The Stock Market and Investing

tagman · February 2010

Attacking Iran would be an act of sheer lunacy----so no doubt someone will do it.

Exactly... and likewise, an Iranian attack against Israel would be an act of lunacy... so no doubt someone will do it. The big difference is that there is an element there that actually wants to do it. :sick:

TM

Mr_Shiftright · February 2010

I don't think so. It is incomprehensible that Iran would choose to destroy its entire civilization. In fact, no country has ever chosen to subject itself to instant and total nuclear annihilation. It makes no sense.

this is just more scare tactics. Iran will go nuclear someday, as will other countries, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Cat was out of the bag in 1945 and that's that. Only solution is complete nuclear ban. Even Ronald Reagan eventually came to this conclusion.

tagman · February 2010

It is incomprehensible that Iran would choose to destroy its entire civilization.

Many perspectives from the Middle East are incomprehensible, as are many events in human history. In addition, it is naive to think that there aren't elements in Iran and other parts of the Middle East that would indeed nuke Israel. In fact, there are elements in the world today that would love to see the end of the United States of America, and parts of Europe as well.

You give the "enemy" way too much credit for having the same kind of human compassion that we have.

Also, you should consider that there are certain religious beliefs that do not have the same kind of perspective that our Christian and other beliefs have... in fact they believe that they would be rewarded for suicide, whether it is on an individual basis or a large scale basis.

Sorry to disagree with you here, and certainly don't want to dwell on this, but history has proven that there are those that have done, and would do, the unthinkable... the only limits have been the amount of destructive power in their hands.

TM

fintail · February 2010

Indeed, places in that neighborhood don't seem to operate on the same level of logic as we do. I have no doubt they'd commit suicide to take us down.

Perhaps if the US wasn't Israel's lap dog, this would all be different. What a sick waste of money and lives.

circlew · February 2010

Looking at this data, along with a stagnant job market, tells me the stock market is n for a bumpy ride.

While economists said that heavy snowstorms in many areas of the country that shut down businesses dampened confidence, many believe that the report confirms that consumers aren't feeling the nascent economic recovery.

"More than six months after the recovery started, consumer confidence is still close to a record low," said Paul Ashworth, senior U.S. economist at Capital Economics. "Without a sustained acceleration in consumption growth, this recovery will eventually fade."

The news sent stocks lower, overshadowing retailers' reports that showed stronger holiday profits.

One gauge, measuring consumers' assessment of current conditions, dropped to 19.4 from 25.2, the lowest level since 1983. The other barometer, which measures their outlook over the next six months and had been rising since October 2009, fell to 63.8 from 77.3.

The Consumer Confidence Index hit a historic low of 25.3 in February 2009 but then enjoyed a three-month climb to 54.8 in May, fueled by signs the economy might be stabilizing. Since then, it has been mired in a narrow range, dropping as low as 47, as rising unemployment took a toll, before climbing again for a three-month stretch.

Feb. Consumer Confidence Falls Sharply

Regards,
OW

tagman · February 2010

Looking at this data, along with a stagnant job market, tells me the stock market is n for a bumpy ride.

Exactly. Along with many other issues, all at the same time.

TM

anthonyp · February 2010

Well I am right in there with the huge losses from a couple of years ago---I owned predominately banking stocks, and although it hurt, I eventually sold out, and as the holdings were from such a long ago time, I had to pay huge capitol gains, and then stagger into other holdings.....predominately etf bond stuff....That worked out for me, and I have ever since been looking for decent moderate holdings....

I would just guess that the market was way too oversold and then we had the buying that went on without a correction, until now....I do think the economy is recovering, but from my perspective I don`t feel very confident in the stock market, and you mentioned alot of the potential problems .....I guess almost everything has to do with confidence or a lack of it----sort of the greed- fear motivating analysis from my generation..I can tell you I would be paralyzed with fear if someone bombed someone with a nuke, so that buying opportunity would vanish for me......I personally think that if the SEC were to do what is morally right, enforce the delivery of shorted stock, and further re-institute the short selling rule, it would level the playing field......I don`t think any of us stand a chance unless we just quickly buy and sell and are very lucky otherwise .....Tony

stever · February 2010

I don`t feel very confident in the stock market

Where else is there to put your money? There's some cheap real estate deals that a lot of investors will likely make a killing on if they can buy and hold for 5 or more years, but it's easier to spread your risks with stocks and the holding costs are a lot less.

anthonyp · February 2010

Well for me the etf`s that represent underlying bond positions are where I am , but I don`t want to over do duration. on holding them...I like you, would prefer decent investments in stocks, but the way things are, the big guys can put a hurting on you very quickly....Tony

Mr_Shiftright · February 2010

I suppose 10,000 Iranians could maybe pick up and throw one missile made out of used garbage cans at Israel. The military might of Iran would make a good science fiction movie.

Heard an interesting interview re: Toyota. Apparently US automakers are not gloating at all over Toyota's troubles, but rather fear that this will be bad for ALL automakers, as it erodes consumer confidence in automotive technology.

tagman · February 2010

Apparently US automakers are not gloating at all over Toyota's troubles, but rather fear that this will be bad for ALL automakers, as it erodes consumer confidence in automotive technology.

So ridiculous. History proves otherwise.

When consumers knew how bad domestics used to be, they bought Toyotas by the boatloads. They didn't abandon the marketplace altogether.

So, likewise, if the majority of would-be Toyota customers were to abandon the idea of buying a Toyota (which I doubt will ever happen in sufficient quantity for the long run.), they would ultimately look to Ford and the other more "trustworthy" imports.

IOW, any damage will be directly to Toyota, but over time most consumers will generally forgive Toyota this time around, IMO. Toyota's overall longer history is too good to completely ignore. They will bounce back.

TM

Mr_Shiftright · February 2010

I'm thinkin' this is different than past history (which, after all, does not always repeat itself).

What with the heebie-jeebies people normally have about electronics (baffling, annoying, hard to fix), I'm predicting that we'll see a rash of "unintended acceleration" in many makes of cars. Call it real, call it mass hysteria, but I think it's going to become more commonplace and will increase lawsuit tendencies.

tagman · February 2010

What with the heebie-jeebies people normally have about electronics (baffling, annoying, hard to fix), I'm predicting that we'll see a rash of "unintended acceleration" in many makes of cars. Call it real, call it mass hysteria, but I think it's going to become more commonplace and will increase lawsuit tendencies.

Or maybe the cat's out of the bag, and now someone will actually listen, as consumers now find that their concerns are legitimate. Lawsuits? Probably right... Some legitimate, and others just to take advantage of the situation.

I do think certain consumer behaviors generally remain the same, and that's why marketing is such a freakin science nowadays. Too bad there are still many companies that pay no attention to it... or else we wouldn't see that ugly front end on the Acuras... hahaha... couldn't resist.

Anyway, we will see what happens... as usual.

TM

Mr_Shiftright · February 2010

Mr. Toyoda was in the media today denying that the issues are related to electronics. He's stonewalling?

stever · February 2010

Investment opportunity:

Brake override design/build companies.

I think the upshot when the smoke clears is that all new cars will be required to have such an override. I don't know how they work - even if it's 100% software, some company will probably be writing the code for the manufacturers.

Vehicle Data Recorder makers would be another.

houdini1 · February 2010

I think the upshot when the smoke clears is that all new cars will be required to have such an override. I don't know how they work

If there are blips in the software now that defeat all the failsafes, etc, why would we think another failsafe would work? Maybe it would have blips also.

I think the whole thing is very much overblown and has gotten out of hand. But now the sharks (lawyers) smell blood. Few cars now have the override, so those mfgs. might as well line up for their medicine also.

circlew · February 2010

Actually, a fail-safe is a great idea considering the current unknowns. Problem is, the "button" could be unintentionally depressed which might cause further consequences...

Regards,
OW

houdini1 · February 2010

In this instance they are talking about a system that automatically cuts off the flow of gasoline when you hit the brakes. So, in theory, you could not be accelerating and braking at the same time. I think Mercedes, Audi, and possibly VW have had this in use for some time. Works the same way that your cruise control works, hit the brakes and it disengages.

stever · February 2010

I'm not talking about cause and effect or solutions.

I'm talking about stock market investment opportunities. Rationality need not apply. :shades:

houdini1 · February 2010

I recently read about an interesting theory regarding oil prices.

Back in the 80's and early 90's the U.S. along with Saudia Arabia applied as much pressure as possible to keep oil prices low to put pressure on the USSR. Oil was about the only export USSR had and their only way to make money. With the low prices they finally went broke.

Currently the U.S. and Saudia Arabia want to keep prices high because they are trying to slow down China. China is the opposite of USSR and has to import oil. The high prices won't break them but will slow them down.

If the theory is correct, oil prices should continue to rise, and therefore, might play into investment strategies.

circlew · February 2010

Agree...I would NOT bet on oil prices falling anytime soon. I believe the latest forecast is for gasoline to peak at just over $3.00/gal in the Spring.

Talking about putting the breaks on our economy...and stock performance.

Regards,
OW

Mr_Shiftright · February 2010

I don't really buy that. Oil prices are driven by greed, not any intentional consequences to various nations IMO. If Iran or North Korea or Yemen wanted to pay the price for it, the Saudis would sell them as much oil as they wanted.

I don't think Russia is short on natural resources. They went broke because they are incredibly corrupted and inefficient.

tagman · February 2010

Oil prices are driven by greed

Sad, but true... to a large extent... as history has so clearly proven. And looooong before China was even a blip on the radar.

Last year, I had a disagreement with a well-respected member about the price of oil and gas... he thought the fundamentals would cause the prices to fall off a cliff. I posted that they would remain high, in spite of his interpretation of the fundamentals. I was right... for a number of reasons that I had outlined in those interesting posts.

Any significant drops in oil prices are typically short lived, and all efforts by those wonderful folks in control of it have been to keep them elevated as much as possible.

TM

Mr_Shiftright · February 2010

My belief is that all modern geopolitical conflicts, be they diplomatic or even shooting wars, regardless of the spouted ideology, are economic in nature. Even terrorism is an attempt to create economic chaos. Bin Laden did not target Disneyland after all.

circlew · February 2010

Bin Laden did not target Disneyland after all.

As goes the price of oil, so goes global economies. Will there ever be an end to the link?

At the root of Osama bin Laden's designs, according to the authors of "The Forbidden Truth," lies a traditionalism constituted by the alliance of Islam, banking, and oil. For decades, say Brisard and Dasquie, the Saudis used their banking and oil powers to support the expansion of radical Islamic movements, particularly Wahhabism, today perhaps the most proselytizing branch of Sunni Islam. The Saudi royal family, the bin Laden family's construction business, and the Mahfouz family's international banking network combined to build the modern Saudi Arabia powerhouse. Thus, Osama bin Laden was not an outsider or counter-cultural renegade. He was born into this elite circle. He was an insider to this success story and continued to benefit from the business and financial networks even after the Saudi regime stripped him of his citizenship in 1991.

Afghanistan, Bin Laden and Oil

Perhaps that is why there is no real effort to get this guy....it might be bad for the global economy!! :surprise:

Regards,
OW

anthonyp · February 2010

Man-- where are you getting all this cold weather from?? I would think heating oil and nat. gas would be much stronger, so the oil prices probably will be subdued but firm through the election, with an occasional spike just to keep people guessing....Tony

circlew · February 2010

I think Charlie can tell you much better than I since he is the resident expert but I think we are in an El Nino pattern that keeps pumping moist weather directly from the West Coast to the East Coast and the jet stream pattern that is in play.

The phenomenon probably will continue into June or July, according to a bureau update today. Sea surface temperatures in two of the areas used to measure the intensity of El Nino have fallen by 0.1 degree Celsius in the last two weeks, the bureau said. They have dropped between 0.5 and 0.6 degree in the last six weeks.

Models surveyed currently show little to no indication of a reinvigoration of El Nino for 2010, according to the statement.

El Nino occurs every two to five years, on average, and lasts about 12 months. The phenomenon is the driving force behind unsettled weather that has brought a drought to Venezuela, warmer temperatures to Canadas Olympic venues and record-breaking snowfalls and below-average temperatures across much of the U.S. that have driven up demand for heating oil and natural gas.

The El Nino effect comes from the creation of an enhanced Pacific jet stream that powers its way across the southern U.S., said Jim Rouiller, a senior energy meteorologist at Planalytics Inc.

The jet stream, carrying warm, moist air, collides with cold Canadian air to create the storms that have brought record snowfalls to Dallas, Washington and Baltimore, he said prior to the release of Australias update.

That explains this unusually stormy pattern that were in and will likely remain for the next few weeks, Rouiller said.

Regards,
OW

Mr_Shiftright · February 2010

That's right, and people in Florida had better nail their houses down this year as well. I think it's going to be a long and violent hurricane and tornado season.

anthonyp · February 2010

Well thanks anyway...For some reason I get you two mixed up...sorry. And sorry to Charlie also..

Mr Shiftie

I worry more about Charleston than down here.....The fabric of Charleston is unique, and when Hugo came through things were a real mess with the original slate roofs all blowing off as they were so old....The insurance companies put up a valiant fight not to replace tham, but lost...Then there were no craftsmen that knew how to do it, so some fine people from either England or Ireland came over for several years and did the work for monster prices......As it turned out , the hurricane really re-fubished Charleston , and gave the economy a real jolt, in a good way...Particularly local small banks....Tony

cyclone4 · February 2010

Man-- where are you getting all this cold weather from?? I would think heating oil and nat. gas would be much stronger, so the oil prices probably will be subdued but firm through the election, with an occasional spike just to keep people guessing

Tony,

There have been two forces that have been in control this winter. One of course has been the moderate to strong El Nino. The other factor is not very well understood, but it is called the Arctic Oscillation Index (AO). The AO has been historically negative for much of the winter. The index is a measure of stratospheric temperatures over the Arctic. It has been quite warm in the stratosphere and this causes the air masses in the Arctic areas to be shoved way to the south. And, amazingly enough the northern Latitudes (like Canada) with this scenario have well above normal temperatures. In fact, much of Canada has been way above normal this winter. But even though these air masses are well above normal in Canada, they turn out to be well below normal as they reach the southern U.S due to less modification than usual. The El Nino has been responsible for bringing storms eastward across the southern 2/3 of the nation and the result has been some historically huge snow events for places that are not accustomed to getting so much snow. Normally, these storms produce rain in the deep south and places like DC and even New York City. But the very negative AO has resulted in cold enough air so that the events have been in the form of snow. The further south one goes in the U.S. the colder the temperature anomalies this winter. I am going to now post a special report I sent to my customers back on Friday It may surprise a lot of you living in the north (especially New England). It is a great example of the "topsy-turvy winter where it has been mild across the northern Midwest and Northeast but cold in the South. New York City and Chicago have averaged very close to normal temperatures, but just north of New York and through the central and northern Great Lakes, it has been above normal this winter. OK, here is the report:

The "crazy" (and I mean CRAZY) storm in the Northeast will continue to affect much of New England through most of the weekend. The very intense low pressure system that moved west to near New York City overnight has been gradually weakening this morning. The wind has shifted from the west to the north in New York and this will be advecting warmer air into the city from upstate eastern NY and VT. No, this is not a typo. I did say warmer air coming from the north. As of 11:00 AM EST, it was still way up to 41 in Burlington, VT and 35 in Albany. It was in the low 40s in Albany about 6:00 AM this morning. Albany got virtually no snow from this system (it was all rain yesterday and last night) while New York picked up anywhere from 7 to 18 inches depending on exact location in the City. There will be some melting there this afternoon as the temperature rises to at least the mid 30s with the warmer air moving in from the north. It warmed up all the way to 38 in Rochester, NY with some light rain now after getting dumped with up 3 feet or more of snow yesterday and overnight. You guessed it. The warmer air is spreading into that area from the east (counter clockwise circulation around the intense low). Meanwhile, they were getting relative cold advection from the southeast in the Boston/Providence area early this morning as the temperatures dropped to the low to mid 30s. But there can only be so much cold advection from the southeast in this area. After all, what lies to the south and southeast of eastern MA and RI? Yes, the relatively warm Atlantic Ocean. Temperatures had again risen to 40 degrees as a result in Boston at 11:00 AM EST. This storm has been similar to the intense system that affected the western Cornbelt around Christmas time. That storm also looped and resulted in incredible weather. For example, Minneapolis was way above freezing with rain while Des Moines about 240 miles to the south was getting heavy snow and temperatures dropped to the teens. The atmosphere across all of the Northeast will be gradually cooling off the next 12-24 hours and any rain in parts of central and northern New England will be changing to snow. It will be off and on snow across New England into Sunday. Some places in the lower elevations will end up with a few inches. Obviously, the higher elevations will get a lot more. New York City will probably pick up another inch or two. Highs will be rising into the low 40s in New York and Boston for the weekend and there will be considerable melting in the area that got heavy snow (namely New York City, a portion of NJ, PA, and upstate New York).

