Upward spending trend unlikely to shift needle on rates
All eyes will be on the monthly spending indicator for June as it becomes the main measure of retail trade when published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics on Tuesday.
Household spending rose 0.9 per cent in May when consumers splashed out on clothes, shoes and new vehicles with borrowing easier since the RBA began cutting rates in February.
This trend is expected to have continued in June, with Commonwealth Bank economists predicting a rise of one per cent.
The data could seal the deal for the central bank's August interest rate decision following a rise in unemployment in June and a fall in inflation for the quarter, with the trimmed mean figure dropping from 2.9 per cent to 2.7 per cent.
RBA deputy governor Andrew Hauser on Thursday hailed the "very welcome" data, as the central bank had been searching for more evidence of inflation returning to the midpoint of its two to three per cent target band.
A host of new and increased US tariffs are expected to come into effect later in the week after nations scrambled to try lock down trade negotiations with President Donald Trump ahead of his August 1 deadline.
Australia has been spared a higher tariff and though most of its goods will continue to face a 10 per cent levy, no US trading partner has a lower rate.
This continuation is a "relief" according to AMP chief economist Shane Oliver, who noted Mr Trump has previously foreshadowed further tariffs on pharmaceuticals - one of Australia's biggest exports to the US.
Increased tariffs on Australia's trading partners could also have indirect impacts for the domestic financial markets.
"The surge in US tariffs still poses a significant threat to the global economy, which will likely become more evident in the months ahead," Mr Oliver said.
Wall Street investors were feeling the pinch on Friday as new tariffs on dozens of trading partners and a surprisingly weak jobs report spurred selling pressure.
The S&P suffered its biggest daily percentage decline in more than two months, with an 8.3 per cent tumble in Amazon.com shares after it posted quarterly results but failed to meet lofty expectations for its cloud computing unit also weighing on equities.
Australian share futures dropped 32 points, or 0.37 per cent, to 16,231.
The benchmark S&P/ASX200 index on Friday dropped 80.8 points, or 0.92 per cent, to 8,662.0, while the broader All Ordinaries fell 81.9 points, or 0.91 per cent, to 8,917.1.
Profit reporting season also begins this week, with major companies such as News Corp, AMP and QBE Insurance set to reveal earnings results.
Australian spending habits will help the Reserve Bank fill in its picture of the nation's economy, with another rate cut expected at its next board meeting amid global tariff woes.
All eyes will be on the monthly spending indicator for June as it becomes the main measure of retail trade when published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics on Tuesday.
Household spending rose 0.9 per cent in May when consumers splashed out on clothes, shoes and new vehicles with borrowing easier since the RBA began cutting rates in February.
This trend is expected to have continued in June, with Commonwealth Bank economists predicting a rise of one per cent.
The data could seal the deal for the central bank's August interest rate decision following a rise in unemployment in June and a fall in inflation for the quarter, with the trimmed mean figure dropping from 2.9 per cent to 2.7 per cent.
RBA deputy governor Andrew Hauser on Thursday hailed the "very welcome" data, as the central bank had been searching for more evidence of inflation returning to the midpoint of its two to three per cent target band.
A host of new and increased US tariffs are expected to come into effect later in the week after nations scrambled to try lock down trade negotiations with President Donald Trump ahead of his August 1 deadline.
Australia has been spared a higher tariff and though most of its goods will continue to face a 10 per cent levy, no US trading partner has a lower rate.
This continuation is a "relief" according to AMP chief economist Shane Oliver, who noted Mr Trump has previously foreshadowed further tariffs on pharmaceuticals - one of Australia's biggest exports to the US.
Increased tariffs on Australia's trading partners could also have indirect impacts for the domestic financial markets.
"The surge in US tariffs still poses a significant threat to the global economy, which will likely become more evident in the months ahead," Mr Oliver said.
Wall Street investors were feeling the pinch on Friday as new tariffs on dozens of trading partners and a surprisingly weak jobs report spurred selling pressure.
The S&P suffered its biggest daily percentage decline in more than two months, with an 8.3 per cent tumble in Amazon.com shares after it posted quarterly results but failed to meet lofty expectations for its cloud computing unit also weighing on equities.
Australian share futures dropped 32 points, or 0.37 per cent, to 16,231.
The benchmark S&P/ASX200 index on Friday dropped 80.8 points, or 0.92 per cent, to 8,662.0, while the broader All Ordinaries fell 81.9 points, or 0.91 per cent, to 8,917.1.
Profit reporting season also begins this week, with major companies such as News Corp, AMP and QBE Insurance set to reveal earnings results.
Australian spending habits will help the Reserve Bank fill in its picture of the nation's economy, with another rate cut expected at its next board meeting amid global tariff woes.
All eyes will be on the monthly spending indicator for June as it becomes the main measure of retail trade when published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics on Tuesday.
Household spending rose 0.9 per cent in May when consumers splashed out on clothes, shoes and new vehicles with borrowing easier since the RBA began cutting rates in February.
This trend is expected to have continued in June, with Commonwealth Bank economists predicting a rise of one per cent.
The data could seal the deal for the central bank's August interest rate decision following a rise in unemployment in June and a fall in inflation for the quarter, with the trimmed mean figure dropping from 2.9 per cent to 2.7 per cent.
RBA deputy governor Andrew Hauser on Thursday hailed the "very welcome" data, as the central bank had been searching for more evidence of inflation returning to the midpoint of its two to three per cent target band.
A host of new and increased US tariffs are expected to come into effect later in the week after nations scrambled to try lock down trade negotiations with President Donald Trump ahead of his August 1 deadline.
Australia has been spared a higher tariff and though most of its goods will continue to face a 10 per cent levy, no US trading partner has a lower rate.
This continuation is a "relief" according to AMP chief economist Shane Oliver, who noted Mr Trump has previously foreshadowed further tariffs on pharmaceuticals - one of Australia's biggest exports to the US.
Increased tariffs on Australia's trading partners could also have indirect impacts for the domestic financial markets.
"The surge in US tariffs still poses a significant threat to the global economy, which will likely become more evident in the months ahead," Mr Oliver said.
Wall Street investors were feeling the pinch on Friday as new tariffs on dozens of trading partners and a surprisingly weak jobs report spurred selling pressure.
The S&P suffered its biggest daily percentage decline in more than two months, with an 8.3 per cent tumble in Amazon.com shares after it posted quarterly results but failed to meet lofty expectations for its cloud computing unit also weighing on equities.
Australian share futures dropped 32 points, or 0.37 per cent, to 16,231.
The benchmark S&P/ASX200 index on Friday dropped 80.8 points, or 0.92 per cent, to 8,662.0, while the broader All Ordinaries fell 81.9 points, or 0.91 per cent, to 8,917.1.
Profit reporting season also begins this week, with major companies such as News Corp, AMP and QBE Insurance set to reveal earnings results.
Australian spending habits will help the Reserve Bank fill in its picture of the nation's economy, with another rate cut expected at its next board meeting amid global tariff woes.
All eyes will be on the monthly spending indicator for June as it becomes the main measure of retail trade when published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics on Tuesday.
Household spending rose 0.9 per cent in May when consumers splashed out on clothes, shoes and new vehicles with borrowing easier since the RBA began cutting rates in February.
This trend is expected to have continued in June, with Commonwealth Bank economists predicting a rise of one per cent.
The data could seal the deal for the central bank's August interest rate decision following a rise in unemployment in June and a fall in inflation for the quarter, with the trimmed mean figure dropping from 2.9 per cent to 2.7 per cent.
RBA deputy governor Andrew Hauser on Thursday hailed the "very welcome" data, as the central bank had been searching for more evidence of inflation returning to the midpoint of its two to three per cent target band.
A host of new and increased US tariffs are expected to come into effect later in the week after nations scrambled to try lock down trade negotiations with President Donald Trump ahead of his August 1 deadline.
Australia has been spared a higher tariff and though most of its goods will continue to face a 10 per cent levy, no US trading partner has a lower rate.
This continuation is a "relief" according to AMP chief economist Shane Oliver, who noted Mr Trump has previously foreshadowed further tariffs on pharmaceuticals - one of Australia's biggest exports to the US.
Increased tariffs on Australia's trading partners could also have indirect impacts for the domestic financial markets.
"The surge in US tariffs still poses a significant threat to the global economy, which will likely become more evident in the months ahead," Mr Oliver said.
Wall Street investors were feeling the pinch on Friday as new tariffs on dozens of trading partners and a surprisingly weak jobs report spurred selling pressure.
The S&P suffered its biggest daily percentage decline in more than two months, with an 8.3 per cent tumble in Amazon.com shares after it posted quarterly results but failed to meet lofty expectations for its cloud computing unit also weighing on equities.
Australian share futures dropped 32 points, or 0.37 per cent, to 16,231.
The benchmark S&P/ASX200 index on Friday dropped 80.8 points, or 0.92 per cent, to 8,662.0, while the broader All Ordinaries fell 81.9 points, or 0.91 per cent, to 8,917.1.
Profit reporting season also begins this week, with major companies such as News Corp, AMP and QBE Insurance set to reveal earnings results.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Don't let FOMO fool you: Selling Big Bash teams is a bad idea
Cricket Australia certainly has a challenge to grow revenue. Its commercial revenue – sponsorship, ticketing, hospitality etc – has been flat over the past five years, and its domestic media rights deal is essentially flat until 2031. Selling stakes in BBL teams will deliver an infusion of cash. The problem is that selling capital assets such as the BBL is a one-off. It sacrifices future revenue for a lump sum today. Since CA's costs won't reduce, it will still need that revenue in future years. The only way to do this is to invest the proceeds of sale into something that generates at least the same return as the BBL. Loading Effectively, this means the proceeds of sale need to be sequestered, put into the Future Fund and invested in other revenue-generating assets, most likely outside cricket. This might happen, or might not. As governments worldwide show, the temptation to spend tomorrow's money today can be overwhelming. Best to reduce costs, run at a surplus over the cycle, invest the proceeds wisely and host more World Cups. That brings us to the fear of missing out. The arguments for: Everyone else is doing it, so why shouldn't we? In particular, the England Cricket Board has sold stakes in the Hundred for seemingly good prices – especially the team based at Lord's. The IPL includes private owners, and is a success, so perhaps this is causation as well correlation? The IPL clubs are globalising and, if they end up contracting players to their franchises across the world on a 12-month basis, the BBL might miss out on having these players involved unless the IPL owners also own BBL teams. BBL clubs might not be able to afford players in demand from other privately owned leagues played in the same window. The core hope is that someone will overpay for the revenue streams CA would otherwise be receiving, or that they can generate more revenue or profit than CA and the states can. The core fear is we need to sell now or be left behind. It's possible a foreign owner can make more money from BBL clubs from overseas sources than CA can, but only if the BBL effectively becomes the Australian leg of a global T20 tour controlled by IPL owners and private equity firms. Think Sydney Knight Riders rather than Sydney Sixers. The question for CA is whether this will help it to grow the game in Australia more effectively than retaining full ownership and control. This seems unlikely. CA and the states are focused on growing Australian cricket and understand the participation and consumption markets better than anyone; foreign BBL owners are not, and won't ever, be focused on this. Nor is Boston Consulting Group. CA's flagship product, international cricket, also runs parallel to the BBL. CA has the ability to manage its schedule to maximise the audience for all formats. This will become far more challenging when private owners are solving only for BBL. And CA will not exercise the same degree of control over Indian billionaires as the Board of Control for Cricket in India does. The BCCI is in effect an arm of the Indian government; CA is not. The nub of the issue appears to be 'If we sell the BBL now we can get top dollar. If we don't, the IPL owners will compete with it and take the players'. This is already happening to a degree, with parallel tournaments over summer in South Africa and the Middle East. Is it therefore better to surrender, to take the money and run? The answer in my view is no. It is a mistake to think the BBL is popular because of specific players. Players come and go and always will. And the BBL makes stars as much as stars make the BBL. BBL is popular fundamentally because it is cricket, it is T20 and it is played in the perfect timeslot – every summer night. Its standing among global T20 leagues is largely irrelevant to Aussie fans. As, frankly, is the IPL. It is also a mistake to think the IPL is better-run. It simply operates in a far bigger market. Which brings us to cricket politics. The argument for: Key figures are in favour of it. The 'privatise' faction has existed in Australian cricket since at least 2011. However, its incentives must be carefully examined. If I am a leading player, player agent, or players' union, I want as much competition for players as possible – except when it comes to restrictions on overseas player slots in the BBL. More owners and more competitions are better. So privatisation is good. CA's incentives are the opposite. If I am associated with a potential investor or stand to make money from a transaction, I want privatisation. CA needs to discount these perspectives accordingly. Loading And if I am an executive or director who wants to be seen to 'do something', or 'leave a legacy', or just do something new, I might want privatisation. That requires a good hard look in the mirror. Administrators are only temporary custodians of the game. The real question for CA is what is best for Australian cricket fans, and the grassroots clubs and associations that ultimately own the game. Publicising the report would help us decide for ourselves. That is the right next step.
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Don't let FOMO fool you: Selling Big Bash teams is a bad idea
Cricket Australia certainly has a challenge to grow revenue. Its commercial revenue – sponsorship, ticketing, hospitality etc – has been flat over the past five years, and its domestic media rights deal is essentially flat until 2031. Selling stakes in BBL teams will deliver an infusion of cash. The problem is that selling capital assets such as the BBL is a one-off. It sacrifices future revenue for a lump sum today. Since CA's costs won't reduce, it will still need that revenue in future years. The only way to do this is to invest the proceeds of sale into something that generates at least the same return as the BBL. Loading Effectively, this means the proceeds of sale need to be sequestered, put into the Future Fund and invested in other revenue-generating assets, most likely outside cricket. This might happen, or might not. As governments worldwide show, the temptation to spend tomorrow's money today can be overwhelming. Best to reduce costs, run at a surplus over the cycle, invest the proceeds wisely and host more World Cups. That brings us to the fear of missing out. The arguments for: Everyone else is doing it, so why shouldn't we? In particular, the England Cricket Board has sold stakes in the Hundred for seemingly good prices – especially the team based at Lord's. The IPL includes private owners, and is a success, so perhaps this is causation as well correlation? The IPL clubs are globalising and, if they end up contracting players to their franchises across the world on a 12-month basis, the BBL might miss out on having these players involved unless the IPL owners also own BBL teams. BBL clubs might not be able to afford players in demand from other privately owned leagues played in the same window. The core hope is that someone will overpay for the revenue streams CA would otherwise be receiving, or that they can generate more revenue or profit than CA and the states can. The core fear is we need to sell now or be left behind. It's possible a foreign owner can make more money from BBL clubs from overseas sources than CA can, but only if the BBL effectively becomes the Australian leg of a global T20 tour controlled by IPL owners and private equity firms. Think Sydney Knight Riders rather than Sydney Sixers. The question for CA is whether this will help it to grow the game in Australia more effectively than retaining full ownership and control. This seems unlikely. CA and the states are focused on growing Australian cricket and understand the participation and consumption markets better than anyone; foreign BBL owners are not, and won't ever, be focused on this. Nor is Boston Consulting Group. CA's flagship product, international cricket, also runs parallel to the BBL. CA has the ability to manage its schedule to maximise the audience for all formats. This will become far more challenging when private owners are solving only for BBL. And CA will not exercise the same degree of control over Indian billionaires as the Board of Control for Cricket in India does. The BCCI is in effect an arm of the Indian government; CA is not. The nub of the issue appears to be 'If we sell the BBL now we can get top dollar. If we don't, the IPL owners will compete with it and take the players'. This is already happening to a degree, with parallel tournaments over summer in South Africa and the Middle East. Is it therefore better to surrender, to take the money and run? The answer in my view is no. It is a mistake to think the BBL is popular because of specific players. Players come and go and always will. And the BBL makes stars as much as stars make the BBL. BBL is popular fundamentally because it is cricket, it is T20 and it is played in the perfect timeslot – every summer night. Its standing among global T20 leagues is largely irrelevant to Aussie fans. As, frankly, is the IPL. It is also a mistake to think the IPL is better-run. It simply operates in a far bigger market. Which brings us to cricket politics. The argument for: Key figures are in favour of it. The 'privatise' faction has existed in Australian cricket since at least 2011. However, its incentives must be carefully examined. If I am a leading player, player agent, or players' union, I want as much competition for players as possible – except when it comes to restrictions on overseas player slots in the BBL. More owners and more competitions are better. So privatisation is good. CA's incentives are the opposite. If I am associated with a potential investor or stand to make money from a transaction, I want privatisation. CA needs to discount these perspectives accordingly. Loading And if I am an executive or director who wants to be seen to 'do something', or 'leave a legacy', or just do something new, I might want privatisation. That requires a good hard look in the mirror. Administrators are only temporary custodians of the game. The real question for CA is what is best for Australian cricket fans, and the grassroots clubs and associations that ultimately own the game. Publicising the report would help us decide for ourselves. That is the right next step.
AU Financial Review
3 hours ago
- AU Financial Review
India aghast at Trump's ‘dead' economy jibe, 25pc tariffs
New Delhi | Shock, dismay and angst swept across India as businesses, policymakers and citizens digested US President Donald Trump's sharp remarks and a surprise 25 per cent tariff rate last week. While Indian government officials weighed a response and business groups tallied the cost of the trade barrier, social media was alive with users protesting Trump's comments and criticising Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for not speaking up. Bloomberg
