Ive decided to sell my shares on Nasdaq.

[yogavnture]

2 hours ago, suzannegoh said:

 

It's common for people to talk about their winning trades more than their losers. What's less common is people feeling as threatened by that as you appear to be. The OP sold his stocks and feels good about it on days that the markets get hammered, so sue him.

 

my advisor says not to time the market.  secondly the op said he was selling to start a business now he says he will get back in when it hits bottom. i dont think he was ever in to begin with . just a poser.....but hey he aint talking today. must be an up day

[suzannegoh]

my advisor says not to time the market.  secondly the op said he was selling to start a business now he says he will get back in when it hits bottom. i dont think he was ever in to begin with . just a poser.....but hey he aint talking today. must be an up day

 

That's terrible, apparently he doesn't see things the same that you do. Clearly he's a rube. But why do you keep taking about your "advisor"? I hope that your not paying that advisor a lot of money because any a-hole can recite Jack Bogle.

 

 

 

[ExpatOilWorker]

18 hours ago, ghworker2010 said:

quote from richard duncans website:

 

Between now and the end of 2019, the Fed will extract more than $1 trillion from the financial markets through Quantitative Tightening.  Just as Quantitative Easing created money and pushed asset prices higher, Quantitative Tightening will destroy money and cause asset prices to fall.  Market participants are still greatly underestimating the damage that the destruction of $1 trillion is likely to inflict on asset prices over the next 24 months.  In fact, if the Fed continues to tighten in line with its current plans, asset prices could crash, credit could contract and the economy could fall back into severe recession. 

Quantitative Tightening will also be expensive.  It will cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade.  There is a much cheaper way for the Fed to accomplish its goals.  This video explains how it should be done.

Monetary Policy is the government’s most effective economic policy tool.  It is also the most important factor driving asset prices.  This two-part Macro Watch series lays out everything you need to know about how the government conducted Monetary Policy in the past and how it is conducting Monetary Policy now.  This is invaluable information for those who want to anticipate the direction that Monetary Policy will take in the future.  Investors who can do that successfully are likely to be very handsomely rewarded.

Macro Watch subscribers can log in and watch this video now.  It is 20 minutes long and contains 35 downloadable charts.

You have a link to the video?

 

Hopefully the US-$ will also get stronger as a result of reducing money supply by $1 trillion.

[yogavnture]

4 hours ago, suzannegoh said:

 

That's terrible, apparently he doesn't see things the same that you do. Clearly he's a rube. But why do you keep taking about your "advisor"? I hope that your not paying that advisor a lot of money because any a-hole can recite Jack Bogle.

 

 

 

i dont know what  a rube is.  ive talked to many advisors.  lets see if the op can time the market on the up. waiting for that.

[swissie]

I like to take this opportunity to introduce a revolutionary new idea that is at least 150 years old:

- Low interest rates are good for stocks.
- High interest rates are bad for stocks.

Now, with the global economies humming, the central Banks will have to abandon the "money for free" concept. (Avoiding massive future inflation and losing all credibility in the process). No more "free money".
The "Markets" are starting to wonder, how those zillions of Businesses, that rely on "money for free" will fare, if real interest will have to be paid on debt (historically 2 to 3 % above inflation rate).
The only "Central Banker" that refuses to accept "the wind of change" is a certain Mario Draghi. No wonder, he is Italian and he knows well, that a significant increase of interest rates would reduce his home-country (the 3rd largest economic power in Europe) to some elevated 3rd world-country. Nevermind.
--------------------------------------------
As long as Gold (the ultimative "fear index") goes in tandem with Stock Indexes, there is no reason for panic. Gold going up and Stocks (still) going down might be an indicator that the game has changed. Keep an eye on it, but as long as this doesn't happen, what we see these days is likely to be a "correction". As this "correction" is massive, new hights in the near future are not likely. In spite of the unfavorable interest rate outlook, while the world economy is humming, a veritable "Crash" is hard to mentally accommodate at this time and the current economical environement by market participiants. (= At this time, well understood).

More likely, that Stocks will be caught in a fairly wide trading range for the foreseeable future.
Just remember above all: Low interest Rates are good for stocks. High interest rates are bad for stocks.
---------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: The above was conveyed to me by my Clairvoyant Romanian Gipsy Lady Friend. She is 89 years old, has no hair left, has no teet left and her breath is horrible but she is far richer than me and anyone else I know within my micro-cosmos.
I asked how did you do it? Answer: = "During the last big war and shortly afterwards I started buying things that would be of value once the turmoil would be over, thingking that things can't get any worse, only better."

Interesting, since accross the Atlantic, a certain Warren Buffet has persued a similar investement concept quite succsessfully.
Cheers.
 

 

[ExpatOilWorker]

On 2/9/2018 at 10:06 PM, ghworker2010 said:

quote from richard duncans website:

 

Between now and the end of 2019, the Fed will extract more than $1 trillion from the financial markets through Quantitative Tightening.  Just as Quantitative Easing created money and pushed asset prices higher, Quantitative Tightening will destroy money and cause asset prices to fall.  Market participants are still greatly underestimating the damage that the destruction of $1 trillion is likely to inflict on asset prices over the next 24 months.  In fact, if the Fed continues to tighten in line with its current plans, asset prices could crash, credit could contract and the economy could fall back into severe recession. 

Quantitative Tightening will also be expensive.  It will cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade.  There is a much cheaper way for the Fed to accomplish its goals.  This video explains how it should be done.

Monetary Policy is the government’s most effective economic policy tool.  It is also the most important factor driving asset prices.  This two-part Macro Watch series lays out everything you need to know about how the government conducted Monetary Policy in the past and how it is conducting Monetary Policy now.  This is invaluable information for those who want to anticipate the direction that Monetary Policy will take in the future.  Investors who can do that successfully are likely to be very handsomely rewarded.

Macro Watch subscribers can log in and watch this video now.  It is 20 minutes long and contains 35 downloadable charts.

Unless there are more than 20 month in 2019, then the above is just a spin of fake news.

 

[suzannegoh]

13 hours ago, swissie said:

I like to take this opportunity to introduce a revolutionary new idea that is at least 150 years old:

- Low interest rates are good for stocks.
- High interest rates are bad for stocks.

Now, with the global economies humming, the central Banks will have to abandon the "money for free" concept. (Avoiding massive future inflation and losing all credibility in the process). No more "free money".
The "Markets" are starting to wonder, how those zillions of Businesses, that rely on "money for free" will fare, if real interest will have to be paid on debt (historically 2 to 3 % above inflation rate).
The only "Central Banker" that refuses to accept "the wind of change" is a certain Mario Draghi. No wonder, he is Italian and he knows well, that a significant increase of interest rates would reduce his home-country (the 3rd largest economic power in Europe) to some elevated 3rd world-country. Nevermind.
--------------------------------------------
As long as Gold (the ultimative "fear index") goes in tandem with Stock Indexes, there is no reason for panic. Gold going up and Stocks (still) going down might be an indicator that the game has changed. Keep an eye on it, but as long as this doesn't happen, what we see these days is likely to be a "correction". As this "correction" is massive, new hights in the near future are not likely. In spite of the unfavorable interest rate outlook, while the world economy is humming, a veritable "Crash" is hard to mentally accommodate at this time and the current economical environement by market participiants. (= At this time, well understood).

More likely, that Stocks will be caught in a fairly wide trading range for the foreseeable future.
Just remember above all: Low interest Rates are good for stocks. High interest rates are bad for stocks.
---------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: The above was conveyed to me by my Clairvoyant Romanian Gipsy Lady Friend. She is 89 years old, has no hair left, has no teet left and her breath is horrible but she is far richer than me and anyone else I know within my micro-cosmos.
I asked how did you do it? Answer: = "During the last big war and shortly afterwards I started buying things that would be of value once the turmoil would be over, thingking that things can't get any worse, only better."

