In our second quarter issue we noted the growing number of retail investors who believe our securities markets are being run for the sole benefit of short-term traders and speculators—and who have, as a consequence, been exiting the stock markets in droves.
We also noted the growing number of industry observers who believe that the damage being done to our once-huge base of retail investors is being accelerated—and understandably so—by fears of fl sh-traders, robo- traders and runaway computer systems.
Many observers seem to think that the damage that has been done to overall consumer confidence in the equities market is permanent, and beyond fixing. We promised to do a little digging into what’s really happening – and to provide our own perspective on retail investors.
We need to start, we think, with the dot-com crash of 2000—followed all too soon by the devastating financial industry crash of 2008/9—from both of which, many investors will never recover—ever. Then there was the “flash crash” of 2010…followed fast by the BATS and Facebook IPO crashes in 2012, where robo-trading ran wildly amok (again)…followed by the “mini-flash-crash” in May, set off by Knight Capital’s “rogue algorithm”.
No wonder that no less an authority than Bill Gross, the co-founder and co-chief-investment officer of Pacific Investment Management Co. proclaimed that “the cult of equity investment is dying.” And here’s a quick recap of third-quarter sound-bites that add fuel to the firestorm:
“IPOs Dry Up Post Facebook” a June 11th WSJ headline shouted.
“When Will Retail Investors Call It Quits?” asked WSJ columnist Jason Zweig, in his Aug. 2 column, The Intelligent Investor, which reported on the chaos following the Knight Capital robo-trading debacle, that “hit a broad swath of the household-name stocks that investing households favor, like American Express, Harley Davidson and Nordstrom—and even Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway,” adding that “The swoon is likely to accelerate the exodus of individual investors from the stock market. Almost continuously since 2008” he noted, “retail investors have been dumping mutual funds that invest in U.S. stocks. More than $129 billion gushed out of U.S. stock funds in the past 12 months ending in June…In July, another $7 billion leached away…Make no mistake” he added, “The hearts of many small investors have been broken by the serial setbacks of the past few years.”
A mid-year report from Broadridge Financial Solutions noted that “After years of steady growth, the number of positions owned by individual shareholders has declined from 151.9m in FY 10 to 142.5m in FY 11” – a 6% decline, year-to-year. ,
The same report noted—more significantly, we think— that “the number of shares held by individual shareholders has declined from 233b in FY 10 to 205.9b in FY 11”—an 11.6% decline.
Scarier yet for public companies, the percentage of positions voted at annual and special meetings by individual investors—which used to be in the high 70s, back in the ‘80s - and which are still overwhelmingly in favor of management positions—declined another percentage point from FY 10 to FY 11—to a mere 14.5%—although, some modestly good news; the number of shares voted by individual investors ticked UP 2 percentage points to 29% of the shares held by them.
Scarier yet, if you areasupplier topublicly traded companies — or seeking employment with a public company—the number of “listed companies” has fallen from 8,500 in 2005 to a mere 5,000 today…with no replacements in sight - and with the likelihood of even more corporate mergers, going forward.
Still scarier—if you are a Transfer Agent, printer, proxy solicitor or any other supplier of services to “registered holders”—we believe that the number of registered holders has fallen from the 100+ million there were, back in the 1990s to way-less than 50 million today. And worse yet; if one were to really look at what, exactly, remains in the registered holder universe, we’d find that a huge percentage of the “positions”—up to 90%+ at many companies—are made up of people who hold less than 2% of the company’s stock in the aggregate.
Not a pretty picture… and even worse if one notes a few other social and demographic factors that make a rebound seem highly unlikely: First and foremost, the huge wealth transfer that took place from the Depression-era and post- WW II savers and investors to the baby boomer generation is essentially over.
Further, those baby boomers were hurt worse than anyone in the dot-com—and in the financial industry crash. Many of them have no money to come back into the market with— even if they wanted to—which many of them clearly do not want to do…at least for now.
Still further, we think that the big money baby boomers lost in employee ownership plans during these crashes— or thanks to the host of wealth-destroying mergers and acquisitions we’ve witnessed – or to other seismic economic changes (think big-bank and car company employees, or those poor H-P or Yahoo employee investors, for eg.) have forced individual investors to totally rethink the “old model” of investing in their employer’s stock plan… So another big market segment in our “space” has been badly and maybe permanently damaged.
So…should we care about all of this? Yes, of course – if you are a supplier of products, services or advice and counsel to publicly traded companies – and there are LOTS of them.
And yes—of course—if you are one of those publicly- traded-companyemployeeswhoischargedwithoverseeing investor relations and/orinvestorservicing, andmanaging relations with service providers: Currently, we see a literal four-alarm fire here—where public companies are trying to “piece out” the oversight of shareholder relations functions among a host of low-level staffers—or cutting the job out altogether: Recently, we saw a Fortune-100 company lay off its shareholder relations manager—who oversaw more than a dozen suppliers—and spending of well over $12 million a year—and replace him with no one!
We can guarantee that companies that blindly slash their spending on shareholder relations programs will end up paying more money to poorly-supervised suppliers—for programs and services to investors that are often inferior besides—and that will sometimes require even more expensive re-dos and remediation efforts than they will ever save in salaries. Meanwhile, they are badly short-changing their individual investors… and, more importantly, sending them amessage, loudandclear, that they are “not important.”
We think that publicly traded companies should be seriously concerned about these “strategies” and trends—for long-term business and strategic reasons that really are critically important: prosperity has been built to a very important degree on individual ownership of securities—and on the willingness of “average individual investors” to invest for the long- term: Every successful new idea we can think of—has been funded – and driven to a great extent—by the promise of long-term stock market gains. But who will buy those IPOs if individual investors decide that the stock market is no place for them to be—or worse—is intentionally rigged against them? Do we really believe we can continue to innovate the way we’ve done by compensating innovators—and their employees—with salary dollars alone and maybe a 401(k) that’s full of bonds yielding less than 2% for “safety’s sake”?
Now for the sixty-four-dollar question: Given all the developments outlined above, do WE think that individual ownership is dying…and maybe dead?
Somewhat to our own surprise, we say NO: Rather amazingly—despite the gloom and doom about the global economy that naysayers are trumpeting, the stock market has been hitting high after high. Recent data from the Fed on U.S. Corporate Issued Equity Ownership shows that U.S. households still own 38% of all equities by market value. And let’s face it; if a householder wants to save for retirement, and to outpace inflation, the only place to look is really the equities market, like it or not.
What makes us most confident of all about the future of equities is that individual investors have a compulsion to sell at the lows and to buy at the highs that seems to be genetically wired in: When they see stock markets begin to tank—or to soar—they have, historically, been incapable of holding back. So to an optimist and very long-term investor like your editor, the big pullback from stocks is actually a bullish indicator.
So what should companies be doing to right the boat where their own individual investor ownership is concerned?
We say that individual investors need to be given the same degree of respect—and attention—that companies gave them
pretty much through the 1990s…before the short-term, quickbuck investors took over, demanding constant budget cuts in any activities that did not have an immediate payback. It’s time to realize, we think, that long-term, individual investors are really our BEST and MOST VALUABLE FRIENDS … and that the quick-buck folks are truly our worst and most insidious enemies…and to ACT ACCORDINGLY. Start, we say, by reviewing our top-ten reasons to grow – and to guard – your company’s retail investor base. Comments and reactions would be most welcome!
Share
Share the Optimizer with your colleagues!