Posted:
#51
Anyone watching DPTR? Going berserk and I don't see any news at all.
0
September Stock Discussion
Posted:
#52
Quote Originally Posted by Vermeer:
I have compared economics to astrology and alchemy.That being said, just to be fair, here is an article pointing out and naming the ones who saw it coming.A pity Al and Ben are not among the ones mentioned...
https://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/452dc484-9bdc-11de-b214-00144feabdc0.html
I have compared economics to astrology and alchemy.That being said, just to be fair, here is an article pointing out and naming the ones who saw it coming.A pity Al and Ben are not among the ones mentioned...
https://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/452dc484-9bdc-11de-b214-00144feabdc0.html
hyperlinked
Policymakers have resisted inclusion of balance sheets and the flow of funds in their models by arguing that bubbles cannot be easily identified, nor their effects reliably anticipated. The above analysts have shown that this is, in fact, feasible, and indeed essential if we are to “see it coming” next time. The financial sector is just as real as the real economy. Our policymakers, and the analysts they rely on, ignore balance sheets and the flow of funds at their peril – and ours.
maybe by brainwashed, improperly instructed inflationist economists, yes. But why did so many average joe shmoes spot the housing bubble waaaay back when,,,,,,fundamentals?
I'm pretty sure Peter Schiff was one that was warning of the coming crash before it happened, and i've also read that he's lost those that invested with him 60 - 80% of their 'investments'
0
Posted:
#53
can any of you guys lend me some of your expertise on ID ? have a friend in the biz that is as wary as i am of playing the stock market, but out of the blue he told me last week that he got his feet wet with this stock on some info he got thru the line of work, and was trying to push me to take his advice. I found it very odd to even have the conversation, but now that i've watched it go from 6.80 to 7.35 i'm kicking myself a bit.
link
thanks for any help
link
thanks for any help
0
Posted:
#56
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Wow..
There might be a hint that they have a discovery or something happened relative to one of their wells, or maybe even the CRB.
DRYS is on the move today too.
Wow..
There might be a hint that they have a discovery or something happened relative to one of their wells, or maybe even the CRB.
DRYS is on the move today too.
LVS too. 6 months ago to the date LVS traded at $1.38. Now sits almost $17. That's a 12-bagger in 6 months. WoW.
0
Posted:
#57
LVS too. 6 months ago to the date LVS traded at $1.38. Now sits almost $17. That's a 12-bagger in 6 months. WoW.
WYNN over $60 again and "the desert dog" MGM over $10. all three short term overbought BUT heaven help any bears that try to short them. the last week the last week they got pounded. still no LVS stock to borrow @ TD and that usually mean higher. 
I can see the "Macau Monsters" moving but MGM? I hear very little positive about Las Vegas gaming, OR our overall economy, right now. 
0
Posted:
#59
Quote Originally Posted by depeche2:
LVS too. 6 months ago to the date LVS traded at $1.38. Now sits almost $17. That's a 12-bagger in 6 months. WoW.
LVS too. 6 months ago to the date LVS traded at $1.38. Now sits almost $17. That's a 12-bagger in 6 months. WoW.
Yeah we sat here and talked about it and I was all for it, but of course I didnt do anything about it, that and the banks on the cheap..like WFC under 10, BAC below 5 etc etc.
0
Posted:
#63
China's Ministry of Finance announced that it would sell 6 billion yuan worth of government bonds in Hong Kong soon. That's less than $900 million at current exchange rates, a pittance compared to the $100 billion-plus in U.S. Treasury debt that we're selling every few weeks. But it's noteworthy because this is the first issue of Chinese government debt targeted at global investors.
Any comment on the details of this?
0
Posted:
#67
some interesting Art Cashin comments friday morning.....
“There’s just some eerie things about this (market)—it’s reminiscent of spring and summer of ‘87 when nobody believed the rally and it kept going up despite skepticism, people shorting into it,” he said. “It ate them alive until it suddenly turned.”
btw, looking like a "flip and dink 'em" move today in the gamers. after an early "Oh my GOD, COVER!!!" move they flipped at 1130 edt. LVS and MGM bown almost a point from their highs and WYNN almost 2 points. "I got MINE" profit taking or the start of a correction? all the gamers had one hell of a run since the start of september.
0
Posted:
#70
He is no better than Cramerica, the difference is he stands on the floor and holds an order-entry pad.
I watched that channel almost since it started and I never cared for him.
Rick Santelli before his stardom is one of the only real info sources on CNBS, definitely not Art Cashin.
Here is an Art impression from yours truely-
"Uhhhh it looks like they are going to try and test the bulls conviction after the bond closes, the bulls are in control since Labor Day and they are buying on every dip" blah blah blah.
I watched that channel almost since it started and I never cared for him.
Rick Santelli before his stardom is one of the only real info sources on CNBS, definitely not Art Cashin.
Here is an Art impression from yours truely-
"Uhhhh it looks like they are going to try and test the bulls conviction after the bond closes, the bulls are in control since Labor Day and they are buying on every dip" blah blah blah.
0
Posted:
#74
Interesting comparison between 1987 and 2009.
Actually there is no comparison. Totally different.
Let's break-down the market in 87 and 2009, also for-sake-of-comparison we'll also look at 1929, the start of the great deppresion and 2000 the end of the tech boom.
Here's the previous 5 years and 2 years of market returns coming into each period. And remember, earnings drives the stock market for the most part, when the markets been driven way up stocks become expensive relative to earnings unless earnings rise at the same pace. When stocks are expensive relative to earnings is when the stock market produces big corrections.
5 years coming into ............
1929 --- 29.8% average per year
1987 --- 20.3%
2000 --- 28.9%
2009 --- (-.08%)
even if we throw out 2008, a down year for the market
2008 --- 10.6%
2 years coming into ...........
1929 --- 42.3%
1987 ---- 25.7%
2000 ---- 24.9%
2009 --- (-15.9%)
2008 --- 10.6%
First, we can see there's no comparison with 2009 or 2008 with the other 3 peiods.
The two 5 year periods coming into 1929 and 2000 are "BY FAR THE BEST RETURNS" of the four periods.
These were also the "2 BEST 5 YEAR RETURNS OF ANY 5 YEAR PERIOD IN THE HISTORY OF THE STOCK MARKET BEGINNING IN 1871".
Looking at 2 Years previous 2009 and 2008 again is no comparison to the other periods, stocks have not been driven up coming into 2009 or 2008 like they were going into the other 3 periods which all produced big market corrections.
Remember, when stocks get driven-up they become expensive relative to earnings unless of coarse earnings are rising at the same rate. And the way we tell this is..... Price-to-Earnings Ratio of the S&P 500, (PE).
In 1929 the PE was around 27, the highest or most expensive period for stocks at the end of a bull run untill 2000 when the PE was around 45.
What did these 2 most expensive periods produce ??
The only two periods in the history of the stock market when stocks went down 3 consecutive years (2000-2002), and 4 consecutive years (1929-1932).
Again, high PE's, when stocks are expensive, produce market corrections.
The 42.3% returns in the 2 years coming into 1929 produced the 2cd best 2 year returns in market history, meaning stocks are now expensive relative to earnings, and not surprisingly produced the only 4 consecutive year losing streak in market history.
What 2 year period produced the largest 2 year return ????
The 2 year period just a few years after the only 4 consecutive year losing streak , meaning stocks are now inexpensive.......
1935-1936 --- 43.7% average per year
Looking at the PE of each periods tell's us the story.....
1929 --- around 27
1987 --- around 23
2000 --- around 45
2007 (october) --- around 30
today ---- around 17
Stocks are the cheapest they've been for years and years and years today.
The largest market correction's in 1929, 2000, 2007 also followed the largest PE's.
The PE in 1987 was one of the highest at the time, since the tech boom in the 90's the PE has been higher than in past years like 1929 or 1987 because investors are willing to pay more for tech, tech consistently trades higher than the rest of the market.
Also today it's much easier for the average investor to buy stocks, just as recently as in the 80's commissions were 10 times higher then they are today and one needed to buy a minimum number of shares or they were accessed a penalty.
Because of these reasons is why we see PE's much higher since the tech boom of the 90's, "BEFORE BIG MARKET CORRECTIONS", such as the 30 PE before 2007 or the 45 PE in 2000.
This is why a 17 PE today is not the same as a 17 PE years ago, stocks today are cheap and............
WE'RE GOING UP FROM HERE FOLKS !!!!!!!!!!!
0
Posted:
#75
Many analyst are talking about a double dip because the great depression produced.
Well let's take a look, here's the yearly return after the market starting going up similar to today.........
1933 ---- 56.8% , very similar to the run-up we've seen since the lows in march
1934 --- (-8%)
1935 ---54.9%
1936 --- 32.55%
1937 --- (-32.11%)
1938 --- 17.5%
What double dip are they talking about ???? The 8% loss in 1934 ???
Why would anyone won't to miss the tremendous gains of 1933 and 1935 just to avoid the double dip 8% loss in 1934 ????
Are they talking about the 32.11% loss in 1937 ???? But that came 5 years after the market began to rise off the bottom.
Even if you were the worst possible market timer, getting in the market in 1934 and getting out at the end of 1937 catching both the double dip losing periods you still produced a very nice 16.4% average return per year.
Imagine if your timing wasn't this bad ?????
Why would talking about that double dip be worth anything ???
The stock market produces big returns at market bottoms when stocks are cheap, like we've seen today. And stocks are still cheap.
I wouldn't be afraid of a double dip, when stocks are cheap there's less downside potential, you'll very likely miss some very, very nice returns if you do.
2 Years from now you'll be kick'in yourself for not being in this market !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0
Hot Forum Topics