Interesting, since accross the Atlantic, a certain Warren Buffet has persued a similar investement concept quite succsessfully.
Cheers.
 

 

It could be right that that this is only a temporary setback for stocks but I don’t think that Gold and Stocks moving in the same direction is a good indicator of that.  Or at least not in the short term.  After 2008 gold rebounded strongly but during the 2008 crisis itself gold got hammered as badly as anything else.  Part of the reason for that is that one way for people to cover margin calls on their stocks is to sell gold.  

[ghworker2010]

This info is cited from 13D research:

 

Will there be a failed rally in the S&P 500 or will we see modest new highs before the decline resumes in earnest? Many comparisons to 1987 have been floated in recent days—with good reason. Recall that the die was cast after the Plaza Accord in 1985, when the G4 agreed to a big dollar devaluation because the enormous rally in the greenback under Reagan and Volcker was harming U.S. export-competitiveness.  In 1987, the U.S. dollar was falling rapidly, accompanied by soaring bond yields—while the stock market was hitting new highs. If there ever was a signal to be cautious, that was it.  

One important unanswered question is how will bonds respond if U.S. stocks continue to decline at this rate? Will Trump tweet angry messages to the Fed? What impact will this have on the perception of the Fed’s independence? And how will that impact the U.S. dollar? Is it possible that this time, after rallying briefly, bond prices will fall, accompanied by a falling dollar? And, what if this turns into a self-fulfilling downward spiral?

Four things caused the recent decline in U.S. equities—and they aren’t going away anytime soon. First, inflation is finally coming and will likely overshoot. Second, bond yields are responding by breaking out to the upside. Third, the U.S. budget deficit—due to the tax-cuts and end of spending restraint—could easily exceed $1.2 trillion next fiscal year, with trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see.  Fourth, when the Fed began tightening its monetary policy a few years ago, it had little impact on U.S. asset prices because of the inflow of liquidity from Japan and Europe that was triggered by the extraordinary level of quantitative easing going on in those countries. Now, the Fed is scheduled to increase the runoff this year from its portfolio from $20 billion a month to $50 billion a month—at the same time that the ECB and the BOJ will begin withdrawing their monetary stimulus. 

The wildcard in the market outlook is the algorithmic trading and all the new financial products initiated since 2008 in the U.S.—reminiscent of the program trading so widely blamed for triggering the October 1987 market debacle. A 1987 type event is therefore entirely possible. 

The following observation by Vitaliy Katsenelson, in a recent Marketwatch.com opinion article, underscores the risks we see: “The consequences of well-meaning (but not all-knowing) economists setting the cost of money are widespread, from the inflation in asset prices to encouraging companies to spend on projects they shouldn’t. But we really don’t know the second-, third-, and fourth derivatives of the consequences that command-control interest rates will bring. We know that most likely every market participant was forced to take on more risk in recent years, but we don’t know how much more because we don’t know the price of money.” 

The sharp reversal in U.S. stocks is unprecedented. We quote from a Bloomberg article entitled, “This Is the Worst Momentum Swing for U.S. Stocks in History”: “The S&P 500 Index’s 14-day relative strength index—a technical gauge of the magnitude and speed of price movements—has swung 57 points lower over the past two weeks. ‘The journey from ecstasy to agony is entirely unprecedented, in the United States at least,’ writes Bloomberg macro strategist Cameron Crise, who earlier noted this inauspicious achievement. ‘That’s the largest momentum swing in history—and it’s not particularly close.’”

U.S. Treasury 30-year bond yields have risen sharply and are now testing the 2015 downtrend line. Intermediate-term momentum is rising sharply. Will investors buy UST bonds to hedge against a falling U.S. stock market? Or, will investors sell bonds to hedge against sharply rising inflation?

Has the long-term cycle in the global reflationary forces reached a critical point? Trump’s election in late 2016 triggered the “Trump reflation trade”, the first important sign in the financial media of a shift in investor psychology from deflation to reflation.

_____________________________________

 

The comment from bloomberg is interesting. This yr is really uncertain for the U.S share markets

[swissie]

On 11.2.2018 at 11:37 AM, suzannegoh said:

It could be right that that this is only a temporary setback for stocks but I don’t think that Gold and Stocks moving in the same direction is a good indicator of that.  Or at least not in the short term.  After 2008 gold rebounded strongly but during the 2008 crisis itself gold got hammered as badly as anything else.  Part of the reason for that is that one way for people to cover margin calls on their stocks is to sell gold.  

Right on. = The ripple-effect. A truly "big rumble" will affect all investements. In such a scenario, even the much praised  "diversification-concept" may not live up to expectations. There are times when Cash under the mattress is the best investement. But those times when "Cash under the matress" is the best investement never last long.
So, what is a person to do? I believe young (or youngish folks) should stay invested and look at the price of their investments once or twice per year. Sufficient, if you are in it for "the long haul".
As one get's older, I believe that starting to gradually "consume" ones assets is legitimate. There is a time to accumulate assets and there is a time to "de-accumulate" assets, always knowing, that the last shirt we will ever wear has no pockets.
Cheers.  
   

[sendintheclowns]

The only observation which I can add to this thread is that the stock market has been described as a bunch of people in a room all trying to steal off each other. 

[sendintheclowns]

On 2/10/2018 at 7:25 PM, yogavnture said:

i dont know what  a rube is.  ive talked to many advisors.  lets see if the op can time the market on the up. waiting for that.

advisors?? read the book: https://www.amazon.com/Where-Are-Customers-Yachts-Street/dp/0471770892

[yogavnture]

On ‎2‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 12:23 PM, sendintheclowns said:

advisors?? read the book: https://www.amazon.com/Where-Are-Customers-Yachts-Street/dp/0471770892

i saw the book. i believe if a person is not smart with advising and has a chunk of money it is better to use an advisor. that is my opinion. i live in a state capital city in usa.  lets say 300ooo population.  so its a decent size city. i went to every heavy hitter advisor in the town.  shocking the different approaches they used. i stayed with my old advisor ..........he literally laughed at what the other advisors advised. i did talk to a smart man once. he was quite wealthy . at least worth 25 million. he told me ...........put it into 4 good stocks and hold them ............he mentioned john deere. mcdonalds. cant remember the others. this was before apple or amazon were big.   sometimes i reflect upon his thoughts.  dump the advisor. put the money into 4 stocks. like lets say caterpillar. amazon,, apple. and maybe a bank.  something like that and wait.........then i told my advisor that and he said no one would put all their money into 4 stocks. only.............................when u are with an advisor u are really just doing what they want.  and its clear they are paid to put you in certain stuff. i consider that leakage. a necessary evil.  if u dont want to do the work. and have alot of money . use an advisor. its like a bouncer or security guard. 

[yogavnture]

On ‎2‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 12:18 PM, sendintheclowns said:

The only observation which I can add to this thread is that the stock market has been described as a bunch of people in a room all trying to steal off each other. 

i think u are being a bit pessimistic. look at the markets over history from like 1940 onwards. the graph only goes up. the question is ........do u invest on your own or pay someone to skim and do it for you. that is the cheating part. should an advisor make one percent of your portfolio to invest for you

[ghworker2010]

This article is interesting:

 

http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/when-the-next-financial-crisis-hits-there-will-be-little-the-rba-can-do-about-it-20180215-p4z0f1.html

 

''The “canary” to watch is the US long bond rate – if that moves up (say) 100-150 basis points, expect a stockmarket collapse, and probably a credit crisis.''

[lkn]

1 hour ago, yogavnture said:

i did talk to a smart man once. he was quite wealthy . at least worth 25 million. he told me ...........put it into 4 good stocks and hold them […]

Let’s say you have 200,000 to invest and your yearly return is 10% (which is above the S&P 500’s average return), it will take you more than 50 years to reach 25 million.

