Retail Sales: Cooked Data?
The Market Ticker ® - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Posted 2012-05-15 08:54
by Karl Denninger
in Macro Factors
Ignore this thread
Retail Sales: Cooked Data?
 

I suppose I should be impressed by seasonal adjustments, right?

Well, I'm not.

The U.S. Census Bureau announced today that advance estimates of U.S. retail and food services sales for April, adjusted for seasonal variation and holiday and trading-day differences, but not for price changes, were $408.0 billion, an increase of 0.1 percent (±0.5%)* from the previous month and 6.4 percent (±0.7%) above April 2011. Total sales for the February through April 2012 period were up 6.6 percent (±0.5%) from the same period a year ago. The February to March 2012 percent change was revised from 0.8 percent (±0.5) to 0.7 percent (±0.3%).

I'm supposed to be impressed, right?  Ok, let's look at the internals and see if they reflect it.

Yah.

Drops in unadjusted numbers were seen in autos, furniture, electronics, food, helath, clothing, sporting goods, general merchandise, miscellaneous and non-store retailers along with restaurants and bars.  In short, pretty much everything except for building materials and gas, which was pretty-much flat.

I know, I know, April typically has fairly sizeable seasonal adjustments, but look at autos -- the decrease unadjusted was 10% this month, roughly (March -> April.)  Last year it was down 8.2%.  But the adjusted number this month was reported as up 0.3%, and last year, same month, and last year it was reported as down 0.32%.

Yes, it really is that blatant and it's not just cars -- in some other places it's even worse!

Electronics: Unadjusted, down 11.1% monthly.  Last year, down 10.8%.  Adjusted, reported as up 0.26% this month, last year reported as down 1.9%.

Intentionally cooked data to make the economy look better than it really is? 

You decide.

Discussion below (registration required to post)
 

Main Navigation
Full-Text Search & Archives
Archive Access
Get Adobe Flash player





Blogtalk 3:30 CT Mondays
Items To Look At


Discuss The Capital Markets along with daily technical analysis with our Gold Donor program.

Where We Are, Where We're Heading (2013) - The annual 2013 Ticker

Links and Blogroll
Our policy on reciprocal links: Send us an email with your information and why you think your blog or news site would make a good addition - in most cases reciprocal link requests will be granted.
Seeking Alpha Certified
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Looking for "The Best of Market Ticker"? Check out
Ticker Classics.

Visit the forum to discuss this and other investing-related topics; see the FAQ on the forum for information about Gold Donor status including access to our technical analysis video server.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

Market Ticker content may be reproduced or excerpted online provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media.

Submissions may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Leads on stories of current economic and political interest are always welcome. Our fax tip line is 850-897-9364; please include contact information with your transmission.

 
Comments.......
User: Not logged on
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
User Info Retail Sales: Cooked Data? in forum [Market-Ticker]
Curbyourrisk
Posts: 3590
Incept: 2008-08-19

Farmingdale, NY
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Karl, our leaders would never intentionally mislead us. How dare you accuse our glorious leaders of fabricating such lies. It is people like you who give our Government a bad name... it is.. I am sorry, I just can't keep a straight face and type this crap.

smiley

----------
Time is up.

I hate to burst your bubble, but there is no Santa Claus, the tooth fairy does not exist and American justice does not involve the courts.
Mortgageguymn
Posts: 1563
Incept: 2009-03-09
Green
North Coast
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
A whistleblower could make out pretty well. Hope one figures that out.
Frat
Posts: 1935
Incept: 2009-07-15
Silver
NKY
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Well Karl, it IS an election year.

I expect this from .gov, left or right it doesn't matter. What worries me more is that people see the headline and some do magically 'forget' how ****ty the economy has been for 4+ years and buy the headline. ****ing morons.

----------
We're ****ed. Where's Henry Bowman when you need him?
Blackswan
Posts: 5563
Incept: 2007-11-06
Gold
Just outside of Philly
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
But the clown on bloomberg radio said they were better then good. Oh well..

----------
“It’s checkmate. Everywhere it’s checkmate.”
Hugh Hendry
Argos
Posts: 6315
Incept: 2008-03-23
Gold
The Green Mountain State
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Which clown was that, Blackswan? I ask because I've noticed Michael McKee really getting it wrong a couple of times in recent months.
Irishblues
Posts: 283
Incept: 2010-12-18
Gold
Wisconsin
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I've never liked "seasonal adjustments" for the simple fact that it can be gamed quite easily and there's no simple way to test for reasonableness unless you have your hands on the model that fit the data to determine those adjustments.

Crap like this report only underscore my sentiment.
Bagbalm
Posts: 4255
Incept: 2009-03-19
Green
Just North of Detroit
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
The leaders may not have cooked the numbers. Their underlings know what they want to hear and can provide it. Be funny as hell really if their own ass sucking organizations are lying to them. Liars all around = disaster.
Blackswan
Posts: 5563
Incept: 2007-11-06
Gold
Just outside of Philly
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Argos.. I forget the clowns name.. He has a real rough voice... Like the godfather without the italian accent...

----------
“It’s checkmate. Everywhere it’s checkmate.”
Hugh Hendry
Nelstomlinson
Posts: 124
Incept: 2011-12-21

Juneau Alaska
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Bagbalm, having been in a similar situation, I can tell you that the modelers know what range of answers is acceptable, and know that they are expected to deliver somewhere in that range. It really doesn't matter if the modelers want to go along or not. If your answer isn't acceptable, someone up the line will edit it, and make it acceptable.

Many times I researched an old fiscal note, and tried to find out how they got those amazing numbers. Usually the answer was that a political appointee had made them up, and had thrown away the actual data-based work that our group had delivered.
Comrader
Posts: 78
Incept: 2010-06-10

pa
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
just noticed tickercon back to 1
Irishblues
Posts: 283
Incept: 2010-12-18
Gold
Wisconsin
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Nelsontomlinson wrote..
Bagbalm, having been in a similar situation, I can tell you that the modelers know what range of answers is acceptable, and know that they are expected to deliver somewhere in that range. It really doesn't matter if the modelers want to go along or not. If your answer isn't acceptable, someone up the line will edit it, and make it acceptable.

Exactly. In my job, while I might be able to pick a number in a range of acceptable answers, it's my duty to pick the most reasonable answer and to quantify the range that is deemed acceptable, along with explaining [or being able to explain] why I picked the number that I did and what factors might cause the true answer to move toward either side of the range. It's not necessarily "bad" if the true answer is outside what I thought was the acceptable range [hence, the notion of a probability distribution and a confidence interval], but it is bad if I just say "this is absolutely the answer" and never disclose the risks involved or take those risks into account.
Nelstomlinson
Posts: 124
Incept: 2011-12-21

Juneau Alaska
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Irishblues, what I was saying that the political appointees make it clear to the researcher what number they want to see, and the political appointee will report that number, whatever the researcher reports to them.

I think you are talking about respectable, responsible research. I'm saying that's not always what the government bureaus do.
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