Connect with us


Key Events This Week: FOMC, GDP, Core PCE, And Earnings Galore

Key Events This Week: FOMC, GDP, Core PCE, And Earnings Galore

Given the tough last week for the markets, which saw the Nasdaq 100 do something it hasn’t done since the aftermath of the internet bubble, when it fell more than 1% in every…



Key Events This Week: FOMC, GDP, Core PCE, And Earnings Galore

Given the tough last week for the markets, which saw the Nasdaq 100 do something it hasn’t done since the aftermath of the internet bubble, when it fell more than 1% in every session of a week, this week brings a fascinating double header. Not only do we have the FOMC on Wednesday but we have some notable tech earnings in the form of Apple (Thursday), Tesla (Wednesday) and Microsoft (Tuesday). As DB's Jim Reid notes, "plenty of scope for market moving info."

Digging into this week's details, we’ll get a first look at how the global economy has fared into the new year (and with Omicron) with the release of the January flash PMIs today. Japan’s Jibun Bank manufacturing PMI edged up to +54.6 overnight, the highest in at least three years from +54.3 in December. However, the survey also showed that the nation’s service sector activity contracted in January for the first time in four months, from +46.6 versus +52.1 in December, as Omicron hit. Returning to the week ahead we'll also look back a bit with the Q4 GDP releases from the US (Thursday), France and Germany (both Friday) as well. Keep an eye out for the initial jobless claims from the US as well, since they’ve deteriorated in recent weeks and that’s one of the most timely indicators we get on the state of the labour market there. The weakness is likely Omicron related and given its on the retreat again this may be temporary. There’ll also be plenty of political developments to look out for as well, including the Italian Presidential election. Geopolitics doesn't always impact markets even if they feel very tense and fraught. However the current Russia/Ukraine situation does seem to be adding to the risk off at the moment and merits close attention.

As discussed at the top, the main market highlight this week will be the Federal Reserve’s first monetary policy decision of the year on Wednesday, along with Fed Chair Powell’s subsequent press conference. According to our economists, this January meeting is set to be the last before they kick off that hiking cycle, with lift-off set to commence in March as part of the first of 4 hikes this year. However, they’ve also argued (link here) that there’s a tail risk of an even bigger hawkish surprise over the months ahead, with the possibility that the Fed raises rates in March and then goes onto raise rates 6 or 7 times this year. So maybe the calm before the storm. Also watch out to see if the committee want to outline more of their current QT plans. The Q&A could be a popcorn moment for the markets with plenty of questions likely on inflation, the Fed’s hiking path, financial conditions and QT amongst other things.

On the earnings side, the season really ramps up this week, with a number of US Tech companies reporting in particular. In total, we’ve got 106 companies in the S&P 500, along with a further 46 in the STOXX 600 so there’s plenty to look out for. Among the highlights are IBM today. Then tomorrow we’ll hear from Microsoft, Johnson & Johnson, Verizon Communications, NextEra Energy, Texas Instruments, American Express, General Electric and Moderna. On Wednesday, releases will include Tesla, Abbott Laboratories, Intel, AT&T and Boeing. Thursday then sees reports from Apple, Visa, LVMH, Mastercard, Comcast, Danaher, McDonald’s, SAP, UniCredit and Samsung Electronics. Finally on Friday, we’ll hear from Chevron and Caterpillar.

Turning to the political scene, there are a number of events expected this week. First, there’s the Italian Presidential election, with the Italian parliament and regional delegates set to start voting today. If a president is not elected in the first round of voting, another vote will take place tomorrow, with a vote normally taking place each day until a President has been selected. Since the approval of the Constitution in 1948, it’s taken 9 votes on average over 6 days to elect the President. In the first three rounds, a two-thirds majority is required, but from the fourth round only an absolute majority is needed.

Otherwise, there’ll be a lot of attention on the UK this week, where it’s expected that the long-awaited report by the civil servant Sue Gray will be released looking at allegations of parties having taken place in Downing Street during the pandemic. There isn’t a confirmed date for this yet, but it’s expected to arrive some time this week. Against this backdrop, there has been growing speculation that a vote of no confidence could be called in Prime Minister Johnson’s leadership of the Conservative Party, which will take place if 15% of Conservative MPs submit a letter of no confidence. Some Conservative MPs have already said publicly that they have submitted a letter, and if a vote then took place, it would be a secret ballot among Conservative MPs where a simple majority would then be required to remove Johnson as leader. Brexit will also remain in the headlines, as EU Commission Vice President Maroš Šefčovič will be meeting again with UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss on Monday regarding the Northern Ireland Protocol. Finally in the UK, there’ll be a further easing of Covid-19 restrictions in England, as from Thursday there will be an end to the requirement for Covid passes at large events, and face coverings will no longer be legally required in any setting.

Elsewhere tomorrow, the IMF will be releasing their latest forecasts for economic growth around the world, with their World Economic Outlook update. These normally generate a few headlines.

Courtesy of DB, here is a day-by-day calendar of events

Monday January 24

  • Data: January flash manufacturing, services and composite PMIs from Japan, France, Germany, Euro Area, UK and US, US December Chicago Fed national activity index
  • Earnings: IBM

Tuesday January 25

  • Data: Germany January Ifo business climate indicator, US November FHFA house price index, January Conference Board consumer confidence, Richmond Fed manufacturing index
  • Central Banks: Bank of Japan release Summary of Opinions from January meeting (23:50 UK time)
  • Earnings: Microsoft, Johnson & Johnson, Verizon Communications, NextEra Energy, Texas Instruments, American Express, General Electric, Moderna
  • Other: IMF release World Economic Outlook Update

Wednesday January 26

  • Data: US preliminary December wholesale inventories
  • Central Banks: Monetary policy decisions from the Federal Reserve and Bank of Canada
  • Earnings: Tesla, Abbott Laboratories, Intel, AT&T, Boeing

Thursday January 27

  • Data: China December industrial profits, Germany February GfK consumer confidence, US weekly initial jobless claims, preliminary December durable goods orders, core capital goods orders, Q4 GDP, December pending home sales, January Kansas City Fed manufacturing activity
  • Central Banks: Monetary policy decision form the South African Reserve Bank, ECB’s Scicluna speaks
  • Earnings: Apple, Visa, LVMH, Mastercard, Comcast, Danaher, McDonald’s, SAP, UniCredit, Samsung Electronics

Friday January 28

  • Data: France preliminary Q4 GDP, December PPI, Germany preliminary Q4 GDP, Euro Area December M3 money supply, final January consumer confidence, Italy January consumer confidence, US December personal income, personal spending, final January University of Michigan consumer sentiment index
  • Earnings: Chevron, Caterpillar

* * *

Finally, looking at just the US, Goldman writes that the key economic data releases this week are the Q4 GDP release, durable goods report, and jobless claims on Thursday, as well as the core PCE inflation report and employment cost index release on Friday. The January FOMC meeting is this week, with the release of the statement at 2:00 PM ET on Wednesday, followed by Chair Powell’s press conference at 2:30 PM. There are no other scheduled speaking engagements by Fed officials this week.

Monday, January 24

  • 09:45 AM Markit Flash US manufacturing PMI, January preliminary (Bloomberg consensus 56.7, last 57.7)
  • Markit Flash US services PMI, January preliminary (consensus 54.8, last 57.6)

Tuesday, January 25

  • 09:00 AM FHFA house price index, November (consensus 1.1%, last 1.1%)
  • 09:00 AM S&P/Case-Shiller 20-city home price index, November (GS +0.9%, consensus +0.97%, last +0.92%); We estimate the S&P/Case-Shiller 20-city home price index rose by 0.9% in November, following a 0.92% increase in October.
  • 10:00 AM Conference Board consumer confidence, January (GS 112.5, consensus 111.8, last 115.8); We estimate that the Conference Board consumer confidence index decreased by 3.3pt to 112.5 in January, reflecting negative signals from other confidence measures.
  • 10:00 AM Richmond Fed manufacturing index, January (consensus 14, last 16)

