Connect with us

What *Seems* Inflation Now Is Something Else Entirely

This is yet another one of those crucial recent developments which should contribute much clarity about the economic situation, yet is exploited in other ways (political) adding only more to the general state of economic confusion. The shelves may be…

Published

2 years ago

on

This is yet another one of those crucial recent developments which should contribute much clarity about the economic situation, yet is exploited in other ways (political) adding only more to the general state of economic confusion. The shelves may be empty in a lot of places around the country, leaving anyone with the impression there just aren’t enough goods.

Shortage of goods, everyone’s thinking, by virtue of economics (small “e”) it will be another significant inflationary pressure. Maybe even the straw that breaks the post-70s camel’s back.

But is there actually a shortage of goods? Is that really what this supply shock is all about?

If there is one thing unambiguously in short supply, it’s actually physical structures and locations to warehouse goods. Contrary to public perception, an enormous quantity of material is being produced and even shipped, the issue is that it can’t get as far as its destination because of bottlenecks/constraints in transit.

Outside of a few highly visible sectors, automobiles in particular, this unusual inventory cycle is being generated on the upside by how hard it is to transport things rather than having few things to transport. As we noted here, this has created a perverse chain of events whereby the ordering of goods is being conducted based on transportation worries rather than (honest) forecasts of end demand.

Suppose retailers (outside of automobiles) grow concerned about supply availability or shipping times. They might naturally react by boosting their current order flow if only to increase their chances some product makes it through the clogged shipping channels.

As that increased order flow unrelated to demand continues to move back through the supply chain, it probably would only make the transportation issues that much worse. It’s already a mess, and because it’s already a mess the entire supply chain tries to stuff more goods through it rather than less, rather than giving the system some time and space to work out enough kinks.

This would mean an overflow of goods but where many if not most of the goods lurk in the background, not anywhere visible at the end of the line. This is not a shortage. And if there is such a thing, then storage space would be the thing coming up for a huge price premium.

Eurodollar University’s Making Sense; Episode 108, Part 3: The Several Cycles of Inventory

Last Friday, the Wall Street Journal reported:

Warehouse availability in the U.S. fell to record lows in the third quarter, according to figures from real-estate firms that show industrial space is all but disappearing near some of the country’s busiest distribution hubs.

One CFO at a major corporate real estate firm added, “Space in our markets is effectively sold out.”

Part of the problem is post-pandemic behavior; locked down originally due to governmental indifference, consumers began buying even more goods online than they had been prior to 2020. This required retooling much (too much) of the way goods are handled from producer to wholesaler to retail delivery.



But as the economy seeks its way back to normal, Americans, in particular, are still buying online; as if years of a slower trend toward virtual shopping were condensed all at once into the calendar space of a few months.

As we pointed out here, wholesalers have got product; a lot of inventory, if you exclude the effect of an auto sector plagued by an entirely different set of supply problems. In other words, for motor vehicles and parts, it is not the same thing at all as what’s going on everywhere else in the goods economy.

That’s not what the public is being led to believe, as social media flooded with images of empty shelves cultivate this misimpression how the whole economy must be in the same boat (pun intended) as the auto sector.



Stepping up the supply chain one rung, retailer inventories at first appear equally dismal (above); matching data with the perception of systemwide destocked shops. Inventory levels are at extreme lows, and inventory-to-sales ratios even more historically low still.

However, if you deal with the situation in the automobile industry separately, as you should, excluding retail auto inventories what you find is goods flowing if not flooding on the retail level that along with wholesale inventories (ex motor vehicles) matches the shortage of warehouse space described in Friday’s WSJ.


Many companies have claimed they are absolutely ready for “too many goods”, believing both their newfound penchant for individual supply chains as well as logistical consulting to manage more than ever. This so long as demand doesn’t “unexpectedly” fall off, even a little, which then might trigger the downside of the inventory cycle.

With this deluge of goods reaching US warehouses, wherever they might be in the country or within their own delivery process, it has to be a little unnerving how even mainstream commentary on the economy has itself shifted prominently. Earlier in the year, it was common enough (Warren Buffett!) to hear the term “red hot” thrown around regularly to the point of ubiquity.

Nowadays, you are far more likely to encounter the tag “stagflation” with few references to overheating left outside of the FOMC members already having cornered themselves into tapering (and therefore having to “justify” the upcoming act by, yet again, like every other time, being overly positive interpreting otherwise not-so-great economic data). It was the “red hot” economy from early 2021 which had built up Corporate America’s inventory exuberance.


A stagflation economy, on the other hand, with warehouse space already at a huge premium, the “flation” part becomes increasingly settled into the opposite of the one most Americans are thinking, and it is in large part because of the real reason for so many empty shelves.

Excessive levels of inventory given just a downgrade in expected future demand (see: Chicago Fed National Activity Index above) becomes highly disinflationary at the drop of a dime, not inflationary. Depending upon just how much of a demand downgrade, given these other factors, an inventory cycle downswing could actually end up being outright deflationary.

It is understandable why Americans have been left to believe all these things add up to consumer price acceleration far into the future. Vast swaths of grocery and department store shelves which go on unstocked for a noticeably long period play along with the perception of a goods shortage, seeming to be consistent on the surface with the previous (earlier in 2021) burst of consumer price increases.



While those price increases sure did happen, they were not inflation nor were they even a supply issue in the way it appears most people are being led to think of it. While there aren’t enough cars on dealer lots, the entire rest of the goods economy (apart from a few other sectors, like clothing) is on the verge of being overwhelmingly awash in all manner of non-auto stuff.

And this doesn’t even count what’s stuck afloat on logjammed ships already acting as warehouses-of-last-resort.

Read More

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Pharma industry reputation remains steady at a ‘new normal’ after Covid, Harris Poll finds

The pharma industry is hanging on to reputation gains notched during the Covid-19 pandemic. Positive perception of the pharma industry is steady at 45%…

Published

1 hour ago

on

March 13, 2024

By

The pharma industry is hanging on to reputation gains notched during the Covid-19 pandemic. Positive perception of the pharma industry is steady at 45% of US respondents in 2023, according to the latest Harris Poll data. That’s exactly the same as the previous year.

Pharma’s highest point was in February 2021 — as Covid vaccines began to roll out — with a 62% positive US perception, and helping the industry land at an average 55% positive sentiment at the end of the year in Harris’ 2021 annual assessment of industries. The pharma industry’s reputation hit its most recent low at 32% in 2019, but it had hovered around 30% for more than a decade prior.

Rob Jekielek

“Pharma has sustained a lot of the gains, now basically one and half times higher than pre-Covid,” said Harris Poll managing director Rob Jekielek. “There is a question mark around how sustained it will be, but right now it feels like a new normal.”

The Harris survey spans 11 global markets and covers 13 industries. Pharma perception is even better abroad, with an average 58% of respondents notching favorable sentiments in 2023, just a slight slip from 60% in each of the two previous years.

Pharma’s solid global reputation puts it in the middle of the pack among international industries, ranking higher than government at 37% positive, insurance at 48%, financial services at 51% and health insurance at 52%. Pharma ranks just behind automotive (62%), manufacturing (63%) and consumer products (63%), although it lags behind leading industries like tech at 75% positive in the first spot, followed by grocery at 67%.

The bright spotlight on the pharma industry during Covid vaccine and drug development boosted its reputation, but Jekielek said there’s maybe an argument to be made that pharma is continuing to develop innovative drugs outside that spotlight.

“When you look at pharma reputation during Covid, you have clear sense of a very dynamic industry working very quickly and getting therapies and products to market. If you’re looking at things happening now, you could argue that pharma still probably doesn’t get enough credit for its advances, for example, in oncology treatments,” he said.

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

I created a ‘cosy game’ – and learned how they can change players’ lives

Cosy, personal games, as I discovered, can change the lives of the people who make them and those who play them.

Published

2 hours ago

on

March 13, 2024

By

Cosy games exploded in popularity during the pandemic. Takoyaki Tech/Shutterstock

The COVID pandemic transformed our lives in ways many of us are still experiencing, four years later. One of these changes was the significant uptake in gaming as a hobby, chief among them being “cosy games” like Animal Crossing: New Horizons (2020).

Players sought comfort in these wholesome virtual worlds, many of which allowed them to socialise from the safety of their homes. Cosy games, with their comforting atmospheres, absence of winning or losing, simple gameplay, and often heartwarming storylines provided a perfect entry point for a new hobby. They also offered predictability and certainty at a time when there wasn’t much to go around.

Cosy games are often made by small, independent developers. “Indie games” have long been evangelised as the purest form of game development – something anyone can do, given enough perseverance. This means they can provide an entry point for creators who hadn’t made games before, but were nevertheless interested in it, enabling a new array of diverse voices and stories to be heard.

In May 2020, near the start of the pandemic, the small poetry game A Solitary Spacecraft, which was about its developer’s experience of their first few months in lockdown, was lauded as particularly poignant. Such games showcase a potential angle for effective cosy game development: a personal one.

Personal themes are often explored through cosy games. For instance, Chicory and Venba (both released in 2023) tackle difficult topics like depression and immigration, despite their gorgeous aesthetics. This showcases the diversity of experiences on display within the medium.

However, as the world emerges from the pandemic’s shadow, the games industry is facing significant challenges. Economic downturns and acquisitions have caused large layoffs across the sector.

Historically, restructurings like these, or discontent with working conditions, have led talented laid-off developers to create their own companies and explore indie development. In the wake of the pandemic and the cosy game boom, these developers may have more personal stories to tell.

Making my own cosy game

I developed my own cosy and personal game during the pandemic and quickly discovered that creating these games in a post-lockdown landscape is no mean feat.

What We Take With Us (2023) merges reality and gameplay across various digital formats: a website, a Discord server that housed an online alternate reality game and a physical escape room. I created the game during the pandemic as a way to reflect on my journey through it, told through the videos of game character Ana Kirlitz.

The trailer for my game, What We Take With Us.

Players would follow in Ana’s footsteps by completing a series of ten tasks in their real-world space, all centred on improving wellbeing – something I and many others desperately needed during the pandemic.

But creating What We Take With Us was far from straightforward. There were pandemic hurdles like creating a physical space for an escape room amid social distancing guidelines. And, of course, the emotional difficulties of wrestling with my pandemic journey through the game’s narrative.

The release fared poorly, and the game only garnered a small player base – a problem emblematic of the modern games industry.

These struggles were starkly contrasted by the feedback I received from players who played the game, however.

This is a crucial lesson for indie developers: the creator’s journey and the player’s experience are often worlds apart. Cosy, personal games, as I discovered, can change the lives of those who play them, no matter how few they reach. They can fundamentally change the way we think about games, allow us to reconnect with old friends, or even inspire us to change careers – all real player stories.

Lessons in cosy game development

I learned so much about how cosy game development can be made more sustainable for creators navigating the precarious post-lockdown landscape. This is my advice for other creators.

First, collaboration is key. Even though many cosy or personal games (like Stardew Valley) are made by solo creators, having a team can help share the often emotional load. Making games can be taxing, so practising self-care and establishing team-wide support protocols is crucial. Share your successes and failures with other developers and players. Fostering a supportive community is key to success in the indie game landscape.

Second, remember that your game, however personal, is a product – not a reflection of you or your team. Making this distinction will help you manage expectations and cope with feedback.

Third, while deeply considering your audience may seem antithetical to personal projects, your game will ultimately be played by others. Understanding them will help you make better games.

The pandemic reignited the interest in cosy games, but subsequent industry-wide troubles may change games, and the way we make them, forever. Understanding how we make game creation more sustainable in a post-lockdown, post-layoff world is critical for developers and players alike.

For developers, it’s a reminder that their stories, no matter how harrowing, can still meaningfully connect with people. For players, it’s an invitation to embrace the potential for games to tell such stories, fostering empathy and understanding in a world that greatly needs it.

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

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

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

The SNF Institute for Global Infectious Disease Research announces new advisory board

From identifying the influenza virus that caused the pandemic of 1918 to developing vaccines against pneumococcal pneumonia and bacterial meningitis in…

Published

2 hours ago

on

March 13, 2024

By

From identifying the influenza virus that caused the pandemic of 1918 to developing vaccines against pneumococcal pneumonia and bacterial meningitis in the 1970s, combating infectious disease has a rich history at Rockefeller. That tradition continues as the Stavros Niarchos Foundation Institute for Global Infectious Disease Research at Rockefeller University (SNFiRU) caps a successful first year with the establishment of a new advisory board.

Credit: Lori Chertoff/The Rockefeller University

From identifying the influenza virus that caused the pandemic of 1918 to developing vaccines against pneumococcal pneumonia and bacterial meningitis in the 1970s, combating infectious disease has a rich history at Rockefeller. That tradition continues as the Stavros Niarchos Foundation Institute for Global Infectious Disease Research at Rockefeller University (SNFiRU) caps a successful first year with the establishment of a new advisory board.

This international advisory board was created in part to give guidance on how to best use SNFiRU’s resources, as well as bring forward innovative ideas concerning new avenues of research, public education, community engagement, and partnership projects.

SNFiRU was established to strengthen readiness for and response to future health crises, building on the scientific advances and international collaborations forged in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Launched with a $75 million grant from the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF) as part of its Global Health Initiative (GHI), the institute provides a framework for international scientific collaboration to foster research innovations and turn them into practical health benefits.

SNFiRU’s mission is to better understand the agents that cause infectious disease and to lower barriers to treatment and prevention globally. To speed this work, the institute launched numerous initiatives in its inaugural year. For instance, SNFiRU awarded 31 research projects in 29 different Rockefeller laboratories for over $5 million to help get collaborative new research efforts off the ground. SNFiRU also supports the Rockefeller University Hospital, where clinical studies are conducted, and brought on board its first physician-scientist through Rockefeller’s Clinical Scholars program. “One of the surprises was the scope of interest from Rockefeller scientists in using their talents to tackle important infectious disease problems,” says Charles M. Rice, Maurice R. and Corinne P. Greenberg Professor in Virology at Rockefeller and director of SNFiRU. “The research topics range from the biology of infectious agents to the dynamics of the immune response to pathogens, and also include a number of infectious disease-adjacent studies.”

In the past 12 months, SNFiRU often brought together scientists studying different aspects of infectious disease as a way to spur new collaborations. In addition to hosting its first annual day-long symposium, SNFiRU initiated a Young Scientist Forum for students and post-doctoral fellows to meet regularly, facilitating cross-laboratory thinking. A bimonthly seminar series has also been established on campus.

Another aim of SNFiRU is to develop relationships with community-based organizations, as well as design and participate in community-engaged research, with a focus on low-income and minority communities. To that end, SNFiRU is helping develop a research project on Chagas disease, a tropical parasitic infection prevalent in Latin America that can cause congestive heart failure and gastrointestinal complications if left untreated. The project will bring together clinicians practicing at health centers in New York, Florida, Texas, and California and basic scientists from multiple institutions to help the communities that are most impacted.

“The SNFiRU international advisory board convenes globally recognized leaders with distinguished biomedical expertise, unrivalled experience in pandemic preparedness and response, and a shared commitment to translating scientific advancements into equitably distributed benefits in real-world settings,” says SNF Co-President Andreas Dracopoulos. “The advisory board will advance the institute’s indispensable mission, which SNF is proud to support as a key part of our Global Health Initiative, and we look forward to seeing breakthroughs in the lab drive better outcomes in lives around the globe.”

The new advisory board will hold its first meeting on April 11th, 2024, following the second annual SNF Institute for Global Infectious Disease Research Symposium at Rockefeller.

Its members are: Rafi Ahmed of Emory University School of Medicine, Cori Bargmann of The Rockefeller University, Yasmin Belkaid of the Pasteur Institute, Anthony S. Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Peter Hotez of Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development, Esper Kallas of of the Butantan Institute, Sharon Lewin of the University of Melbourne Doherty Institue, Carl Nathan of Weill Cornell Medicine, Rino Rappuoli of Fondazione Biotecnopolo di Siena and University of Siena, and Herbert “Skip” Virgin of Washington University School of Medicine and UT Southwestern Medical Center.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending