The BULL everyone hates

225 replies [Last post]
Shania Twain's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-09-23

NEXT: blow right through spx 1100ish. (massive oct 08 gap)

The run to 1200 will be so quick you shorts/bears/cash pussies are

gonna want the CHEESE bad again instead of wanting out of trap

like in march.

This is wonderful. Truly wonderful.

(could one of you bears please give some more reason why it should not be going up   bwahhahahahahahahahahahah)

buy strength sell weakness

bric
energy
tech
infra
ag

get long

(BTW   dont care about jobs number-does not matter crap number BUY OPENING)

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

1

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

fr

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

If anyone is watching CNBC...look at Michelle Caruso Cabrerras nipples...they look just like mlgone's moms

meletoi's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-04

just because i have been wrong 100% of the time doesn't mean you are right.  i am meletio, who has gotten everything wrong this week.

meletoi's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-04

yes.  Greece.  home of boy lovers!  Eat it, pikers!  The market will crash in precisely 2 hours, 31 minutes and 27 seconds!  Raining ACATS chumps!

Shania Twain's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-09-23

totally don't get michelle carusa cabrera.

scag

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

f

meletoi's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-04

i'm trying to fit in guys. you know, pretend i like girls too.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

SHARE PRICES ARE HIGHER ONCE
AGAIN, and we are obviously dead, utterly,
completely wrong in our decision made early in
October to be short of the US market in any way,
shape or form. Our Int’l Index remains well below its
most recent multi-year high made in mid-October just
under 7,700, and the upward sloping trend lines that
had supported the NASDAQ, the S&P, the Dow, the
Russell et al remain broken to the downside, but for
whatever reason, shares have gone higher and we are
wrong to be short.
All of the things we have come to rely upon over thirty
+ years of watching the stock market here in the US
are proving to be worthless. Volume is rising as stocks
fall, while volume wanes as prices rise, but that seems
not to matter, for stocks keep rising. The P/e multiples
are high, but that does not matter; they rise further and
shares move higher. Insider selling swamps insider
buying by margins we’ve not seen before, but that
matters not a whit; share prices continue to advance.
The Dow Transports have not confirmed the strength in
the Dow Industrials, but so what? Shares keep going
higher. Earnings that are good are met with massive
share weakness; while “misses” to the downside are
met by rapid price increases. Thus, either we’ve gone
mad, or the market has, but we wash our hands of it
and leave it to others wiser, or more courageous, or
sillier than we to make sense of it all:

New bull??

Shania Twain's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-09-23

howboutshoeshine wrote:
SHARE PRICES ARE HIGHER ONCE
AGAIN,
and we are obviously dead, utterly,
completely wrong in our decision made early in
October to be short of the US market in any way,
shape or form. Our Int’l Index remains well below its
most recent multi-year high made in mid-October just
under 7,700, and the upward sloping trend lines that
had supported the NASDAQ, the S&P, the Dow, the
Russell et al remain broken to the downside, but for
whatever reason, shares have gone higher and we are
wrong to be short.
All of the things we have come to rely upon over thirty
+ years of watching the stock market here in the US
are proving to be worthless. Volume is rising as stocks
fall, while volume wanes as prices rise, but that seems
not to matter, for stocks keep rising. The P/e multiples
are high, but that does not matter; they rise further and
shares move higher. Insider selling swamps insider
buying by margins we’ve not seen before, but that
matters not a whit; share prices continue to advance.
The Dow Transports have not confirmed the strength in
the Dow Industrials, but so what? Shares keep going
higher. Earnings that are good are met with massive
share weakness; while “misses” to the downside are
met by rapid price increases. Thus, either we’ve gone
mad, or the market has, but we wash our hands of it
and leave it to others wiser, or more courageous, or
sillier than we to make sense of it all:

New bull??

translation for above:   I was wrong.

amzn making new highs.     nice
ewz up 100% last 12 months     wonderful

loser bears talking their books........priceless.

short it. go for it.   

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Ira- 100% SHORT with use of ETF's
personal account- 30 put contracts for November 102's at .46 cents
 
I just wanted to see if that changed anyone's convictions. I ALWAYS put my money where my mouth is brutha.

Shania Twain's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-09-23

sweet   
i hope they are trip shorts.

ull be covering in pain

AAII: 33% bulls. always wrong

All bears are welcome to tell us why market should not be going up.

I love that so much.

I heard one tool on CNBC actually say that the market
had "no right" to go up.   funny    

(PS jobs data good for stocks. the longer Ben keeps all you loser bears cash at 1/2 of 1%, the more it finds its way to risk)

lets review again:

1. BRIC   (write on ur hand)

2. market is a discounting mechanism

If u get bearish, repeat 1 and 2 above

Bud  Fox's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-07-20

howboutshoeshine wrote:Ira- 100% SHORT with use of ETF's
personal account- 30 put contracts for November 102's at .46 cents
 
I just wanted to see if that changed anyone's convictions. I ALWAYS put my money where my mouth is brutha. Hey brutha, ya sure there is room in there for your coinage with your b/d's ding dong in there first? 

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Bud Fox wrote:howboutshoeshine wrote:Ira- 100% SHORT with use of ETF's
personal account- 30 put contracts for November 102's at .46 cents
 
I just wanted to see if that changed anyone's convictions. I ALWAYS put my money where my mouth is brutha. Hey brutha, ya sure there is room in there for your coinage with your b/d's ding dong in there first? 
 
Another CHILD. Hello there. You are quite the loser as well. Did you know that it was Friday? NO need for your pathetic replies. LOSER. I try to add to this forum and get little babies responding with childish remarks. Hey ADMIN, where ya at?

BerkshireBull's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-06-10

I saw the title and thought someone started a thread to say they hated<--------------------- BerkshireBULL

Shania Twain's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-09-23

BerkshireBull wrote: I saw the title and thought someone started a thread to say they hated<--------------------- BerkshireBULL
 
no muffin head   we love you.
 
today NOT a good day for the bears.    
We might get a monster blow off day to upside here (500 plus).
(oct 08 gap)
 
keep holding that cash u bears.
 
can someone please give me another reason why it should not be going up?
 
bric
ag
infra
commods
tech
 
 
 
 
 

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Shania Twain wrote:BerkshireBull wrote: I saw the title and thought someone started a thread to say they hated<--------------------- BerkshireBULL
 
no muffin head   we love you.
 
today NOT a good day for the bears.    
We might get a monster blow off day to upside here (500 plus).
(oct 08 gap)
 
keep holding that cash u bears.
 
can someone please give me another reason why it should not be going up?
 
bric
ag
infra
commods
tech
 
 
 
 
 
 
No, but I will give you a million reasons why it's ready to CRASH. AMZN good one. If you held it since 99' your up 10%. What is that in annual terms? Shania, No one is arguing day to day action here. The market is increasing with everything going against it. That's NOT a good thing. Reminds me of the TECH bubble and the ridiculous housing market. Truth is......I hope you're right and I'm wrong because I will have and easier life your way, but under NO circumstance do I see it as a possibility.

Shania Twain's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-09-23

[
 
 
 
No, but I will give you a million reasons why it's ready to CRASH. AMZN good one. If you held it since 99' your up 10%. What is that in annual terms? Shania, No one is arguing day to day action here. The market is increasing with everything going against it. That's NOT a good thing. Reminds me of the TECH bubble and the ridiculous housing market. Truth is......I hope you're right and I'm wrong because I will have and easier life your way, but under NO circumstance do I see it as a possibility.
 
 
good.   keep doubting it.   keep shorting it.   keep holding your cash.
 
"If you held it since 99' your up 10%. What is that in annual terms?"  
 
You're looking out back window brother. 
 
The above comment is the MAIN REASON we will be way above mean next ten years.  
Buy AFTER nasty rolling 10 years.
 
1250 is coming quickly
 
.5% cash making you bears CRAZY.    This is wonderful
 
 
 
 

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

Here's a good reason. The rally is not based on fundamentals

LSUAlum's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-10-18

downdowndown wrote: Here's a good reason. The rally is not based on fundamentals

Doesn't a negative correlation of .88 mean that it's highly predictive. Based on that chart, it would appear it is based on fundamentals of the dollar for the broader market.

Moraen's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-01-22

LSUAlum wrote:downdowndown wrote: Here's a good reason. The rally is not based on fundamentals

Doesn't a negative correlation of .88 mean that it's highly predictive. Based on that chart, it would appear it is based on fundamentals of the dollar for the broader market.LSU - yes. 

