Pages:     | 1 | 2 || 4 | 5 |   ...   | 9 |

OAO Gazprom has successfully placed its new 10-year bond loan for US$ 1.750 billion. The bonds were placed at nominal value with the coupon 9.625 percent payable twice a year. The joint lead-managers of the issue and joint managers of order books were Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein and Morgan Stanley.

OAO Sberbank Fitch has upgraded Sberbank's individual rating from "D" to "C/D", whereas other ratings of the bank remained the same (long-term: "BB-", short-term: "B"). The upgrading testifies to the increase in banks profitability after 2000 up to the level, which either corresponds with or exceeds other Russian banks' indicators.

OAO Lukoil Lukoils net profit according to US GAAP decreased during 9 months of 2002 nearly by 30 percent, to US$ 1.347 billion. The revenues in the reporting period increased by 5.8 percent and amounted to US$ 11.108 billion. Oil export revenues increased by 3.6 percent up to US$ 3.189 billion and oil product export revenues increased by 20.6 percent up to US$ 4.533 billion. The revenues from oil trade in the domestic market decreased 2.2 times, falling down to US$ 362 billion; the revenues from domestic trade in oil products increased by 3.4 percent up to US$ 2.017 billion. Meanwhile, the companys operating costs have decreased in the reporting period from US$ 1.47 to US$ 1.45 billion, and the production has grown by percent, approximately. The production cost of an oil barrel decreased by 6.5 percent, down to US$ 2.61.

Table Dynamics of World Foreign Stock Indexes As of 24 February 2003 Value Change During Change Since the the Month (%) Beginning of the Year RTS (Russia) 370.3 7.17% 3.14% Dow Jones Industrial Average (USA) 7858.24 - 2.43% - 5.79% NASDAQ Composite (USA) 1322.38 0.11% -0.98% S&P 500 (USA) 832.58 -2.70% -5.37% FTSE 100 (UK) 3701.8 3.77% -6.06% DAX-30 (Germany) 2571.35 -6.42% -11.11% CAC-40 (France) 2785.61 -5.18% -9.08% Swiss Market (Switzerland) 4181.3 -5.45% -9.71% Nikkei-225 (Japan) 8564.95 2.70% -0.16% Bovespa (Brazil) 10254 -6.28% -9.00% IPC (Mexico) 5913.68 -0.68% -3.48% IPSA (Chile) 998.64 -0.33% -3.06% Strait Times (Singapore) 1306.79 1.19% -2.55% Seoul Composite (Korea) 616.29 2.64% -1.80% ISE National-100 (Turkey) 11392.58 3.27% 9.86% Morgan Stanley Emerging Markets Free Index 287.919 -0.87% -1.43% Foreign Exchange Market Currency offer in February remained steadily high due to a substantial inflow of export revenues.

However, against the background of unstable situation at the world markets, investments in the US currency became less attractive, and, therefore, banks are seeking for alternative financial instruments, for example, Rouble securities. The fact that banks refuse to buy currency even if there is surplus Rouble liquidity indicates the changing attitude of the market.

On the whole, in the period from 31 January until 21 February the Ruble-Dollar exchange rate decreased by 28.45 kopecks (0.89 percent), from RUR / US$ 31.8345 as of 31.01.2003 down to RUR / US$ 31.55 as of 21.02.2003. The first week of the month was rather quiet. The RUR exchange rate was near RUR / US$ 31.85, while the trade volume was moderate. Later, some massive currency sales followed. On 12 February, the trade volume was US$ 692 million, and the decrease of the US Dollar exchange rate was 7.4 kopecks, according to SELT results. On 21 February, the trade volume in the SELT was US$ 956 million. The SELT dollar trade volume will amount to RUR 144 billion in February, according to preliminary estimates.

Balances in correspondent accounts were within the range of RUR 80 -100 billion in February. Overnight interbank deposit rates decreased from 3.5 percent 3.4 percent to 1.7 percent - 1.8 percent over the period.

35,34,33,32,31,30, 29,28, 27,26,FIGURE 7. THE DYNAMICS OF THE OFFICIAL ROUBLE - DOLLAR AND ROUBLE - EURO EXCHANGE RATE In the international market, the Euro-Dollar exchange rate slightly decreased as compared to the last week in January. In the period from 31 January until 25 February the Dollar grew in price 0.17 cents (0.percent), and at the end of the period its exchange rate decreased to US$ / Euro 1.07980.

