made clear that this would not be allowed to proceed. The highlights of that meeting were unambiguous to say the least. Collectively, European countries had more gold than the U.S. If they joined forces, they could set the price of gold at a higher level, thus creating additional reserves and credit. In Kissinger’s words, they would be able to create a “money printing machine.”

The minutes also clearly stated that such a move would be detrimental to America’s interests and that, if Europe tried it, America would “squash” them. Ultimately, for the plan to succeed Germany would have had to cooperate. But with the Soviet Union looming on its doorstep, it was in no position to cross the U.S.

America’s strong dollar policy was successful for the ensuing decades. But by the late 1990s, two important seeds began to grow: China’s economy and America’s profligacy. By the early 2000s, America had transformed from once being the world’s largest creditor to becoming its largest debtor nation and the Federal Reserve began a reckless monetary policy which has lasted for the last two decades.

Following the 2008 financial crisis, China complained about how the U.S. was devaluing the dollar through its large accumulation of debt and excessive printing of money and began to voice its desire to introduce a new global financial system. With the notable exception of countries subject to U.S. sanctions (e.g., Russia, Venezuela, Iran, and North Korea), the idea of a new monetary system was met with indifference. The concept of anything superseding the dollar was considered unthinkable by most of the developed world as verging on heresy by America.

That is, until recently.

When Russia invaded Ukraine, everything changed. The U.S. and NATO countries (the West) not only imposed sanctions on Russia, but they also froze its U.S. dollar reserves and blocked it from the SWIFT dollar transfer system.

Seeing an opportunity, China took notice and encouraged much of the world to follow suit. The race began to find alternatives. While the West was right to confront Russia for its unprovoked aggression, they underestimated the global response to these sanctions.

The BRICS countries and much of the global south have been reluctant to sever ties with Russia for a variety of reasons — from needing their oil, food, fertilizer, and military equipment, to taking advantage of the Wagner Group to counter domestic anti-insurgency efforts.

Additionally, many in the global south have harbored long-held resentments towards the West’s rhetorical “rules-based world order,” which they see as hypocritical and self-serving. The freezing of Russia’s dollar reserves and exclusion from the SWIFT system also put countries on notice that they might be next.

Financial systems are built on trust and, if they are weaponized, they lose the trust necessary to retain their dominance. 

As such, in just over a 12-month period, countries around the world mustered the courage to begin openly discussing the creation of alternative methods to conduct trade and settlement, as well as reducing their dollar reserves. The trade and settlement role of the dollar is where most of exiting will occur and where the demand for the dollar will fall away more precipitously.

Furthermore, BRICS countries have attracted numerous new member applications over the past year, with Egypt, Turkey, Algeria, and most recently Saudi Arabia showing interest and making declarations about creating a BRICS currency to compete with the dollar.

Many of these countries have been aggressively adding to their gold reserves over the past 13 years, and the size of their purchases has been accelerating, suggesting that perhaps any new currency might be backed by gold. Brazil (which has become increasingly vocal about its displeasure with the U.S. dollar system) and Argentina have started promoting the idea of creating a South American trading block and currency, the sur, similar to the European Union and euro.

The laundry list of dollar alternatives is long and growing daily. Examples include China testing cross-border digital currency settlements with Thailand and the UAE, insisting that sanctioned countries such as Russia, Iran and Venezuela accept yuan as payment for oil. Saudi Arabia is considering doing the same (there are rumors that Saudi is already selling oil for yuan and converting those yuan for gold on the Shanghai exchange). India is also buying some of its Russian oil in UAE dirhams. The simplest method, which is becoming increasingly popular, is bi-lateral agreements using local currencies.

The critical unanswered question is how the U.S. will respond to moves to de-dollarize. Any sudden decrease in U.S. dollar demand could have disastrous consequences for Americans. It could potentially trigger a U.S. dollar crisis leading to very high inflation, or even hyperinflation, and initiate a debt and money printing cycle that could tear apart the social fabric of society.

In short, any U.S. administration would ultimately consider any such de-dollarization moves to be matters of national security.

Much of the global community is cheering, however. A lot of sovereign debt held by the global south is denominated in greenbacks, and an overpriced dollar makes debt service nearly impossible today. Additionally, because most commodities are priced in dollars, many less developed countries are importing inflation that would otherwise accrue to the U.S.

That being said, BRICS nations should consider what America’s reaction to sudden shifts away from the dollar might be. History has demonstrated that it is exceptionally rare for a transfer of global economic power to take place without major warfare.

Despite America’s likely opposition, de-dollarization will persist, as most of the non-Western world wants a trading system that does not make them vulnerable to dollar weaponization or hegemony. It’s no longer a question of if, but when.

To break away from this hazardous trajectory, credible and inclusive dialogue regarding a new global agreement should commence now, in which major economies consent to a new monetary system (perhaps backed by gold and/or commodities) by consensus, including the U.S. This would inevitably involve substantial discomfort for the U.S., possibly to such an extent that it is politically unpalatable.