 

My point is that the stock market is not where you get rich, it is where people who already have a lot of money increase their wealth.

[simoh1490]

1 hour ago, ghworker2010 said:

This article is interesting:

 

http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/when-the-next-financial-crisis-hits-there-will-be-little-the-rba-can-do-about-it-20180215-p4z0f1.html

 

''The “canary” to watch is the US long bond rate – if that moves up (say) 100-150 basis points, expect a stockmarket collapse, and probably a credit crisis.''

That's an old story that is still WIP, it started out when the yield of the 10 year bond hit 2.6, yesterday it hit 2.9, interestingly it fell when China started buying US Treasuries again, a timely intervention.

[simoh1490]

On 15/02/2018 at 12:18 PM, sendintheclowns said:

The only observation which I can add to this thread is that the stock market has been described as a bunch of people in a room all trying to steal off each other. 

That description comes from somebody who has never invested in the stock market and probably doesn't even understand how it works.

[xylophone]

On 10/02/2018 at 2:54 PM, yogavnture said:

my advisor says not to time the market

Some basic rules........

– Set your goals and time horizon.

– Understand your risk profile.
– Diversify
– Don't try to time the market
– Stay the course
– Use index trackers

 

And as you get older and less capable of earning, adjust the portfolio to be more conservative.

[yogavnture]

4 hours ago, lkn said:

Let’s say you have 200,000 to invest and your yearly return is 10% (which is above the S&P 500’s average return), it will take you more than 50 years to reach 25 million.

 

My point is that the stock market is not where you get rich, it is where people who already have a lot of money increase their wealth.

how much money would a person have if they put 50000 in 4 stocks . 50k in amazon.  50k in apple  . 50k in jp morgan chase.......and 50k in john deere (or caterpillar)  lets say this was done 5 years ago today.    how much money would i have now?  beyond that what if a person put the 200k in a decent mutual fund or just in the s and p 500 equally weighted stock.  what would the amount be?  this guy i mention before was quite wealthy so for him to lose a million he could still sleep at night............he directly told me to pick 4 good companys and just wait for long time.  and my advisor laughed at the idea. hmmmmmmmm he wouldn't be getting paid for that.  i think 1 percent is typical for advisors.  and in down markets they know what to do better than most of us. 

[yogavnture]

4 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

That's an old story that is still WIP, it started out when the yield of the 10 year bond hit 2.6, yesterday it hit 2.9, interestingly it fell when China started buying US Treasuries again, a timely intervention.

my advisor says to not follow the news.

[lkn]

48 minutes ago, yogavnture said:

how much money would a person have if they put 50000 in 4 stocks . 50k in amazon.  50k in apple  . 50k in jp morgan chase.......and 50k in john deere (or caterpillar)  lets say this was done 5 years ago today.    how much money would i have now?  beyond that what if a person put the 200k in a decent mutual fund or just in the s and p 500 equally weighted stock.  what would the amount be?

For the S&P 500 it would be worth 360,862 and for the 4 stocks, it would be 623,266.

 

But 1) you’re picking stocks in hindsight, 2) the last 5-8 years have been some of the best years for the stock market, helped tremendously by near-zero interest rates and quantitative easing. It is highly unlikely that the next 5-8 years will be equally good, and 3) despite the phenomenal gains of the last 5 years and retroactively picked stocks, there’s still a long way from 623,266 to 25 million.

 

Let’s do another calculation, say you invested the 200,000 in the S&P 500 the 24th of March 2000, so almost 18 years ago. Today you would have only 357,878. You read that correctly, the guy who went in 5 years ago would have *more* than the guy who has been in the market for almost 18 years.

 

Edited February 16, 2018 by lkn

[yogavnture]

1 hour ago, lkn said:

For the S&P 500 it would be worth 360,862 and for the 4 stocks, it would be 623,266.

 

But 1) you’re picking stocks in hindsight, 2) the last 5-8 years have been some of the best years for the stock market, helped tremendously by near-zero interest rates and quantitative easing. It is highly unlikely that the next 5-8 years will be equally good, and 3) despite the phenomenal gains of the last 5 years and retroactively picked stocks, there’s still a long way from 623,266 to 25 million.

 

Let’s do another calculation, say you invested the 200,000 in the S&P 500 the 24th of March 2000, so almost 18 years ago. Today you would have only 357,878. You read that correctly, the guy who went in 5 years ago would have *more* than the guy who has been in the market for almost 18 years.

 

ive always had an unsettled feeling when this rich guy told me that. i somehow think he was right. the advisor i use has a militant stance. i can only do what he suggests. or i need to leave him. he has the same answer for everything.  honestly i think he wants to get rid of me but i dont think he can as he works for a big bank.  can an advisor get rid of a client for being difficult.?  i think i pay the advisor about .5 percent of my total.  that seems fair. my assets have doubled since 2010 . that seems good?  hell if i know.  

Edited February 16, 2018 by yogavnture
spelling

[simoh1490]

6 hours ago, yogavnture said:

my advisor says to not follow the news.

Your advisor is right, most people should make their investments, lock them away and wait for their advisor to call. Except I have an interest in economics and since I don't have a financial advisor, I need to try and follow what's going on.

[sendintheclowns]

21 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

That description comes from somebody who has never invested in the stock market and probably doesn't even understand how it works.

Sticks and stones, bro.

[sendintheclowns]

16 hours ago, yogavnture said:

my advisor says to not follow the news.

correct, do not follow the news - but do follow the company you are invested in. For the companies I invest in, I am registered for NR's published by Investor Relations. For SET, and macro economic news, ThaiCapitalist provides a decent, very condensed free em service. Curious to know, do you do due dilligence, before investing or do you let your advisor dictate to you?

[yogavnture]

1 hour ago, sendintheclowns said:

correct, do not follow the news - but do follow the company you are invested in. For the companies I invest in, I am registered for NR's published by Investor Relations. For SET, and macro economic news, ThaiCapitalist provides a decent, very condensed free em service. Curious to know, do you do due dilligence, before investing or do you let your advisor dictate to you?

he does everything. but for some reason when i need to invest more. he seems to want me to come up with a name of a new investment. usually. he did come up with catapillar. which i made good mony on though but then he came up with tractor supply that is a rotten company.  i like pay pal right now

[yogavnture]

4 hours ago, sendintheclowns said:

correct, do not follow the news - but do follow the company you are invested in. For the companies I invest in, I am registered for NR's published by Investor Relations. For SET, and macro economic news, ThaiCapitalist provides a decent, very condensed free em service. Curious to know, do you do due dilligence, before investing or do you let your advisor dictate to you?

do you think doubling my assets from 2010 until now is a reasonable return? that would be more than ten percent per year.  is that good?

Edited February 17, 2018 by yogavnture
spelling

[speedtripler]

38 minutes ago, yogavnture said:

do you think doubling my assets from 2010 until now is a reasonable return? that would be more than ten percent per year.  is that good?

If you bought bitcoins last week you could have doubled your wealth

Doing it in eight years is not that impressive imo

[yogavnture]

1 hour ago, speedtripler said:

If you bought bitcoins last week you could have doubled your wealth

Doing it in eight years is not that impressive imo

bitcoins is a ponzi scheme

[lkn]

3 hours ago, yogavnture said:

do you think doubling my assets from 2010 until now is a reasonable return? that would be more than ten percent per year.  is that good?

It’s worse than the performance of the S&P 500 index for the same period.

 

Though maybe if you have low risk/volatility, it’s good, for example I would gladly take 6% yearly return if it was guaranteed (so basically zero risk) despite the average return on stocks being higher.

 

But from what you have written so far, it seems a bit strange with him asking you to come up with some stocks.