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

Sure, but if the stocks are at rather lofty multiples then wouldn't that assume things would get better. Shouldn't the dollar then be going up?
The entire mkt now is based on the biggest bang for the buck. It's controlled by traders playing the dollar dow trade, but it does not really make too much sense. when stocks go up on something that doesn't make sense...bad things happen. ( tech bubble )..maybe not today but I think soon...plus the volume is slowing as we go up

Shania Twain's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-09-23

downdowndown wrote: Sure, but if the stocks are at rather lofty multiples then wouldn't that assume things would get better. Shouldn't the dollar then be going up?
The entire mkt now is based on the biggest bang for the buck. It's controlled by traders playing the dollar dow trade, but it does not really make too much sense. when stocks go up on something that doesn't make sense...bad things happen. ( tech bubble )..maybe not today but I think soon...plus the volume is slowing as we go up

excellent

short it
hold cash

you should go all in short
maybe trip short

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

I am !

Shania Twain's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-09-23

The dollar is weak?
Wow.    That's some great insight there.
Maybe we should tell someone?

1100 ish. and next 120 spee points UP quick

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

You asked for a reason why it should go down. I've given one . Why should it go up ( asset managers chasing performance is not a good reason )

Jebediah's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-07-10

Why do you need a reason?  You nor I can predict it, so go with what the market is doing.  A falling currency can be good for the stock market.  Money searches for returns, and a low interest rates combined with a falling dollar is a losing proposition.  IMO, the market is simply a measure of risk acceptance or aversion.  Valuations, currency moves, jobs reports, government policies, and anything else you can think of is nice to talk about, but at the end of the day it is mental doodling.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Jebediah wrote:Why do you need a reason?  You nor I can predict it, so go with what the market is doing.  A falling currency can be good for the stock market.  Money searches for returns, and a low interest rates combined with a falling dollar is a losing proposition.  IMO, the market is simply a measure of risk acceptance or aversion.  Valuations, currency moves, jobs reports, government policies, and anything else you can think of is nice to talk about, but at the end of the day it is mental doodling.
 
If you feel this way, you must be a technition. And you see that technically we are worse off than we are fundamentally. You are short?

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

Jebediah wrote: Why do you need a reason?  You nor I can predict it, so go with what the market is doing.  A falling currency can be good for the stock market.  Money searches for returns, and a low interest rates combined with a falling dollar is a losing proposition.  IMO, the market is simply a measure of risk acceptance or aversion.  Valuations, currency moves, jobs reports, government policies, and anything else you can think of is nice to talk about, but at the end of the day it is mental doodling.

None of it matters until it does!

In late January 2000, Abby Joseph Cohen, chief U.S. market strategist at Goldman Sachs said, "Returns will be good, but not great." Ralph Acampora of Prudential Securities, another highly respected analyst, saw the main indexes rising perhaps 20% to 25%. "2000 will be, on balance, a very, very good year," he said on January 8th of that year. He went on to say, "this could last another four or five years."

     Also, in June of 2000, the USA Today polled several high-profile market "experts" for their outlook on the second half of that year. Thomas Galvin, of the former Donaldson Lufkin & Jenrette firm, predicted stocks would head "much higher". Alan Skrainka, chief market strategist at Edward Jones said, "We're pretty upbeat." Morgan Stanley's frequently publicized opinions from Mary Meeker included, "The Bull market in stocks shows no indications of slowing down."

Moraen's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-01-22

downdowndown wrote: Alan Skrainka, chief market strategist at Edward Jones said, "We're pretty upbeat." Morgan Stanley's frequently publicized opinions from Mary Meeker included, "The Bull market in stocks shows no indications of slowing down."I wasn't bearish until just now.  Do whatever the opposite of what Skrainka is saying.

Shania Twain's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-09-23

downdowndown wrote:

None of it matters until it does!

In late January 2000, Abby Joseph Cohen, chief U.S. market strategist at Goldman Sachs said, "Returns will be good, but not great." Ralph Acampora of Prudential Securities, another highly respected analyst, saw the main indexes rising perhaps 20% to 25%. "2000 will be, on balance, a very, very good year," he said on January 8th of that year. He went on to say, "this could last another four or five years."

     Also, in June of 2000, the USA Today polled several high-profile market "experts" for their outlook on the second half of that year. Thomas Galvin, of the former Donaldson Lufkin & Jenrette firm, predicted stocks would head "much higher". Alan Skrainka, chief market strategist at Edward Jones said, "We're pretty upbeat." Morgan Stanley's frequently publicized opinions from Mary Meeker included, "The Bull market in stocks shows no indications of slowing down."

great insights

I love u bears talking your book

give me more

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

Morean...read again...that quote was from the year 2000. My point was that ways to measure stocks do matter. The mkt is very inefficient on the short term. It's just gambling. Time will produce the truth. It's not different this time

Moraen's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-01-22

Never mind, I must be slipping.