cyclone4 · February 2010

Everybody needs to watch this video. Could this be the answer to cheap energy? The inventor is obviously a GENIUS. Click on the Bloom box once you get to this site.

http://www.cbs.com/primetime/60_minutes/

anthonyp · February 2010

Thanks----and again sorry for the messup...don`t believe a thing from the temperature experts from Miami...It is cool to cold and has been for the last week although they say it has been in the seventies......Walking around today , with a sweater, was very comfortable......so there will be no warm air coming up from Florida, at least until it warm up.....:) Tony

Mr_Shiftright · February 2010

It's iffy but who knows. Like all other inventions, being clever, or even brilliant, is not enough. It has to be cost-efficient and it has to displace the older technology it is "attacking".

As the video pointed out, or rather inferred, the Segway turned out to be an expensive and non-competitive substitute for a bicycle. They never sold enough to get the cost down. The technology seems to have been more suited to wheelchairs.

Maybe the Bloom Box will be that way---operating in a niche market. Or maybe GE will buy it and gouge us for it.

Think about the car---that gasoline piston engine is still King even after 125 years of everyone else trying to displace it--diesel, electric, rotary, steam---they have all "failed" to dethrone it.

tagman · February 2010

Thomas Edison reincarnated?

And to think that the transistor was once a miracle device.

Inventions are often scoffed at and their inventors ridiculed... and what's amazing to me is that sometimes the inventions are just so obvious AFTER they are invented... and the rest of us wonder how it could be so simple.

I will happily write that $3,000 check for a Bloom Box the moment it is available...even if it says GE on the side.

Freakin' awesome! A good optimistic jolt never hurts anyone.

Thanks Charlie! Loved it.

TM

Mr_Shiftright · March 2010

I didn't notice anyone ridiculing this guy---he has great creds. The criticisms I heard were more about the economics of success, not whether it worked or not.

It still, after all, relies on fossil fuels (in present incarnation) and it is still very expensive.

Right now, I'm seeing this as a *supplemental* form of energy, like wind power, not a totally new form of energy. I don't think the Edison analogy is correct here, IMO. Edison replaced the candle and gas light. This strikes me as just a better gas light.

On the other hand, ANY way to reduce consumption of fossil fuels is a great way to go right now.

I'd certainly consider buying one for $3000 if it can be shown to pay for itself. I have no desire to underwrite experimental technology, though, at a cost-deficit. I can't afford to do that.

I also don't think sucking off tax credits is a sound basis for justifying a device, either.

houdini1 · March 2010

I also don't think sucking off tax credits is a sound basis for justifying a device, either.

Agreed. Tell that to all those green, solar panel, wind power, and mass transit folks.

Get that bloom box down to the $3,000. level and if it works as promised I would probably buy a couple of them.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2010

How many years payoff in order to justify that cost to yourself, vs. just paying the ordinary utility bill?

Let's see here. For me, I pay about $850 a year for gas and electric. Presuming this thing could cut my bill in half, it would take roughly kinda sort 7 years to pay off, before any actual "savings" accrue.

That's not too bad. I might do that. Of course, this presumes no rise in utility costs. Payoff could come sooner.

On the other hand, this also presumes no or low maintenance of the device.