The best we can hope for is a process that facilitates the gradual decrease in dollar demand over a lengthy period of time, allowing the U.S. and other countries to adjust accordingly. A multipolar monetary system might provide a more equitable playing field to poorer countries and just maybe give the U.S. and the world longer-term economic and political stability. The likely outcome of this would still be quite chaotic and involve a drop in the standard of living for Americans. Nevertheless, this path appears inevitable, and such an option is preferable to the inevitable turmoil of the more extreme scenarios we have seen throughout history.

Perfectamente explicado. Lo de Kissinger diciéndole a Europa que "vais a jugar con nuestras reglas u os barremos del mapa" es para enmacar.

Putin se ha pasado de frenada invadiendo Ucrania, pero que los EEUU (que en papel no son parte del conflicto) hayan expulsado a Rusia del SWIFT para mí ha sido en error estratégico de libro. Si buscaban intimidar al resto de países, han conseguido justo lo contrario. Estas sanciones funcionan con países pequeños (e "invadibles"), no con la mayor reserva de recursos naturales de Eurasia.

Ahora toca ver qué le sustituye. Si una cesta de divisas o una nueva moneda fuerte basada en el patrón oro (no tendría sentido reemplazar el USD por otra moneda fuerte sin nigún respaldo porque tarde o temprano acabaríamos en la misma situación).
Hasta se me pasa por la cabeza la creación de una moneda única mundial reservada para intercambios internacionales controlada por un comité de países (algo así como el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU, pero con fines económicos), con tasas de cambio acordadas en las principales monedas.

[wanderer]

Lo del "privilegio exorbitante" del dólar US, ciertamente se acabará, but not any time soon...

Mis dos centauros...

[el malo]

https://www.cityam.com/london-house-prices-first-time-buyers-need-household-income-of-nearly-100k-to-buy/

London house prices: First-time buyers need household income of nearly £100k to buy

Londoners’ desire to get on the property ladder has helped fuel the housing market in the capital, despite households now needing an extra £12k in income to be able to afford their own place.

Figures released by Zoopla, show that in April house price growth in London rose by 0.5 per cent, as demand and market activity in the capital continued to outperform other Southern regions in the UK.

However, the average household income in London required to buy a two-bed home is now £97k up from £91k in 2020, and a three-bed home is £115k up from £103k almost three years ago.

“Demand and market activity in the London sales market is doing better than in other regions across Southern England. This is because house prices have lagged behind the rest of the market since 2016,” Richard Donnell, executive director at Zoopla said. (...)

Es interesante porque lo que veo a pie de calle (a pie de Zoopla más bien) es un mercado a dos velocidades totalmente diferenciado.

Hacía mucho que yo no veía pisos a la venta por menos de £400,000 en mi zona, y ahora ya hay unos cuantos y bajando. He visto hasta una "mansionette" anunciada con 5 habitaciones por menos de medio millón (completamente inpensable hace 6 meses). Luego te metes en el anuncio y ves que las 5 habitaciones son en realidad 3 (anuncian el salón como "bedroom") y un cuarto-vestidor sin ventana, que se anuncia como "habitación".

Si hace falta ese sueldo no es por los precios, es por la dificultad para que te den la hipoteca (y lo impagable de la cuota). Hace 5 años juntabas £50,000 y te metías de cabeza y con una sonrisa en un piso de una habitación de £500,000. Esa era la entrada a la "property ladder". Hoy mismo un piso de esas características está bordeando los £400,000 y no se venden. Incluso me he encontrado algún anuncio en los que se le pide a potenciales compradores que antes de visitar el piso hablen con su banco! (cómo deben estar los vendedores de hartos para poner algo así).

Lo de las dos velocidades es porque sigue habiendo pisos totalmente invendibles de 3-4 habitaciones a la venta por cifras que rondan el millón de libras, y los nuevos pisos que se ponen a la venta por mucho menos (precios todavía muy altos, pero menos irrealistas).

En zona 2 sólo hay obra nueva a precios estratosféricos (con precios de entrada de£800,000 para 2 habitaciones) o pisos en edificios de más de 50 años (o más de 100) con un "service charge" anual de miles de libras (aaay esas derramas constantes).

Un pepito consigue ahorrar £100,000 para meterse en un piso de £400,000, con lo que le queda una hipoteca de £370,000 (descontando gastos) a 20 años. Eso es una hipoteca al mes de £2,200.
A esos gastos fijos súmale council tax (unos £100 tirando por lo bajo), service charge (otros £150 siendo generoso) y las facturas básicas de luz, agua y seguro del hogar. Eso son £2,700 al mes durante los próximos 20 años.
Para manter un ratio de solvencia medio decente tendrían que entrar en casa como mínimo £7,000 al mes (£140,000 brutos si es un sólo sueldo). Y eso sin contar que a ese piso le harán falta por lo menos otros £20,000 de reforma para que no sea un estercolero viejo y gastado.

¿Cuánta gente pensamos que hay caminando por Londres ganando £140,000 anuales y buscando desprenderse de sus ahorros para poder meterse en un piso de una habitación?

Ya se que hay gente con herencias y otras fuentes de ingresos dispuestos a pulírselo en vivienda.. pero ¿tantos como para absorber lo que hay en el marcado?
La prueba sigue en Zoopla, los pisos por debajo de £400,000 siguen a la venta.

[senslev]

Breaking: Jerome Powell clarifies comments made during #FOMC today.

https://twitter.com/traderpodcaste/status/1653946632591794176?s=20

[el malo]

https://www.pressreader.com/spain/el-economista/20230504/page/18/textview

La Fed cierra el ciclo de alzas de tipos con una última subida de 25 puntos básicos

Saludos.

Cierra el ciclo de alzas porque lo dice el consenso de analistas y expertos consultados 

edito:

A todo esto, el BCE sube los tipos otro cuartito de punto. Imagino que veremos el euribor por encima del 4% en los próximos días.

[sudden and sharp]

Suave, suavesssito...







Hay que desssirlo mas....
[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STaVuIMXyOs&list=RDSTaVuIMXyOs&start_radio=1 ]

[Derby]

https://twitter.com/financialjuice/status/1654124722123309058

@financialjuice NYSE HALT WESTERN ALLIANCE BANK WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

https://www.ft.com/content/bf2bd5af-1e55-4be3-b29d-f5cae9533b29

Western Alliance becomes latest US bank to explore potential sale

Arizona institution hires advisers as shares of regional lenders slide

Western Alliance is exploring strategic options including a potential sale of all or part of its business, according to two people briefed on the matter, as it becomes the latest US regional bank to seek a lifeline amid the turmoil sweeping through the industry.

The Arizona-based bank, which had $71bn of assets at the end of March, has hired advisers to explore its options, the people said, adding that the bank’s deliberations were at an early stage and might not come to anything.(...)

[Derby]

https://www.ft.com/content/bd3c28cc-3407-45a9-9c72-9c89c9aa9740

ECB raises rates as Lagarde warns of ‘more ground to cover’

Central bank president hints at further increases to bring inflation down after 0.25 point hike

The European Central Bank raised interest rates by a quarter of a percentage point on Thursday, as its head warned that the fight against inflation was not yet won.

Christine Lagarde, ECB president, signalled that the decision to increase the benchmark deposit rate to 3.25 per cent would not be the last such move this year.

“We have more ground to cover and we are not pausing, that is extremely clear,” she said, while adding that borrowing costs were now in “restrictive territory”.

Thursday’s increase, the seventh consecutive rise since mid-2022, was smaller than previous increases, a sign that eurozone borrowing costs are approaching their peak. But Lagarde noted that some of the ECB’s rate-setters had backed a bigger rise of half a percentage point.

Eurozone inflation remains well above the ECB’s 2 per cent target after rising for the first time in six months to 7 per cent in April, up from 6.9 per cent in March.

Investors are pricing in a couple more quarter-point moves by the ECB to lift its deposit rate to 3.75 per cent — matching its highest-ever level in 2001.

This compares with current benchmark rates of above 5 per cent in the US, which also increased rates by 0.25 per cent this week, and 4.25 per cent in the UK.

Central banks on both sides of the Atlantic have dramatically raised rates since last year in response to a surge in inflation. But, with price pressures down from their peak and a credit crunch looming, many economists think the rate-tightening cycle is nearing its end.

In another move intended to increase borrowing costs, the ECB said it would buy fewer bonds to replace maturing securities as it seeks to shrink its balance sheet. The bank has built up huge bond holdings since 2015 and now intends to cut the stockpile by €25bn a month from July, compared with the current pace of €15bn.

Carsten Brzeski, an economist at Dutch bank ING, described the decision to shrink the balance sheet at a faster pace as “a bargaining chip” so that hawks on the governing council would accept a smaller rate rise.

But Krishna Guha, vice-chair of US investment bank Evercore, labelled the move as “unwise given the global banking stress”.

The euro weakened 0.4 per cent against the dollar to $1.101 while the yield on interest rate-sensitive two-year German bonds slipped 0.06 percentage points to 2.62 per cent.

Despite last month’s rise in the headline figure, core inflation — which strips out energy, food and other more volatile prices — dipped for the first time in 10 months to 5.6 per cent in April.

The ECB said that it would raise rates enough to hit its inflation target and keep them there “for as long as necessary”.

Rising interest rates have contributed to turmoil in the US banking sector, which continued this week with the seizure of First Republic by US regulators and the sale of the lender’s main assets to JPMorgan Chase.

While eurozone banks have so far been more resilient, they told the ECB in a survey published this week that credit conditions and loan demand tightened at the fastest pace since major financial crises more than a decade ago.

Lagarde said the decision to slow the pace of rate rises from half a point to a quarter-point reflected signs that credit conditions were tightening.

Economists believe such factors will cool inflation, making fewer rate increases necessary.