Wednesday, January 26

  • 08:30 AM Advance goods trade balance, December (GS -$96.0bn, consensus -$96.0bn, last -$98.0bn): We estimate that the goods trade deficit decreased by $2.0bn to $96.0 in December compared to the final November report, reflecting an increase in imports.
  • 08:30 AM Wholesale inventories, December preliminary (consensus 1.4%, last 1.4%): Retail inventories, December (consensus 1.5%, last 2.0%)
  • 10:00 AM New home sales, December (GS +2.0%, consensus +2.8%, last +12.4%): We estimate that new home sales increased by 2.0% in December, reflecting softer housing permits, starts, and mortgage applications relative to November.
  • 02:00 PM FOMC statement, January 25-26 meeting: As discussed in our FOMC preview, we expect that the FOMC will use this meeting to hint at a March liftoff and begin formulating a plan for balance sheet reduction. We expect the FOMC to raise interest rates four times this year starting in March and to announce the start of balance sheet reduction in July.

Thursday, January 27

  • 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended January 22 (GS 295k, consensus 260k, last 286k); Continuing jobless claims, week ended January 15 (consensus 1,650k, last 1,635k): We estimate initial jobless claims increased to 295k in the week ended January 22.
  • 08:30 AM GDP, Q4 advance (GS +6.5%, consensus, +5.3%, last +2.3%); Personal consumption, Q4 advance (GS +3.2%, consensus +2.9%, last +2.0%): We estimate GDP growth picked up to +6½% annualized in the advance reading for Q4, following +2.3% in Q3. Our forecast reflects firming consumption growth (to +3.2%), with Omicron reducing activity only very late in the quarter. We expect lackluster growth in business structures and equipment investment—but expect a strong gain in the intellectual property category (+7%). We estimate a boost to GDP growth from inventories (+3.2pp qoq ar) but a drag from net trade (-1.4pp).
  • 08:30 AM Durable goods orders, December preliminary (GS -1.0%, consensus -0.5%, last +2.6%); Durables goods orders ex-transportation, December preliminary (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.9%); Core capital goods orders, December preliminary (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.3%, last flat); Core capital goods shipments, December preliminary (GS +0.5%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.3%): We estimate durable goods retrenched 1.0% in the preliminary December report, reflecting a pullback in commercial aircraft and defense orders. We expect firm gains in core capital goods orders (+0.4%) and core capital goods shipments (+0.5%), reflecting strong goods demand and higher prices.
  • 10:00 AM Pending home sales, December (GS -1.5%, consensus +0.5%, last -2.2%): We estimate that pending home sales decreased by 1.5% in December. Existing home sales are an input into the brokers' commissions component of residential investment in the GDP report.
  • 11:00 AM Kansas City Fed manufacturing index, January (consensus 19, last 24)

Friday, January 28

  • 08:30 AM Employment cost index, Q4 (GS +1.1%, consensus +1.2%, prior +1.3%): We estimate that the employment cost index rose 1.1% in Q4 (qoq sa), which would boost the year-on-year rate by four tenths to +4.1%. Labor shortages continued to exert upward pressure on wage growth in the fourth quarter, though we expect a sequentially slower pace of ECI benefit growth after a jump in Q3.
  • 08:30 AM Personal income, December (GS +0.6%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.4%); Personal spending, December (GS -0.7%, consensus -0.6%, last +0.6%); PCE price index, December (GS +0.37%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.61%); Core PCE price index, December (GS +0.40%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.46%); PCE price index (yoy), December (GS +5.72%, consensus +5.8%, last +5.73%); Core PCE price index (yoy), December (GS +4.77%, consensus +4.8%, last +4.68%): Based on details in the PPI, CPI, and import price reports, we forecast that the core PCE price index rose by 0.40% month-over-month in December, corresponding to a 4.77% increase from a year earlier. Additionally, we expect that the headline PCE price index increased by 0.37% in December, corresponding to a +5.72% increase from a year earlier. We expect that personal income increased by 0.6% and personal spending decreased by 0.7% In December.
  • 10:00 AM University of Michigan consumer sentiment, January final (GS 70.0, consensus 68.8, last 68.8): We expect the University of Michigan consumer sentiment index increased by 0.2pt to 70.0 in the final January reading.

Source: Deutsche Bank, Goldman, BofA.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/24/2022 - 09:34

Read More

Continue Reading


Delivering aid during war is tricky − here’s what to know about what Gaza relief operations may face

The politics of delivering aid in war zones are messy, the ethics fraught and the logistics daunting. But getting everything right is essential − and…




Palestinians on the outskirts of Gaza City walk by buildings destroyed by Israeli bombardment on Oct. 20, 2023. AP Photo/Ali Mahmoud

The 2.2 million people who live in Gaza are facing economic isolation and experiencing incessant bombardment. Their supplies of essential resources, including food and water, are quickly dwindling.

In response, U.S. President Joe Biden has pledged US$100 million in humanitarian assistance for the citizens of Gaza.

As a scholar of peace and conflict economics who served as a World Bank consultant during the 2014 war between Hamas and Israel, I believe that Biden’s promise raises fundamental questions regarding the delivery of humanitarian aid in a war zone. Political constraints, ethical quandaries and the need to protect the security of aid workers and local communities always make it a logistical nightmare.

In this specific predicament, U.S. officials have to choose a strategy to deliver the aid without the perception of benefiting Hamas, a group the U.S. and Israel both classify as a terrorist organization.


When aiding people in war zones, you can’t just send money, a development strategy called “cash transfers” that has become increasingly popular due to its efficiency. Sending money can boost the supply of locally produced goods and services and help people on the ground pay for what they need most. But injecting cash into an economy so completely cut off from the world would only stoke inflation.

So the aid must consist of goods that have to be brought into Gaza, and services provided by people working as part of an aid mission. Humanitarian aid can include food and water; health, sanitation and hygiene supplies and services; and tents and other materials for shelter and settlement.

Due to the closure of the border with Israel, aid can arrive in Gaza only via the Rafah crossing on the Egyptian border.

The U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, will likely turn to its longtime partner on the ground, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, or UNRWA, to serve as supply depots and distribute goods. That agency, originally founded in 1949 as a temporary measure until a two-state solution could be found, serves in effect as a parallel yet unelected government for Palestinian refugees.

USAID will likely want to tap into UNRWA’s network of 284 schools – many of which are now transformed into humanitarian shelters housing two-thirds of the estimated 1 million people displaced by Israeli airstrikes – and 22 hospitals to expedite distribution.

Map of Gaza and its neighbors
Gaza is a self-governing Palestinian territory. The narrow piece of land is located on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea, bordered by Israel and Egypt. PeterHermesFurian/iStock via Getty Images Plus


Prior to the Trump administration, the U.S. was typically the largest single provider of aid to the West Bank and Gaza. USAID administers the lion’s share of it.

Since Biden took office, total yearly U.S. assistance for the Palestinian territories has totaled around $150 million, restored from just $8 million in 2020 under the Trump administration. During the Obama administration, however, the U.S. was providing more aid to the territories than it is now, with $1 billion disbursed in the 2013 fiscal year.

But the White House needs Congress to approve this assistance – a process that requires the House of Representatives to elect a new speaker and then for lawmakers to approve aid to Gaza once that happens.


The United Nations Relief and Works Agency is a U.N. organization. It’s not run by Hamas, unlike, for instance, the Gaza Ministry of Health. However, Hamas has frequently undermined UNRWA’s efforts and diverted international aid for military purposes.

