machinehead Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 HRFF gives disgruntled clients the slip, as he strides toward the BAREister Fund corporate campus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TURK Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 I assume that the things that matter most to the markets are A: The price of oil, and B: The Ten Year Treasury Yield I'm going to ask this question for the third time, and I hope to get some discussion on this... Considering the profound affect that lousy jobs numbers have on the Ten Year Yield (the Yield always tanks on a bad jobs number), why should we assume that Ten Year Yields will ever rise as long as the jobs number continue to suck? Anybody? What is it that would cause the Ten Year Yield to rise DESPITE lousy jobs numbers? If what we see in the future is a deteriorating employment situation, what is it that will cause the Ten Year Yield to rise? Foreign capital outflows in such quantities that this move overpowers the jobs data? Anybody? Are there any more ways that I can ask this question? Is this not exceptionally relevant? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think when all others will not buy our treasuries, the fed will simply monetize the debt. Bernanke clearly indicated as much with the "printing press" remark. So the yields never rise. Turk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TURK Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 Oh yeah! I forgot to mention (per NWD's remarks) this means death to the dollah and gold really shines!! Turk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Doo Doo Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 It will be much worse K-Wave ! At least with YHOO, there was "speculation" that they could continue to grow as internet usage expanded. Only so many homes can be built and sold based upon population growth and available credit expansion ... with interest rates tossed in the mix as an additional factor. (Al Leeson has already publicly stated that interest rates are going up ... and that if you are positioned to bet against that ... you must want to lose money.) The builders have massively overbuilt ... as the growing inventory of new homes is now at unbelievable levels. The MoGauge is stalled in mid air. The insiders at the homebubblers know what lies directly ahead ... they are selling their stocks at unprecedented rates. New home building permit applications are already dropping like a rock in some of the craziest markets. Word is, that speculative investor new home purchases have come to a standstill in some of theses markets. PHM had to drastically drop their prices in the Nevada market. LEN has already warned investors that they have problems. HOV recently missed their quarterly number, no? As the downward spiral unfolds, falling home prices and falling demand will likely create many indebted bagholders with no immediate way out. I can remember the housing bubble in the Boston area back in 1984-87. Homes doubled in price, and then dropped like a rock back to pre-bubble levels in half the time. UFB ! A little comparison chart to ponder for those who like to extrapolate trends forever into the future.. How quickly folks forget, eh? Below are weekly charts of NVR, the current Mania leader, and YHOO from '97-01...scarily simlilar, wouldn't you say...right down to the configration of both the fast and slow MACDs... Please take note that after the last green candle on the YHOO chart at the top in the last week of 1999, the decline to the very bottom only took 15 months..I expect the Homebuilder stocks may take a bit longer..but hopefully the general idea is clear, eh? They may hold the Homies up until the end of the year to make the YE holdings look good...but after that, I expect the first quarter of '05 to be a disaster... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 Please repost your real estate related posts on RealEstateBubbleWatch.com Many tanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 Where's the BARE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHankydoesWallStreet Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 I assume that the things that matter most to the markets are A:? The price of oil, and B:? The Ten Year Treasury Yield I'm going to ask this question for the third time, and I hope to get some discussion on this... Considering the profound affect that lousy jobs numbers have on the Ten Year Yield (the Yield always tanks on a bad jobs number), why should we assume that Ten Year Yields will ever rise as long as the jobs number continue to suck? Anybody? What is it that would cause the Ten Year Yield to rise DESPITE lousy jobs numbers? If what we see in the future is a deteriorating employment situation, what is it that will cause the Ten Year Yield to rise? Foreign capital outflows in such quantities that this move overpowers the jobs data? Anybody? Are there any more ways that I can ask this question? Is this not exceptionally relevant? The Fed simply does not have the flexibility at present to put forth a monetary response to meaningfully higher energy prices as it has in the past.? The extremely levered nature of the US economy precludes such a response as would be consistent with historical precedent.? Is there any other answer you can think of?? We believe the Fed has two clear choices.? Accelerate monetary tightening to head off burgeoning inflationary pressures and risk a debt related negative total economy response to rising rates, or keep short term interest rates in negative territory and jawbone about "contained" inflationary pressures.? Oh yes, the second choice also involves a certain amount of praying.? But, as you can see below, periods of negative annual wage gains were more than present in the 1970's. In fact, they virtually characterized the period. Yes, wage growth is a big driver of inflationary pressures. But we suggest that sustained negative wage growth is a sign that inflationary pressures are building and may be much greater than is anticipated by the public. Great read on energy prices, inflation, and the Fed in the current environment The Containment Area {Tried the RESPOND feature and it gave a bunch of ASCII crap, Doc, probably I messed it up editing more and will try it again to see if it works on another post} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bullseatshitndie Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 want to clear up something from the discussion of investors intelligence #'s in ids this week. doc mentioned how there was one period where the # was above 60 and spx still ran up 100pts. that is not true. i finally had to time update my spreadsheet with the raw data going back to december of 1999. here's the chart of sentiment: http://www.vtoreport.com/sentiment/sentiment.htm since dec 99, the bull # has been above 60 a total of 6 times. bull # date of report close that day ensuing high low recentlly after 61 1/31/01 1366.01 1383.37(1/31/01) 1215.44(2/23/01) 61.8 2/07/01 1340.90 1383.37(1/31/010 1215.44(2/23/01) 61.2 2/21/01 1255.28 1272.76(2/27/01) 1081.19(3/22/01) 60.2 6/18/03 1010.09 1015.33(6/17/03) 962.10(7/01/03) 60.2 2/25/04 1143.67 1163.23(3/5/04) 1087.06(3/24/04) 60.8 12/08/04 1182.81 1197.46(12/3/04)?? ?????? not that the past data is a certain guarantee of the future, but i'll continue to stick with what has worked. the high may already be in or it comes late dec, very early jan as i've said repeatedly. my only concern is year end/begin of year bs. 2005 WILL be the return of the bear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anyone Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 want to clear up something from the discussion of investors intelligence #'s in ids this week. doc mentioned how there was one period where the # was above 60 and spx still ran up 100pts. that is not true. i finally had to time update my spreadsheet with the raw data going back to december of 1999. here's the chart of sentiment: http://www.vtoreport.com/sentiment/sentiment.htm since dec 99, the bull # has been above 60 a total of 6 times. bull # date of report close that day ensuing high low recentlly after 61 1/31/01 1366.01 1383.37(1/31/01) 1215.44(2/23/01) 61.8 2/07/01 1340.90 1383.37(1/31/010 1215.44(2/23/01) 61.2 2/21/01 1255.28 1272.76(2/27/01) 1081.19(3/22/01) 60.2 6/18/03 1010.09 1015.33(6/17/03) 962.10(7/01/03) 60.2 2/25/04 1143.67 1163.23(3/5/04) 1087.06(3/24/04) 60.8 12/08/04 1182.81 1197.46(12/3/04)?? ?????? not that the past data is a certain guarantee of the future, but i'll continue to stick with what has worked. the high may already be in or it comes late dec, very early jan as i've said repeatedly. my only concern is year end/begin of year bs. 2005 WILL be the return of the bear. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> From the very same site, I see that Bulllish Advisors Minus Bearish Advisors are at levels where it was between March 2003 and Dec 2003. What happened between those dates ? Also, look at the Nasdaq 100 positions of Small Traders.. Record Short Those guys are always right, right ? I think when someone has a bias, s/he sees what s/he wanna see.. This is a bear web site, yada yada... So, sentiment is bearish, another proof that we're right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bullseatshitndie Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 want to clear up something from the discussion of investors intelligence #'s in ids this week.? doc mentioned how there was one period where the # was above 60 and spx still ran up 100pts.? that is not true.? i finally had to time update my spreadsheet with the raw data going back to december of 1999. here's the chart of sentiment:? http://www.vtoreport.com/sentiment/sentiment.htm since dec 99, the bull # has been above 60 a total of 6 times. bull #? ? ? date of report? ? close that day? ensuing high? ? ? ? low recentlly after 61? ? ? ? ? 1/31/01? ? ? ? ? ? 1366.01? ? ? ? ? 1383.37(1/31/01)? 1215.44(2/23/01) 61.8? ? ? ? 2/07/01? ? ? ? ? ? 1340.90? ? ? ? ? 1383.37(1/31/010? 1215.44(2/23/01) 61.2? ? ? ? 2/21/01? ? ? ? ? ? 1255.28? ? ? ? ? 1272.76(2/27/01)? 1081.19(3/22/01) 60.2? ? ? ? 6/18/03? ? ? ? ? ? 1010.09? ? ? ? ? 1015.33(6/17/03)? 962.10(7/01/03) 60.2? ? ? ? 2/25/04? ? ? ? ? ? 1143.67? ? ? ? ? 1163.23(3/5/04)? ? 1087.06(3/24/04) 60.8? ? ? ? 12/08/04? ? ? ? ? ? 1182.81? ? ? ? ? 1197.46(12/3/04)??? ? ? ?????? not that the past data is a certain guarantee of the future, but i'll continue to stick with what has worked.? the high may already be in or it comes late dec, very early jan as i've said repeatedly.? my only concern is year end/begin of year bs.? 2005 WILL be the return of the bear. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> From the very same site, I see that Bulllish Advisors Minus Bearish Advisors are at levels where it was between March 2003 and Dec 2003. What happened between those dates ? Also, look at the Nasdaq 100 positions of Small Traders.. Record Short Those guys are always right, right ? I think when someone has a bias, s/he sees what s/he wanna see.. This is a bear web site, yada yada... So, sentiment is bearish, another proof that we're right... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1st of all, the bull/bear diff at the mar 03 lows was 2.3(bull 39.8,bear37.5). again, this indicator best used at extremes. when near zero, buy the market like no tomorrow. when differential near 40, sell. currently, at 39.10. could care less about what happens in between. as for naz 100 small traders record short, well this is the big contract and don't think very good proxy for what the "real" small trades are doing. the emini naz tells a better story. as kwave stated friday in ids, 90+ small are bullish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirac Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 When most people retire, and lose their income, they begin to liquidate. What choice do they have. Social suckurity? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> that would be true if all boomers would liquidate all there accounts when they retire with 65. But that will not be the case. They will sometimes withdraw a bit at other times they will hope for better prices in the future and even BUY more. It will be a smooth process. You can be sure that the financial community will manage that, the governemnt will even make new laws to prevent a sudden withdrawl by the boomers. When the government can introduce laws which forbid to pocess gold why shouldnt they make other things, like that it is forbidden to withdraw more thna 10k dollars a year form the stock market, or they make soemthing with taxes, WTF do i know? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree with your last statement FX...there will be capital controls. And it would not be wise to have your money in an American bank, or at least all of it. People better start looking at maps and find Switzerland, Leichtenstein, Isle of Man or Panama. At the very least, start taking out some cash. Gold too, but I would be leary of holding it in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 Capital controls will not be such that a starving retiree can't draw 1000 bucks a month from their retirement account to pay for food and medicine. Multiply that by 40 million and what's the result? Realistically speaking it would be politically impossible to tell retirees they can't draw their own money out of their retirement accounts. Especially considering that this is the country's largest voting block. Whether there are capital controls that prevent people from moving funds out of the country is a separate, speculative issue. Let's not confuse the two issues. Retirees will on balance liquidate more of the pie, for purposes of subsistence and consumption, than workers will contribute to it. The composition of the pie may change, but it won't get any bigger. In fact, it should shrink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anyone Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 1st of all, the bull/bear diff at the mar 03 lows was 2.3(bull 39.8,bear37.5). again, this indicator best used at extremes. when near zero, buy the market like no tomorrow. when differential near 40, sell. currently, at 39.10. could care less about what happens in between. as for naz 100 small traders record short, well this is the big contract and don't think very good proxy for what the "real" small trades are doing. the emini naz tells a better story. as kwave stated friday in ids, 90+ small are bullish <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Are we looking at different charts ? I see that around May 03 (chart doesn't have lines, I can't see the exact date) Bull/Bear diff is 0.45 and SPX at 950 ish.. Fast forward to Mar 04 , Bull/Bear diff is the same, SPX at 1150 ish.. Where was the sell signal ? May 03 was you sell signal, since 45>40. Did it work ? I am not smart enough to argue which ones are the "real" small traders.. So how many e-minis make a big contract, 5 ? All I can say is, small traders are "small" for a reason, if they have been more right they wouldn't have been left small in the first place with the leverage in futures and all... Again, we see what we wanna see.. Not that there is anything wrong with that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 FCB Trashury Accumulation Cycle Nears End Everybody Else Is Selling Home Equity Cash Out Slows Rally's Days Are Numbered Fed Releases update is now posted! Once a week Doc fills you in on the all important Fed weekly releases. Once a week Doc fills you in on the all important Fed weekly releases with a succinct analysis of the charts of the Fed's most important money and credit measures. This is the real story behind the markets. Get the big picture! Take a subscribatory and download your Fed Releases RIGHT NOW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wndysrf Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 Aloha Riverboaters!!! Looks like the OPEC Jawboning has already started........ They have been recruited by The Matrix to help push stocks higher. ``After OPEC decided to reduce oil output by 1 million barrels a day, prices fell, proving that markets are saturated,'' Abdullah bin Hamad al-Attiyah told reporters today in Dubai, where he was inaugurating a branch of the Qatar Petrochemical Co. More oil price collapse? Huge ramp for stocks next week?............story here "Words" once again turn trillion dollar markets............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.