Tax credits are just an industry subsidy--and those subsidies are certainly given just as readily to major oil companies and Big Ag and...well...GM!. So I wouldn't castigate only alternative energy companies on that particular practice.

houdini1 · March 2010

My utility bills run about $275 a month on average. My house in only 4 years old and very well built but some 4,000 sqft. With the weather we have here your furnace is going full blast in the winter and your AC full blast in summer. So looks like I could recoup fairly quickly.

Didn't mean to give the impression that I would just castigate green companies. I would include most all who get subsidies.

cyclone4 · March 2010

Let's see here. For me, I pay about $850 a year for gas and electric. Presuming this thing could cut my bill in half, it would take roughly kinda sort 7 years to pay off, before any actual "savings" accrue.

You must live in coastal CA or some place similar. I would write a $3,000 check for one of these devices instantly. In fact, I would write a check for $6,000 without any hesitation. Living in the Midwest or Northeast, one of these would pay for itself in about a year or less. I hope and pray this thing is all that the inventor claims. If so, it will catch on much faster than the personal computer ever did. After watching this video, I am rather convinced that this will become a viable source of energy in the not too distant future.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2010

My main concern is that this doesn't take us off the pipeline...given that natural gas will probably be the main fuel source, then we are still subject to being hijacked. Look how fast the price of gas went up.

Oil prices are, interestingly enough, not well-regulated at all. They are subject to all kinds of speculation and manipulation that would be forbidden in stocks.

stever · March 2010

My day trader friend is high on natural gas. Hmmm, that didn't come out right.

Anyway, he thinks it's a buy, and thinks that even though it's relatively plentiful, companies processing and piping it are going to hold value well since there are more uses being found for it (increased number of semis and cars running it for example).

If the Bloom gizmo uses gas, that's one thing. It sounds like ceramic tiles are a big part of the construction process. Does Coors still make ceramics?

Mr_Shiftright · March 2010

And WHO in the world is sitting on the two most massive reserves of natural gas? I believe it is Russia and Iran.

Oh, swell.

stever · March 2010

Well, the US is around #6, and it's a transition fuel anyway. But the transition may take 40 to 60 years to shift to renewables or something else.

I don't know if it's going to happen like fax machines - invented in the mid 1800s but didn't hit critical mass until the 1980s or so. One of those hockey stick charts.

Plenty of time to make some dividends off natural gas. And if Bloomers take off in 5 years like cell phones or Xboxes, then you're golden for a few decades.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2010

The sweet spot for this tech would have to be $3000 for a unit that generates a few kilowatts and can provide electrical power and heat.

If it can't do that, I don't see this as a product for homeowners at all, and probably yet another fuel cell money-loser.

If it CAN reach that ambitious target, with all 3 requirements ( affordable to buy, delivers the right TYPES of power, and in the right quantities) well, then, game changes.

stever · March 2010

That would be a sweet scenario, but I'm thinking it's more something that a whole subdivision would buy. Maybe 50 to 100 homes minimum. Sort of like a community well that's not uncommon in some parts of the country.

Pretty big upfront cost, but shared over the homeowners, long payback, and cheap power to offset the loan costs. The wild card would be a big blip in gas prices.

I think you'll see more suitcase nuke proposals geared toward a single industrial complex and subdivisions too. But natural gas looks like a much less risky investment for something in your portfolio.

circlew · March 2010

Notice how gas jumped a dime in a couple of days?? Ahh, the summer blends!! :sick:

Regards,
OW

Mr_Shiftright · March 2010

When's the last time you saw an entire subdivision agree on anything? :P

anthonyp · March 2010

I got caught up in the craze back in two thousand `plug power` and I thought that was a great idea....I was lucky and took some profits rather quickly, as the stock just soared in a mattter of days...Then everything just seemed to quit.....I sure hope the guy brings this` big fish` home as it is just as exciting today as back then...Thanks for the video....Tony

stever · March 2010

LOL, my subdivision just voted down public water by one vote.

And it's the 3rd or 4th vote in 30 years.

Point taken.

houdini1 · March 2010

my subdivision just voted down public water by one vote.

Probably the "Culligan Man".

The Stock Market and Investing

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles