Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Get Your Money out of the Market (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter LHUCKS
- Start date
Politician Spock
Footballguy
Not likely. That would mean he dates women.Maybe he dated Bernanke's daughter and they had a bad breakup
fantasycurse42
Footballguy Jr.
Bernanke himself?Not likely. That would mean he dates women.Maybe he dated Bernanke's daughter and they had a bad breakup
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
To recap:
Hucks says to get out of the market it proceeds to go on a +20% upward tear.
Gunz claims to be "all in" on AAPL and it proceeds to go on a -34% death spiral.
- You literally cannot make this stuff up.
Politician Spock
Footballguy
Bernanke himself?Not likely. That would mean he dates women.Maybe he dated Bernanke's daughter and they had a bad breakup
Yep, it's been pretty clear all along that the 2 choices were to take our lumps and get it over with, or have the Feds keep propping it up until they can no longer sustain doing so. We went with the second option which really just puts us back at square 1. With a shorter timeline until keeping it artificially propped up becomes unsustainable.
Funniest part about it too is to watch guys like Obama sit there and claim to be about the less fortunate while all the money that's moving from the Fed is mostly intended to help rich people keep their strangle hold on all of the resources. But on the plus side, the constituents are too stupid to realize this. All you have to do is say you care about poor people in a tone they appreciate and they're willing to overlook any actions that say otherwise.
fantasycurse42
Footballguy Jr.
Politician Spock
Footballguy
The tapering is tearing up emerging market economies, which only proves what many were saying... that the money printing wasn't trickling down to the middle class and poor in America, but was instead being invested in the rest of the world. The "hot money" as it's called was looking for greater yield than US bonds and US investments were creating, so the money was invested in emerging market opportunities, making the currencies of those countries stronger. As the Fed spigot is now being slowed, that "hot money" is now headed into US bonds for safety. The emerging markets thus feel a liquidity crisis as they've been cut off from the flow, and many are now hemorrhaging. Buying power of those emerging market countries' citizens is dropping significantly. International companies listed on the US stock exchanges are being sold off because their revenues in those emerging markets are going to take a significant hit too because of this. The Fed cannot stop printing without tanking the world economy.
Like I said, we're back to square 1. Except with even less favorable conditions because we've wasted about half a decade.
GDP was growing too strong anyways over the last two quarters, particularly with all that shutdown mess, tax hikes, and spending cuts last year. Good thing we slowed that ineffective QE that doesn't impact the real economy before it was too late. Who knows, that growth may have continued!
Mark Davis
Footballguy
Took some profits off the table on 10/17/13. Today is the first day I got ahead, by that I mean the funds are lower than what I sold them for. I believed the market to be overvalued then so obviously I still do. We'll see where this ends up.
pantherclub
Footballguy
so lhucks was right?
kupcho1
Footballguy
Only if you consider missing out on one of the best stock market runs in history being right.
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
Keerock
Footballguy
Rohn Jambo
Footballguy
I need to exercise some stock options. Should I hold or sell?
BTW, do I need to worry about this?
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/scary-1929-market-chart-gains-traction-2014-02-11
BTW, do I need to worry about this?
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/scary-1929-market-chart-gains-traction-2014-02-11
Man, I hate crap like this. Here are my two huge issues with trying to compare things:>Rohn Jambo said:
1. Before the 1929 stock crash, the DJIA in 1921 was at 63 and when it crashed, it was at 381. So, from 1921 to 1929, the DJIA basically just went up for 8 years going up by 6x. Well, 8 years ago, the DJIA was around 11k and now it is 16k. That is a 50% increase in 8 years versus a 500% increase in the 1920s. Heck, in 2007, the DJIA was 14k, so in the past 7 years, the DJIA is only up 15%. Anyway, going up 500% in the previous 8 years is a bit different than 50%.
To put the difference in perspective. If the stock market duplicated that 8 year run and then the drop, the DJIA would have hit 66k in 2014 and then dropped to about 33k. So, the DJIA would be 100% MORE than it is today even with the 50% drop in 1929.
2. I love how they use scaling to make the two lines look closer. On the left is the current run that's starts at around 13k and goes up to 16k or 23% increase. On the right is the 1929 run up that starts at 200 and goes to 380, which is a gain of 90%. So by messing with the scales, they get the lines to look scarily similar, yet the rate of increase for the right one is 4 times larger, i.e. if they scaled them the same, the current run would barely look anything like the 1929 run up. It is basically manipulating the numbers to show what you what it to be.
Rohn Jambo
Footballguy
But my financial advisor called me again today. I was going to ignore him as usual but he has been batting 100% so far.
A pull back is one thing. That happens a lot after a nice runup although people have been calling for that for a while. Showing a comparison with bad scaling and no info on the years before is just plain misleading. The point was that we are about to have a 1929 crash by manipulating the data.
General Malaise
Footballguy
The_Man
Footballguy
Up 121.8% in 5 years and 1 month since his first Inauguration.
IF ONLY THIS SOCIALIST WEREN'T REDISTRIBUTING ALL OUR WEALTH MAYBE THERE WOULD BE SOME PROSPERITY IN THE USA
Gr00vus
Footballguy
fantasycurse42
Footballguy Jr.
Interestingly enough, wealth is being sent to the richest and the bottom 90% of America have experienced no benefit from this recovery...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/us-is-now-the-most-unequa_b_4408647.html
"Under Barack Obama, the U.S. has, for the first time in this nation's history, increased the concentration of its privately held wealth during an "economic recovery" from a financial crash. (Consequently: the bottom 90% have experienced no benefit from this "recovery.") Usually, there is more instead of less economic equality in the wake of a crash; but Obama's policies of holding harmless the Wall Street insiders who profited enormously from creating the bubble, and of restoring their wealth by taxpayers buying up their toxic assets via the bailouts, etc., have made the U.S. more like nations such as Chile, India, Indonesia, and less like nations such as Australia, Canada, and Finland. Although Mr. Obama's rhetoric has been opposed to extreme wealth-concentration, his policies have actually intensified that tendency. Republicans are not satisfied with the extent to which he has done this, and they call for even more extreme wealth-concentration policies, but Obama has actually benefited America's billionaires a great deal. Romney received most of their campaign money, but Obama has performed extraordinarily well for them."
Dentist
***Official FBG Dentist***
it's true.. the stock market is somehow a gauge for the economy.. and certainly those that have pensions and 401k's have benefited from the rise in the stock market.
But let's be real... I'd say upwards of 40-50% of people have zero exposure to the stock market because they have no investments (nor will they ever... they live on government assistance or paycheck to paycheck) and another 40% of people have somewhere between a few grand in play to < 100,000 in play which really doesn't mean all that much.
And there's an entire generation of people that think the stock market is a casino because of the dot com crash and the financial crisis and all the movies and documentaries about wall street scams like Wolf on Wall Street... so they aren't even in the game.
That leaves all the stock market gains for top 10%ers and mostly for top 1%ers.
Thanks Hollywood for keeping Joe Average out of the stock market
But let's be real... I'd say upwards of 40-50% of people have zero exposure to the stock market because they have no investments (nor will they ever... they live on government assistance or paycheck to paycheck) and another 40% of people have somewhere between a few grand in play to < 100,000 in play which really doesn't mean all that much.
And there's an entire generation of people that think the stock market is a casino because of the dot com crash and the financial crisis and all the movies and documentaries about wall street scams like Wolf on Wall Street... so they aren't even in the game.
That leaves all the stock market gains for top 10%ers and mostly for top 1%ers.
Thanks Hollywood for keeping Joe Average out of the stock market
NutterButter
Footballguy
this thread just took a turn for the worse
Rohn Jambo
Footballguy
Thank you, LHucks.
lod01
Footballguy
The_Man
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
General Malaise
Footballguy
Remember when wars used to jump start sluggish economies?
I'll tell you what has me eyeballing some short positions or short ETFs. THIS article. EVERYTHING IS AWESOME!!!!
St. Louis Bob
Footballguy
I go here just about every day to read articles. It's amazing how when the articles state gold/Apple/whatever has more room to go up it almost immediately goes down. The opposite of course when whatever is going to continue to keep going down. The last couple of months it seems like the majority of the articles is how everything is keen.
Last edited by a moderator:
St. Louis Bob
Footballguy
General Malaise
Footballguy
For an old fart like me (not really, but was working in dot-com during that 1999-2000 bubble), I distinctly remember articles that showed the valuation of companies based on eyeballs. That was back when Lycos, Excite, Alta Vista, Yahoo and I am sure some others were all the rage of search engines. The funny part is that while Yahoo is still there (worth about 1/3 of what it was at its height ), the #1 player Google wasn't even there back then. I could easily see the same think happening in this social media area. The barrier to entry is almost nothing and when you see articles valuing companies based on users, as if they really can earn $500 or whatever per user. It is like deja vu.
Last edited by a moderator:
Judge Smails
Footballguy
It wasn't just them. I'll never forget Rambus. Trading at $14 bucks or so, then went straight into the stratosphere. Seemed like it moved $30-$50 a day. I think I got in around the equivalent of $75. Did a 4-1 stock split, ended up split adjusted at the equivalent of $525. It was like a 7 bagger in a month. Ridiculous. Then....BooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooomFor an old fart like me (not really, but was working in dot-com during that 1999-2000 bubble), I distinctly remember articles that showed the valuation of companies based on eyeballs. That was back when Lycos, Excite, Alta Vista, Yahoo and I am sure some others were all the rage of search engines. The funny part is that while Yahoo is still there (worth about 1/3 of what it was at its height ), the #1 player Google wasn't even there back then. I could easily see the same think happening in this social media area. The barrier to entry is almost nothing and when you see articles valuing companies based on users, as if they really can earn $500 or whatever per user. It is like deja vu.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
This market is just nuts. The market is having another big rally today.
This train has to come back to the station eventually but people who try and time it are going to go insane.
This train has to come back to the station eventually but people who try and time it are going to go insane.
lod01
Footballguy
lod01
Footballguy
I gave it a shot.
Fed's Fisher’s fretting about some stock market metrics, namely price-to-projected forward earnings, price-to-sales ratios and market capitalization as a percentage of GDP, that are at levels not seen since the late 1990s.
Back when Greenfrog was running the show, if he made this statement, the Dow would go down 500 points.
Keerock
Footballguy
A LITTLE early? Didn't you start this thread in Sept, 2012?Looks like I was a tad early but since March 5th, the Nasdaq has been on a course of lower highs and lower lows. Huge crater going on right now. If we close below 4150, the trend continues.
Well that and he is cherry picking the Nasdaq when the S&P is still up from his latest call on March 3rd, even with today as well.A LITTLE early? Didn't you start this thread in Sept, 2012?
Things appear to be hitting a head, but as I mentioned in several thread here a couple years ago, we were hitting record corporate profits year over year even though the stock market literally hadn't gone up at all since the 1999/2000 peak. It was something like 10 years with 0% return, which was worse than any ten year period I had ever seen, even the great depression. This is all from memory, but still it definitely made me realize that there was going to be a nice run. Wish I had had more cash laying around, but my retirement accounts have done much better of late.
Similar threads