The change of Rouble - Euro exchange rate followed the world's leading trade floors. In February, the highest value was RUR / Euro 34.704 (a historic maximum) on 05 February 2003, and the lowest value was RUR / Euro 33.8422 on 17 February 2003. The Rouble - Euro exchange rate changed by RUR - 0.32, or - 0/93 percent, in the course of the month, while the trade volume was RUR 3.4 billion. 1,1,1,0,0,0,FIGURE 8. THE DYNAMICS OF EURO / DOLLAR EXCHANGE RATE ON INTERNATIONAL FOREX MARKETS Table Financial Market Indicators Month October November December January February* Monthly inflation rate 1.1% 1.6% 1.5% 2.4% 1.3% Inflation rate annualized on the basis of this 14.03% 20.98% 19.56% 32.92% 16.8% month's trend CB RF refinancing rate 21% 21% 21% 21% 18% Annualized yield to maturity on OFZ issues (% 14.98% 14.02% 13.41% 12.31% 9.7% p.a.) Volume of trading in the secondary GKO-OFZ 18.73 11.15 15.11 11.88 35.market for the month (RUR billion) Yield to maturity on Minfin bonds at the end of the month (% p.a.) 4th tranche 4.86% 4.83 % 4.55% 3.70% 3.3% 5th tranche 8.46% 7.83% 7.66% 7.01% 6.4% 6th tranche 7.04% 6.78% 6.66% 5.74% 5.3% 7th tranche 9.13% 8.50% 8.08% 7.19% 6.5% 8th tranche 7.68% 6.81% 6.61% 5.82% 5.4% INSTAR-MIACR rate (% p.a.) on interbank loans at the end of the month:

Overnight 14.89% 4.68% 10.11% 3.74% 1.74% Official RUR / US$ exchange rate at the end of 31.7408 31.8424 31.7844 31.8222 31.the month Official RUR / Euro exchange rate at the end of 31.1790 31.6736 33.1098 34.4443 34.the month / month growth in RUR / US$ exchange 0.33% 0.32% -0.18% 0.12% -0.77% rate Average month growth in RUR / Euro exchange 0.88% 1.59% 4.53% 4.03% -1.13% rate Volume of trading at the stock market in the 324.38 260.20 219.92 217.31 RTS for the month (US$ million) Value of RTS-1 Index at the end of the month 358.65 361.15 359.07 347.63 Change in value of RTS-1 Index during the 5.47% 0.70% -0.58% -3.19% 9.6% month (%) * Estimates S. Drobyshevski, D. Skripkin Structure of inflation in the post-crisis period (1999 2002) At present, researchers are more and more interested in the problem of the relationship between the contribution of monetary and non-monetary factors in the rates of growth in consumer prices in the postcrisis years. For instance, it is necessary to mention that in 2002, for the first time since the crisis of 1998, the growth in producers prices outpaced the growth in consumer prices and made, according to preliminary estimates, 17.7 %.

In order to evaluate the relative contribution of monetary and non-monetary factors in inflation rates observed in 1999 through 2002 there was constructed a cointegration relationship between the accumulated consumer price indices and the nominal money supply M2 (the level registered in the end of August of was taken as a unit). This formulation assumes that all components of inflation (i.e. increases in regulated prices and tariffs, changes in demand for real cash balances, and inflationary expectations) except the growth in money supply per se are non-monetary factors4.

The evaluation of the parameters of the cointegration relationship (assuming the presence of a constant term and linear trend) for monthly data demonstrated that 1 % of increase in money supply M2 results in an increase in CPI by 0.419 % (the standard error is 0.081 %), the slope of the linear trend is minus 0.057 % per month (the standard error is 0.008 %). The decomposition of the increase in the consumer price index taking into account the calculated contribution of monetary and non-monetary factors in 1999 through 2002 is presented in the table.

Contribution of monetary and non-monetary factors in the rates of growth in CPI in 1999 through Increase in Monetary factors Other (non-monetary) factors CPI Increase in CPI share Increase in CPI share 1999 36,6% 22,7% 62,1% 13,9% 37,9% 2000 20,1% 23,7% 117,9% -3,6% -17,9% 2001 18,8% 13,1% 69,8% 5,7% 30,2% 2002 15,1% 8,6% 57,2% 6,5% 42,8% As the results presented in the table demonstrate, the constraining impact of money demand on inflation, i.e. a growth in demand for money resulting from increasing economic activity and decreasing inflationary expectations was observed only in 2000, what led to a decline in CPI by 3.6 percentage points in comparison with the value calculated basing on the actual rates of expansion of money supply in this year. Besides, in Monetary aggregate M2 was chosen basing on the conclusions made in IET studies: Arkhipov S., Drobyshevsky S.

Modelirovaniye dinamiki inflyatsii v 1992 1997 gg. (Modeling inflation dynamics in 1992 through 1997) // Ekonomika perekhodnogo perioda. Ocherki ekonomicheskoi politiki postkommunisticheskoi Rossii, 1991 1997. M.

IET, 1998; Drobyshevsky S., Kotovskaya A. Vnutrenniye aspecty denezhno-kreditnoi politiki Rossii (Internal aspects of the Russias monetary policy). Nauchnye trudy IET, No. 45R. M.: IET, 2002. Both series (of the price index and money supply) are integrated series of the first order. The Johansen test for cointegration is in favor of the hypothesis about the existence of one cointegration relationship between the observed variables (taking into account the linear trend). The evaluated relationship looks as follows: Pt = M 2t + Trend.

2000 there was observed the largest gap between the rates of growth in the aggregate consumer price index and prices and tariffs (electric energy, rail freight, communications, etc) regulated by the state5.

On the contrary, in 1999 the tight monetary policy was the key factor constraining inflation in the situation of declining demand for Ruble denominated cash balances and persisting high inflation expectations after the Ruble devaluation in 1998. Therefore, according to our estimates, in the situation of low inflationary expectations and stable demand for real Ruble denominated cash balances the CPI would increase by 22 % to 25 % in 1999 (actual increase made 36.6 %).

The calculations demonstrate that in 2001 and 2002 the expansion of the money supply per se resulted in a less significant increase in consumer prices in comparison with the observed values. From our point of view, it is the result of the frequent increases in tariffs and prices of services rendered by natural monopolies in these years. At the same time, the contribution of this factor in the resulting inflation values made about % (5.7 percentage points) in 2001 and about 43 % (6.5 percentage points) in 2002.

Our results are an evidence that at the present time implementation of a consistent monetary policy per se is not sufficient to control inflationary processes. The share of increase in prices attributed to non-monetary factors (first of all, increase in regulated prices) becomes comparable with the share of the monetary component. In this connection, coordination of the policy pursued by the Central Bank of Russia with the RF government policies as concerns the regulation of tariffs and prices of services rendered by natural monopolies (electric power, Ministry of Railroads, natural gas), the reform of the system of subsidizing of social services prices (HPU, public conveyance, education, health care), tax policy (first of all, as concerns changes in the indexation of indirect taxes, for instance, excises), and customs policies with regard to imports (import duties) becomes more urgent.

S. Drobyshevsky The Real Sector: Factors and Trends According to the Regulations governing the elaboration and presentation of data approved by RF Goskomstat, the Ministry for Economic Development preliminary estimated GDP in 2002, and more precisely calculated GDP in 2001. The adjustment of 2001 GDP primarily concerned the characteristics of the structure of production across sectors of the economy and GDP revenue formation. According to estimates, the amount of the RF GDP of 2002 made Rub. 10863.4 billion in current market prices and increased by 4.3 % in comparison with the figures registered in 2001.

The changes in the structure of GDP produced in 2002 were determined by outpacing rates of growth in services in comparison with dynamics of production of goods. The share of the sector of services made 53.% in 2002 and increased by 2.9 p.p. in comparison with the figures registered in 2001. The deceleration of the rates of growth in industrial output from 104.9 % in 2001 to 103.7 % in 2002 and construction from 109.9 % to 102.7 % resulted in the decrease in the share of production of goods in GDP by 1.9 p.p. Structural shifts in production of GDP may be explained both by dynamics of growth across different sectors of the economy and changes in relative prices. While producers prices grew by 17.1 % in industry and by 12.6 % in construction in comparison with the figures registered in 2001, the index of tariffs on paid household services and freight increased 1.36 times and 1.18 times respectively. The GDP index deflator of 2002 in comparison with prices of 2001 made 115.2 %, including 110.8 % in the sector producing goods and 120.in the sector rendering services.

Table GDP structure in 1995 through 2002, in current market prices 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Gross domestic product 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Production of goods 41,3 41,6 39,4 39,4 40,2 40,6 37,3 35,Production of services 50,9 49,9 51,9 51,9 49,4 48,0 50,6 53,Net taxes on products 7,8 8,5 8,7 8,7 10,4 11,4 12,1 11,Source: RF Goskomstat See: Rossiyskaya ekonomika v 2000 godu. Tendentsii i perspektivy (Russian Economy in 2000. Trends and Outlooks). Issue 22. M.: IET, 2001. .: 2000 . . 22. .: , 2001.

Pages:     | 1 | 2 || 4 | 5 |   ...   | 9 |

2011 www.dissers.ru -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .