soup Posted December 11, 2004 Report Share Posted December 11, 2004 Dozer: You are correct about the lack of re fi boom. Re fi are in the toilet, see DOc's mogage for exact details. Maybe if 10s break 3%, but then one has to wonder about the depression. All the signs are there. The consumer is tapped. That could change, and who knows if they have another trick up their sleeve? I do not, but then again, I can not beleive they have lasted this long. The bear mkt has a lot of unfinished business. ANd I think the next leg down will be brutual both to stocks and to housing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup Posted December 11, 2004 Report Share Posted December 11, 2004 Just because some stock acts this way or that way does not mean they are discounting anything. THe crowd works in mysterious ways. I always ask the question of Mark, yet I have never seen him answer. What was amzn discounting when it printed 400 bucks? Just because cof or cfc does this or that does not mean shit about the underlying fundamentals. Billy mo mo o'neal was proven a fraud in the 70's , 00, and will be proven a fraud once again when this bubble pops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup Posted December 11, 2004 Report Share Posted December 11, 2004 Re SS: There is no "pot" of dough laying around to be diveted into the stock mkt. ANy monies going to stocks must come from another asset class. If, by some miracle the political hacks would make some tough choices ( paying off existing folks and letting everyone else out of the system) then perhaps we can talk about bullish outcomes for the stock mkt. We are a long way from there. This political bantering taking place at present is all bullshit. Robbing Peter to pay Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHankydoesWallStreet Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 How do the Transports make a move equal to their roaring 90's 96-98 run only with even more momentum while oil prices triple and with a tepid cyclic recovery??? Here we have reached the ultimate extension of the A-B-C move (4.25) and prior highs. Probably I should know better than use the word ultimate in this market. Anyway here another moment of truth has arrived. 2005 is starting with some very interesting technical gauntlets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 "These wonderful Bank Owned properties are located in all areas in all 50 states. First Time Homebuyers, Investment Homes, Condo's and Commercial Foreclosures 50,000 Listings, Starting At $25,000 3-4-5 Bedroom Foreclosed Homes In All 50 States" Get Out! This Ain't Your House No More! In 1992 I watched John Templeton on FNN say that he expected the Dow to go to 10,000 by the year 2000. I had always respected him but I thought he had some sort of mental lapse or ailment when he said that. As it turned out of course it went over 10,000. Now he says Homes could fall in price by 90%. Maybe this will be an understatement again. Maybe the average Home price in U.S. will fall by 95%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHankydoesWallStreet Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 Another one I posted in another forum: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PandaBear Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 Jim Poop-lava is now bullish after being bearish most of 2004. Cites massive liquidity pumping as the main reason for this. His guest this week: Harry Dent, who predicts Dow 40,000 before 2009. http://www.netcastdaily.com/fsnewshour.htm Lance Lewis has a lot of thoughts, including the thought that gold has topped for a while. http://worldmarket.blogspot.com/2004/12/la...-18-months.html Frank Veneroso also thinks gold is headed down for a while along with other commodities. http://worldmarket.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHankydoesWallStreet Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 One of the worst sectors in this recovery about to make a break. Should help us get a grip on where 2005 will go. Sprint-Nextel merger should oligopolize and get some better pricing power to help it break to the upside! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHankydoesWallStreet Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 Jim Poop-lava is now bullish after being bearish most of 2004. Cites massive liquidity pumping as the main reason for this. His guest this week: Harry Dent, who predicts Dow 40,000 before 2009. JP crapitulates??? I hope he has turned bearish on gold too HD the fit the data to the theory expert!!! Another bull getting very cocky comes as a relief that this bear market rally is about done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wndysrf Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 Aloha Riverboaters!!! Attn: Soup.......... Hey Brah... , I'll give you my answer. When AMZN was printing $400, it was clear that the entire Nasdaq was in a massive blowoff mode. The market was discounting nothing but a speculative hysteria combined with epic short squeezes. So far, all the indexes are acting normally, rising in an orderly manner, including the HGX. My view is that stocks and commodities are simply following