Hamas has repeatedly used UNRWA schools as rocket depots. They have repeatedly tunneled beneath UNRWA schools. They have dismantled European Union-funded water pipes to use as rocket fuselages. And even since the most recent violence broke out, the UNRWA has accused Hamas of stealing fuel and food from its Gaza premises.

Humanitarian aid professionals regularly have to contend with these trade-offs when deciding to what extent they can work with governments and local authorities that commit violent acts. They need to do so in exchange for the access required to help civilians under their control.

Similarly, Biden has had to make concessions to Israel while brokering for the freedom to send humanitarian aid to Gaza. For example, he has assured Israel that if any of the aid is diverted by Hamas, the operation will cease.

This promise may have been politically necessary. But if Biden already believes Hamas to be uncaring about civilian welfare, he may not expect the group to refrain from taking what they can.

Security best practices

What can be done to protect the security of humanitarian aid operations that take place in the midst of dangerous conflicts?

Under International Humanitarian Law, local authorities have the primary responsibility for ensuring the delivery of aid – even when they aren’t carrying out that task. To increase the chances that the local authorities will not attack them, aid groups can give “humanitarian notification” and voluntarily alert the local government as to where they will be operating.

Hamas has repeatedly flouted international norms and laws. So the question of if and how the aid convoy will be protected looms large.

Under the current agreement between the U.S., Israel and Egypt, the convoy will raise the U.N. flag. International inspectors will make sure no weapons are on board the vehicles before crossing over from Arish, Egypt, to Rafah, a city located on the Gaza Strip’s border with Egypt.

The aid convoy will likely cross without militarized security. This puts it at some danger of diversion once inside Gaza. But whether the aid convoy is attacked, seized or left alone, the Biden administration will have demonstrated its willingness to attempt a humanitarian relief operation. In this sense, a relatively small first convoy bearing water, medical supplies and food, among other items, serves as a test balloon for a sustained operation to follow soon after.

If the U.S. were to provide the humanitarian convoy a military escort, by contrast, Hamas could see its presence as a provocation. Washington’s support for Israel is so strong that the U.S. could potentially be judged as a party in the conflict between Israel and Hamas.

In that case, the presence of U.S. armed forces might provoke attacks on Gaza-bound aid convoys by Hamas and Islamic jihad fighters that otherwise would not have occurred. Combined with the mobilization of two U.S. Navy carrier groups in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, I’d be concerned that such a move might also stoke regional anger. It would undermine the Biden administration’s attempts to cool the situation.

On U.N.-approved missions, aid delivery may be secured by third-party peacekeepers – meaning, in this case, personnel who are neither Israeli nor Palestinian – with the U.N. Security Council’s blessing. In this case, tragically, it’s unlikely that such a resolution could conceivably pass such a vote, much less quickly enough to make a difference.

Topher L. McDougal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Continue Reading


Diagnosis and management of postoperative wound infections in the head and neck region

“The majority of wound infections often manifest themselves immediately postoperatively, so close followup should take place […]” Credit: 2023 Barbarewicz…



“The majority of wound infections often manifest themselves immediately postoperatively, so close followup should take place […]”

Credit: 2023 Barbarewicz et al.

“The majority of wound infections often manifest themselves immediately postoperatively, so close followup should take place […]”

BUFFALO, NY- October 20, 2023 – A new research perspective was published in Oncoscience (Volume 10) on October 4, 2023, entitled, “Diagnosis and management of postoperative wound infections in the head and neck region.”

In everyday clinical practice at a department for oral and maxillofacial surgery, a large number of surgical procedures in the head and neck region take place under both outpatient and inpatient conditions. The basis of every surgical intervention is the patient’s consent to the respective procedure. Particular attention is drawn to the general and operation-specific risks. 

Particularly in the case of soft tissue procedures in the facial region, bleeding, secondary bleeding, scarring and infection of the surgical area are among the most common complications/risks, depending on the respective procedure. In their new perspective, researchers Filip Barbarewicz, Kai-Olaf Henkel and Florian Dudde from Army Hospital Hamburg in Germany discuss the diagnosis and management of postoperative infections in the head and neck region.