Jebediah's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-07-10

howboutshoeshine wrote:Jebediah wrote:Why do you need a reason?  You nor I can predict it, so go with what the market is doing.  A falling currency can be good for the stock market.  Money searches for returns, and a low interest rates combined with a falling dollar is a losing proposition.  IMO, the market is simply a measure of risk acceptance or aversion.  Valuations, currency moves, jobs reports, government policies, and anything else you can think of is nice to talk about, but at the end of the day it is mental doodling.
 
If you feel this way, you must be a technition. And you see that technically we are worse off than we are fundamentally. You are short?

 
 
About 6'2" actually.  No I am not short.  Nor am I a trader.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Jebediah wrote:howboutshoeshine wrote:Jebediah wrote:Why do you need a reason?  You nor I can predict it, so go with what the market is doing.  A falling currency can be good for the stock market.  Money searches for returns, and a low interest rates combined with a falling dollar is a losing proposition.  IMO, the market is simply a measure of risk acceptance or aversion.  Valuations, currency moves, jobs reports, government policies, and anything else you can think of is nice to talk about, but at the end of the day it is mental doodling.
 
If you feel this way, you must be a technition. And you see that technically we are worse off than we are fundamentally. You are short?

 
 
About 6'2" actually.  No I am not short.  Nor am I a trader.
 
Funny. I do trade, however all of us that "manage" money should be aware of a markets health. If this market were a person it would have stage 4 cancer, HIV, H1N1, just nubs as limbs and a sniper shooting at it. It's going up, never denied that, but if you're not concerned then I have NO clue what you're looking at. Either you don't know or you're in denial, hoping for the best. As I said earlier, I hope this PIG does go up. that would sure make my life easier.

Jebediah's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-07-10

None of it matters until it does!

 
 
Exactly.  Here is what I equate this conversation to.  Is it going to rain on July 4, 2010?  Kind of important to know as many people make plans to be outside on this day.
 
Reasons it won't:
 
1.  Historically July 4 is rain free 79% of the time.
 
2.  It has rained the previous two Fourth of July's, so the odds are against three in a row.
 
3.  The Farmers Almanac says it won't.
 
Reasons it will:
 
1.  Global warming is leading to increased precipitation worldwide.
 
2.  Two rainy 4ths is a trend to be continued.
 
3.  72% of the time when long term weather patterns have mimicked or current patterns it has rained on July 4 the following year.
 
 
My point is this, how the hell knows?  I tell my clients that I do not, but if it is raining on their portfolio July 4, 2010, I will let them know and we will take the steps necessary to stay dry.
 
Full disclosure: all stated facts and opinions were made up for illustration purposes.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

What if there is an 80% chance a hurricane will strike between July 1st and July 14th?
70%?
60%?
50%?
Better to be safe than sorry?

LSUAlum's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-10-18

My point in referencing the post about the Dollar V. DOW correlation was that it was fundamental in nature. By that I mean it wasn't based on the 'paper' of stocks as much as the underlying reason.
 
Fundamental trading typically refers to the individual companies and their underlying business or industry. Technical analysis is price action for the market.
 
Now it could be argued that the technical analysis of the dollar versus the market as a whole is what is driving this. It could also be argued that the falling dollar is advantageous for most of the companies trading on the broader exchanges due to the global nature of their business. The cheaper dollar means (relative to the price they receive from goods/services overseas) the 'cost' of doing business outside of the US is lower. Thus a large portion of their business is now cheaper (much like falling commodity prices helps the supplier first, then potentially the consumer).
 
The end result is that the broader market moves up. Is this technical analysis (which discounts the companies altogether and relies on talking about the 'paper' that is traded in a vacuum) or is it a fundamentally good thing for US companies as they become more profitable relative to their foreign competitors outside the US?
 
Benefits of a falling dollar include a potential reversal of the ongoing trend to outsource labor overseas by US companies or moving manufacturing plants to Central/South America because the benefit is contingent upon the cost (labor in this instance) of doing business Domestically to be materially higher than abroad. Fewer outsourced jobs mean potential job creation domestically. Again, this is fundamental to business success, not technical analysis of the paper that is trading.
 
It's kind of a chicken - or - the - egg argument.

Jebediah's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-07-10

howboutshoeshine wrote:
What if there is an 80% chance a hurricane will strike between July 1st and July 14th?
70%?
60%?
50%?
Better to be safe than sorry?

 
I dispute the % chance of something happening.  What was the % chance of the market rising 50% in the following 6 months on March 9, 2009?   The market and therefore it's price is based simply on the acceptance or aversion to risk.  The P/E ratio on the market is lower now than on 3/31/2009.  What does that say?  I'm not telling you that you are wrong, I am saying that you have no way of knowing.  

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

The scariest thing of the asset bubble' being created by the weak dollar will be that we ( our mkt and our economy will be Japan ) How would liked to have been a broker in Japan for the last 15 years. Slow painful touture

The interlocking nature of Japanese stock ownership, with financial institutions owning large chunks of other companies, had once seemed to be an ingredient of the nation’s economic success, one that contributed to the Nikkei’s 1980s rise. Increasingly, it now came to be seen as a problem, with banks’ stability tied to a volatile equity market.

As Japan moved in and out of recession throughout the 1990s, Japanese stocks put in a lackluster performance, notably contrasting with the bull market taking shape in the U.S. and various other countries. The Nikkei fell below 13,000 in 1998 before rallying to almost 19,000 at end-1999. These gains mostly slipped away in 2000, however, and as equities fell worldwide following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the Nikkei went lower than 10,000 for the first time since 1984.

On November 14, 2002, the Nikkei sank below the Dow Jones Industrial Average, closing at 8,303 compared to the Dow’s 8,542. This crossing of paths would not last long, but prior to Japan’s lost decade, it would have been difficult to imagine such a thing happening at all. On the last trading day of the 1980s, when the Dow closed at 2,753, the American benchmark had been about one-fourteenth of the high-flying Nikkei.

The rebound that began in 2003 brought the Nikkei from a low of 7,607 on April 30 of that year to 18,261 on July 9, 2007. But a steady descent brought the index into the 13,000 range by mid-2008 and the decline became precipitous as equities around the world deflated last September. With the Nikkei lately still mired in four digits, Japan’s economic debacle is ongoing, and the lost decade now threatens to stretch into a pair of lost decades.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Jebediah wrote:howboutshoeshine wrote:
What if there is an 80% chance a hurricane will strike between July 1st and July 14th?
70%?
60%?
50%?
Better to be safe than sorry?

 
I dispute the % chance of something happening.  What was the % chance of the market rising 50% in the following 6 months on March 9, 2009?   The market and therefore it's price is based simply on the acceptance or aversion to risk.  The P/E ratio on the market is lower now than on 3/31/2009.  What does that say?  I'm not telling you that you are wrong, I am saying that you have no way of knowing.  
 
For me, and many others that follow trends the probability was VERY high.  3% bullish, biggest CRASH in history, risk aversion at the highest levels in history. ( I use treasuries to measure willingness to take risk because it is the "safest" asset class ) We are in the opposite position now. ( same as 2007 ) I here ya though, prediction is always based on probability and because of that I may be COMPLETELY wrong. You have a strong point, just the same.

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

There is also a ton of companies that buy goods from overseas. I sure can't see advantage as an individual have my currency decline in value on a daily bases. consumer 2/3 of gdp. On a side note about our problems ...the banks are now treating forclosures as if they were OPEC. they open up and let a few out each month as they are still holding a ton of them on the books.   which after all was the root of the problem in the first place

meletoi's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-04

YOU GUYS DO KNOW THAT DOWNDOWNDOWN IS THE GUY PRETENDING TO BE THE REAL MELETIO, DON'T YOU?LET IT RAIN!!!!  WATCH THE MARKET FALL.  DOLLAR IS WEAK.  WE'RE GOING TO END UP JUST LIKE JAPAN.

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

meletoi wrote: YOU GUYS DO KNOW THAT DOWNDOWNDOWN IS THE GUY PRETENDING TO BE THE REAL MELETIO, DON'T YOU?LET IT RAIN!!!!  WATCH THE MARKET FALL.  DOLLAR IS WEAK.  WE'RE GOING TO END UP JUST LIKE JAPAN.

?

meletoi's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-04

TAKE A LOOK AT THE GRAPHS THE FAKE MELETIO POSTED.  SAME SOURCE.

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

Who are you ?

LSUAlum's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-10-18

downtowns wrote:There is also a ton of companies that buy goods from overseas. I sure can't see advantage as an individual have my currency decline in value on a daily bases. consumer 2/3 of gdp. On a side note about our problems ...the banks are now treating foreclosures as if they were OPEC. they open up and let a few out each month as they are still holding a ton of them on the books.   which after all was the root of the problem in the first place

First off, you have no idea what you are talking about with Banks and Foreclosures. Banks have no desire to keep a non-performing assets on their books any longer than they have to. The reason being is that it directly affects their capital structure to have non-performing assets and that structure is what allows banks to lever their money by creating loans. The entire non-performing asset problem is what lead to the 'zombie bank' phenomenon. They have capitalization requirements to remain solvent.
 
Secondly, you can't see an advantage to the lower dollar? Lets see, rising interest rates means that as a highly leveraged consumer you will be squeezed (bad) but as an investor or dealing in an industry that is involved with investing (see title of website you are on) higher rates mean better returns for investors (new issues of bonds will be at a higher rate, money market accounts and CD's won't be a joke for investors anymore). Higher rates typically coincide with higher inflation. Inflation is NOT A BAD thing in moderation. Inflation is what keeps the economy from dying. Demand spurs corporate profits and also revenues, which in turn spurs earnings and thus higher stock prices.
 
The reason Inflation is not a bad thing in moderation is it spurs demand. Example: If you were going to buy a house, but knew that the price would drop 5% by year end, you do not buy it. No one purposefully buys an asset to have it decline. If you knew that it was going to go up 5% soon, you would rush to buy it today. No one wants to pay more than they have to for an asset either. Without inflation (in moderation) you have low or no demand for goods.
 
The housing bubble is an example of how inflation spurred demand. It is also an example of how it was no longer in moderation and thus caused a problem. The result of deflation on homes has also been a great example of how deflation cripples demand and how it should be avoided at all costs.

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

Get your fact correct before you tell someone they have no idea what they're are talking about.

Banks aren't reselling many foreclosed homes

Carolyn Said, Chronicle Staff Writer

          

A vast "shadow inventory" of foreclosed homes that banks are holding off the market could wreak havoc with the already battered real estate sector, industry observers say.

Lenders nationwide are sitting on hundreds of thousands of foreclosed homes that they have not resold or listed for sale, according to numerous data sources. And foreclosures, which banks unload at fire-sale prices, are a major factor driving home values down.

"We believe there are in the neighborhood of 600,000 properties nationwide that banks have repossessed but not put on the market," said Rick Sharga, vice president of RealtyTrac, which compiles nationwide statistics on foreclosures. "California probably represents 80,000 of those homes. It could be disastrous if the banks suddenly flooded the market with those distressed properties. You'd have further depreciation and carnage."

downdowndown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-11-09

Inflation did not spur the demand for homes, easy money did.

LSUAlum's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-10-18

downdowndown wrote:Get your fact correct before you tell someone they have no idea what they're are talking about. Banks aren't reselling many foreclosed homes Carolyn Said, Chronicle Staff Writer            A vast "shadow inventory" of foreclosed homes that banks are holding off the market could wreak havoc with the already battered real estate sector, industry observers say. Lenders nationwide are sitting on hundreds of thousands of foreclosed homes that they have not resold or listed for sale, according to numerous data sources. And foreclosures, which banks unload at fire-sale prices, are a major factor driving home values down. "We believe there are in the neighborhood of 600,000 properties nationwide that banks have repossessed but not put on the market," said Rick Sharga, vice president of RealtyTrac, which compiles nationwide statistics on foreclosures. "California probably represents 80,000 of those homes. It could be disastrous if the banks suddenly flooded the market with those distressed properties. You'd have further depreciation and carnage."

I worked at a bank for going on a decade, so take it from me, I do have my facts straight.
 
Because some reporter quotes some stats does not A) make it a fact or B) show the context of the numbers.
 
The fact remains that NO BANK wants to own non-performing asset. Try looking up sometime what the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 sometime for some of the requirements that Banks have for solvency before you post some reporter to support your argument.
 
Do banks own non-performing assets? Sure. Are they actively seeking the best possible way to get rid of them? Absolutely. Are they doing some OPEC type rationing? Absolutely NOT.
 
Again, you sir, have no idea how much you don't know about this subject.

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×