the liquidity and number of dollar paper instruments being spewed out of the Atomic Particle Accelerator. Shorty thinks that commodities are going to rally and stocks are going to crash. I think both will move together, and if there is some type of "accident" to send stocks down, then all commodities are going to crash with the CRB, including gold. Conversely, if "any and all weakness" is counterattacked by by Al Green with the usual rate reductions, then I think stocks and commodities are both going to go parabolic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dozer Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 yi-yi-YI ! hanky, that sure is one spikey spike! we all talk about how reminiscent this time is of 1999, but it's truly even more manic. That's a higher upthrust than even 1999's peak. Regarding the Refi 'boom': I just came across a number in Comstock that Refi's are currently 75% off the peak, and still dropping. Also, I saw it posted here today or yesterday that the tax-cuts were ending or had ended. Is that actually the case? I was under the impression that the tax -rebates- had ended, but that all the -cuts- were still in place. Appreciate any info to the contrary. Here's an interesting cyclical goings-on....to this tenderfoot, it looks like distribution effected by master artists... http://stockcharts.com/def/ servlet/SC.web?c=cat,uu[w,a]eacayyay[pb10!d20,2][vc60][iuk14!lah12,26,9!lc20] &listNum=1 Note the almost perfect 3-day timing between cycle-peaks of the ripple along the top. Pump, pump, pump....distribute, distribute, distribute... I would also note that CAT closed Friday -at- a peak.... It's another data-point which leads me to think that FeedFool is right....we have a week of down ahead; before another round of manic-jamma begins anew... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 Jim Poop-lava is now bullish after being bearish most of 2004.? Cites massive liquidity pumping as the main reason for this.? His guest this week:? Harry Dent, who predicts Dow 40,000 before 2009. "Hairy Dent" A genuine latter-day traveling Huckster. Hairy, you ain't no John Templeton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTNWORSE Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 I would not bet on further weakness past the Fed meeting. Another chart getting into the "buy" zone: http://www.wallstreetcourier.com/technicia...statistics9.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PandaBear 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}> Plunger, I think one of the interesting things about the current economic climate is that NOTHING will cause Treasury bond yields to rise significantly until the foreign central banks stop buying. And even if they do, the Fed will monetize both directly and indirectly (through their agents in the Caribbean - who now buy more Treasury bonds than the People's Bank of China), to achieve their targeted bond yield. This is one of Bernanke's "unconventional measures". The "Bernanke put", for bond investors. http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/sp...121/default.htm There are at least two ways of bringing down longer-term rates, which are complementary and could be employed separately or in combination. One approach, similar to an action taken in the past couple of years by the Bank of Japan, would be for the Fed to commit to holding the overnight rate at zero for some specified period. Because long-term interest rates represent averages of current and expected future short-term rates, plus a term premium, a commitment to keep short-term rates at zero for some time--if it were credible--would induce a decline in longer-term rates. A more direct method, which I personally prefer, would be for the Fed to begin announcing explicit ceilings for yields on longer-maturity Treasury debt (say, bonds maturing within the next two years). The Fed could enforce these interest-rate ceilings by committing to make unlimited purchases of securities up to two years from maturity at prices consistent with the targeted yields. If this program were successful, not only would yields on medium-term Treasury securities fall, but (because of links operating through expectations of future interest rates) yields on longer-term public and private debt (such as mortgages) would likely fall as well. The price of this policy would be the sacrifice of the dollar and high inflation. Exactly what they are doing right now. Exactly why Bill Gross says the bond vigilantes are dead. Exactly why our own Machinehead calls the 10-year the "zombie" note. Except the Fed really hasn't had to do too much, because Uncles Fukui and Mizoguchi have done most of the heavy lifting and will continue to do so. I would not underestimate the resolve of the Bank of Japan to go down with USS Dollar, like some kamikaze pilot or Imperial Japanese Navy captain dying for their emperor. Your question is extremely relevant and the answer tells us why we are likely to go the high to hyperinflation route rather than the straightforward deflationary one. Under a gold standard, this could not happen. But we are awash in a sea of fiat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.