“In order to minimize the wound infections/surgical site infections, aseptic operating conditions with maximum sterility are required.”

Furthermore, depending on the extent of the surgical procedure and the patient‘s previous illnesses, peri- and/or postoperative antibiotics should be considered in order to avoid postoperative surgical site infection. Abscesses, cellulitis, phlegmone and (depending on the location of the procedure) empyema are among the most common postoperative infections in the respective surgical area. The main pathogens of these infections are staphylococci, although mixed (germ) patterns are also possible. 

“Risk factors for the development of a postoperative surgical site infection include, in particular, increased age, smoking, multiple comorbidities and/or systemic diseases (e.g., diabetes mellitus type II) as well as congenital and/ or acquired immune deficiency [10, 11].”


Continue reading the paper: DOI: 

Correspondence to: Florian Dudde


Keywords: surgical site infection, head and neck surgery


About Oncoscience

Oncoscience is a peer-reviewed, open-access, traditional journal covering the rapidly growing field of cancer research, especially emergent topics not currently covered by other journals. This journal has a special mission: Freeing oncology from publication cost. It is free for the readers and the authors.

To learn more about Oncoscience, visit and connect with us on social media:

For media inquiries, please contact

Oncoscience Journal Office

6666 East Quaker Str., Suite 1D

Orchard Park, NY 14127

Phone: 1-800-922-0957, option 4


Read More

Continue Reading


G77 Nations, China, Push Back On U.S. “Loss And Damage” Climate Fund In Days Leading Up To UN Summit

G77 Nations, China, Push Back On U.S. "Loss And Damage" Climate Fund In Days Leading Up To UN Summit

As was the case in primary school with…



G77 Nations, China, Push Back On U.S. "Loss And Damage" Climate Fund In Days Leading Up To UN Summit

As was the case in primary school with bringing in presents, make sure you bring enough for the rest of the class, otherwise people get ornery...

This age old rule looks like it could be rearing its head in the days leading up to the UN COP 28 climate summit, set to take place in the United Arab Emirates in about six weeks. 

At the prior UN COP 27, which took place in Egypt last year, the U.S. pushed an idea for a new World Bank "loss and damage" climate slush fund to help poor countries with climate change. But the G77 nations plus China, including many developing countries, are pushing back on the idea, according to a new report from the Financial Times

The goal was to arrange how the fund would operate and where the money would come from for the "particularly vulnerable" nations who would have access to it prior to the upcoming summit in UAE.

But as FT notes, Pedro Luis Pedroso Cuesta, the Cuban chair of the G77 plus China group, has said that talks about these details were instead "deadlocked" over issues of - you guessed it - where the money is going and the governance of the fund.

The U.S.'s proposal for the fund to be governed by the World Bank has been rejected by the G77 after "extensive" discussions, the report says. Cuesta has said that the nations seek to have the fund managed elsewhere, but that the U.S. wasn't open to such arrangements. 

Cuesta said: “We have been confronted with an elephant in the room, and that elephant is the US. We have been faced with a very closed position that it is [the World Bank] or nothing.”

Christina Chan, a senior adviser to US climate envoy John Kerry, responded: “We have been working diligently at every turn to address concerns, problem-solve, and find landing zones.” She said the U.S. has been "clear and consistent" in their messaging on the need for the fund. 

Cuesta contends that the World Bank, known for lending to less affluent nations, lacks a "climate culture" and often delays decision-making, hindering quick responses to climate emergencies like Pakistan's recent severe flooding.

The G77 coalition voiced concerns about the World Bank's legal framework potentially limiting the fund's ability to accept diverse funding sources like philanthropic donations or to access capital markets.

With just days left before the UN COP 28 summit, the World Bank insists that combating climate change is integral to its mission and vows to collaborate on structuring the fund.

Tyler Durden Fri, 10/20/2023 - 15:45

Read More

Continue Reading