Global Correction

[fletchsmile]

You can't compare 2 heavyweights like the FTSE allworld & DOW JONES IA with the three other -Asian- charts. That's plain silly. ALL Asian stocks were up in the same period since August 16 (and on the way down now).

Both you and Bingo are taking this topic way too personal and I suggest we look at a broader picture instead of calling a YES-NO-YES-NO Global Correction.

Bingo said YES; you said NO.

It's more complex than YES-or-NO but if big shots like Alan Greenspan, Warren Buffett and now Li-ka-Shing from HK are warning the financial world......than....who am I ?

LaoPo

I guess you didn't read the earlier posts, or missed the points, if you're unsure why I used the indices I did:

1) Asian markets' decoupling from US markets is accelerating. Anyone who spotted that a while back, would be in a good position. Hence the need for an Asian reference.

2) Thailand has lagged it's peers in South East Asia and Asia generally. Thought that would be of interest on a Thai forum. Thailand has lagged it's peers obviously because of political events.

Hence the need for the 3 Asian charts. Thailand - we live in been driven by political events for a year or so. SE Asia as Thailand peers. Asia to illustrate de-coupling. Hope that make sense now

3) Using a world a world index, as well as the Dow quoted. Well that just highlights most of the world is slightly up since the call for a bust. Dow as that was quoted as the argument for a global bust. Dow might be heavyweight, but more and more like its currency it is becoming the exception rather than the rule.

Think you're reading too much into things if you think it's personal. If you're talking about the bigger picture? Most of the talk above is about US and US markets. Take a quick check thru the posts. Most talk of FED, US, USD, Dow, US Sub prime etc

Hence someone needs to bring in the Asian picture, decoupling issues, Thailand political situation etc.

1) Thailand picture driven more by politcs for the last year or so

2) Asia decoupling

3) US perhaps heading to recession

If we're talking silly, I'd say the thinking that there are are a set of global factors driving all markets in the same way, and that these same set of factors will cause a global bust is silly. Yet that's what many people above keep implying. They imply US is faltering, rest of world will follow.

There is a little hope in your last sentence, though, if you at least recognise it's complex, rather than saying all markets have the same fate awaiting.

I disagree with your thinking on this topic. You think only American banks make bad loans? You think Thai banks don't make even more as a percentage of their loan portfolios? If liquidity is lost then all the chickens come home to roost, everywhere. Bad loans in Thailand and similar places have often been obscured by rising markets which effectively bailed out the banks from their risky behaviors. If the music stops Thailand isnt the "safe haven" I'd choose. I'm not suggesting anything bad is about to happen, in fact the SET is currently in a bullish trend. That doesn't mean it won't be pulled down by events outside its borders.

Not at all. That's a large stretch to say only American banks make bad loans. Not sure where you got that implication from. Yes Thai banks generally have higher NPLs on their books, than wetern ones as we all know. As you also know Thailand, though, has had some very interesting bank results this year, quite polarised in fact been good and bad performers. Additionally most of the Thai bed debt news came thru in H1. This contrasts US where it will fall H2. Thai banks exposure to CDOs was minimal in contrast to US. i.e worst seems over for Thai banks. Worst is just beginning for US. All suffer NPLs at some point, but the cycles are different.

Not sure you're accurate to say bad loans in Thailand have been obscured by rising markets. Rises have been small comparatively in Thailand when compared to other markets. Loans are mainly domestic.

Thanks for pointing out the bullish trend on the SET. Exactly the point we need more of. Yes, US may be bearish, but US alone is not global.

Edited November 24, 2007 by fletchthai68

[LaoPo]

You can't compare 2 heavyweights like the FTSE allworld & DOW JONES IA with the three other -Asian- charts. That's plain silly. ALL Asian stocks were up in the same period since August 16 (and on the way down now).

Both you and Bingo are taking this topic way too personal and I suggest we look at a broader picture instead of calling a YES-NO-YES-NO Global Correction.

Bingo said YES; you said NO.

It's more complex than YES-or-NO but if big shots like Alan Greenspan, Warren Buffett and now Li-ka-Shing from HK are warning the financial world......than....who am I ?

LaoPo

I guess you didn't read the earlier posts, or missed the points, if you're unsure why I used the indices I did:

1) Asian markets' decoupling from US markets is accelerating. Anyone who spotted that a while back, would be in a good position. Hence the need for an Asian reference. Surely you're not telling me it's enough to talk about the Dow index for a global recession? Or perhaps you are?

2) Thailand has lagged it's peers in South East Asia and Asia generally. Thought that would be of interest on a Thai forum. Political rather than economic factors have weighed have on Thailand for a year or so.

Hence the need for the 3 Asian charts. Thailand - where we live, has been driven by political events for a year or so. SE Asia as Thailand peers. Asia to illustrate de-coupling from US. Hope that make sense now

3) Using a world a world index, as well as the Dow quoted. Well that just highlights most of the world is slightly up since the call for a bust. Dow as that was quoted as the argument for a global bust. Dow might be heavyweight, but more and more, like its currency it is becoming the exception rather than the rule.

Think you're reading too much into things if you think it's personal.

If you're talking about the bigger picture? Most of the talk above is about US and US markets. Take a quick check thru the posts. Most talk of FED, US, USD, Dow, US Sub prime, US credit spreads etc

Hence someone needs to bring in the Asian picture, decoupling issues, Thailand political situation etc. Summary

1) Thailand picture driven more by politcs for the last year or so

2) Asia decoupling

3) US perhaps heading to recession

If we're talking silly, I'd say the thinking that there are are a set of global factors driving all markets in the same way, and that these same set of factors will cause a global bust is silly. Yet that's what many people above keep implying. They imply US is faltering, rest of world will follow. There is a little hope in your last sentence, though, if you at least recognise it's complex, rather than saying all markets have the same fate of a global bust awaiting.

So far the idea of a bust is highlighly questionable, as the passage of 3 months has been showing. The idea of it being global, to use your words, is just silly..

Sir, I disagree with you on so many points that it is -almost- useless to discuss them.

But, let me try, just briefly.

Your first points:

1. Asia is decoupling from the US ? That's utter nonsense.

2. That's the understatement of the year; the SET's movements are based upon the political situation ? nonsense as well.

3. The Dow is less and less important according to your view and becoming an exception...? Well, Sir, if the Dow farts, it's storming in Asia.

Sir, we're living in a global world but the axe: DJIA <> FTSE <> DAX/Frankfurt is still of the utmost importance to Asia and the rest of the world.

Asia can NEVER be seen as 'decoupled' from the rest of the world.

I wish you well with your 'decoupling' investments in Asia.

LaoPo

[fletchsmile]

Sir, I disagree with you on so many points that it is -almost- useless to discuss them.

But, let me try, just briefly.

Your first points:

1. Asia is decoupling from the US ? That's utter nonsense.

2. That's the understatement of the year; the SET's movements are based upon the political situation ? nonsense as well.

3. The Dow is less and less important according to your view and becoming an exception...? Well, Sir, if the Dow farts, it's storming in Asia.

Sir, we're living in a global world but the axe: DJIA <> FTSE <> DAX/Frankfurt is still of the utmost importance to Asia and the rest of the world.

Asia can NEVER be seen as 'decoupled' from the rest of the world.

I wish you well with your 'decoupling' investments in Asia.

LaoPo

Very 20th century thinking sir:

1. Suggest you google the word "decoupling". If you still can't see Asia decoupling from US, then as you say we've not much to discuss. Not complete yet, but it is happening. Note I referred to Asian markets decoupling from US, not from the rest of the world.

2. What's your view on why Thai markets have substantially underperformed their SE Asian peers, if not mainly for the political situation? Economy has been subdued because of the political situation. Underlying fundamentals are still there. November thru January the elections are the most important event to watch

3. 20th century saying to still believe, the Dow sneezes and the world catches a cold.

One small example: Watch the BRICs go. Brazil and Russia with their resources, India and China to consume them. A new era is dawning...

Edited November 24, 2007 by fletchthai68

[LaoPo]

Thanks for pointing out the bullish trend on the SET. Exactly the point we need more of. Yes, US may be bearish, but US alone is not global.

Bullish trend on the SET ? What bullish trend ?

The SET dropped 100 points in the LAST 3 weeks from 915 to 807; you Gents call that a Bullish trend ?

Or are you talking lowest 616 this year versus highest point 915 ? The year 2007 hasn't finished yet....

Apart from that, comparing GIANT Banks, in the US or EU, with Thai banks is comparing Giants with Dwarfs and doesn't make sense.

I suggest to study the Market Caps as well as PROFITS of the Western Banks and Thai Banks and make a comparison.

It's like comparing grains of sand on the beach of Koh Samet with Rocks from the Rocky Mountains or The Alps.

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

Thanks for pointing out the bullish trend on the SET. Exactly the point we need more of. Yes, US may be bearish, but US alone is not global.

Bullish trend on the SET ? What bullish trend ?

The SET dropped 100 points in the LAST 3 weeks from 915 to 807; you Gents call that a Bullish trend ?

Or are you talking lowest 616 this year versus highest point 915 ? The year 2007 hasn't finished yet....

Apart from that, comparing GIANT Banks, in the US or EU, with Thai banks is comparing Giants with Dwarfs and doesn't make sense.

I suggest to study the Market Caps as well as PROFITS of the Western Banks and Thai Banks and make a comparison.

It's like comparing grains of sand on the beach of Koh Samet with Rocks from the Rocky Mountains or The Alps.

Oh, and, if I'm 20th century thinking, well if that's what you think, be my guest.

So are Buffett, Greenspan and Mr. Li-Ka-Shing, if you know who they are...

LaoPo

Edited November 24, 2007 by LaoPo

[lannarebirth]

Thanks for pointing out the bullish trend on the SET. Exactly the point we need more of. Yes, US may be bearish, but US alone is not global.

Bullish trend on the SET ? What bullish trend ?

The SET dropped 100 points in the LAST 3 weeks from 915 to 807; you Gents call that a Bullish trend ?

Or are you talking lowest 616 this year versus highest point 915 ? The year 2007 hasn't finished yet....

Apart from that, comparing GIANT Banks, in the US or EU, with Thai banks is comparing Giants with Dwarfs and doesn't make sense.

I suggest to study the Market Caps as well as PROFITS of the Western Banks and Thai Banks and make a comparison.

It's like comparing grains of sand on the beach of Koh Samet with Rocks from the Rocky Mountains or The Alps.

LaoPo

What I mean by bullish trend is that the SET remains above it's daily, weekly and monthly rising trendline. It wouldn't need to fall much further to negate that view however.

[LaoPo]

Thanks for pointing out the bullish trend on the SET. Exactly the point we need more of. Yes, US may be bearish, but US alone is not global.

Bullish trend on the SET ? What bullish trend ?

The SET dropped 100 points in the LAST 3 weeks from 915 to 807; you Gents call that a Bullish trend ?

Or are you talking lowest 616 this year versus highest point 915 ? The year 2007 hasn't finished yet....

Apart from that, comparing GIANT Banks, in the US or EU, with Thai banks is comparing Giants with Dwarfs and doesn't make sense.

I suggest to study the Market Caps as well as PROFITS of the Western Banks and Thai Banks and make a comparison.

It's like comparing grains of sand on the beach of Koh Samet with Rocks from the Rocky Mountains or The Alps.

LaoPo

What I mean by bullish trend is that the SET remains above it's daily, weekly and monthly rising trendline. It wouldn't need to fall much further to negate that view however.

Sorry, Lannarebirth, almost forgot you're the man with the statistics and graphs; nothing wrong with that tho. I'm curious to see where we are December 31st 2007. But...who cares; it's just a Polaroid picture every day again.

Let's enjoy the weekend. My wife is waiting...

LaoPo

[lannarebirth]

Thanks for pointing out the bullish trend on the SET. Exactly the point we need more of. Yes, US may be bearish, but US alone is not global.

Bullish trend on the SET ? What bullish trend ?

The SET dropped 100 points in the LAST 3 weeks from 915 to 807; you Gents call that a Bullish trend ?

Or are you talking lowest 616 this year versus highest point 915 ? The year 2007 hasn't finished yet....

Apart from that, comparing GIANT Banks, in the US or EU, with Thai banks is comparing Giants with Dwarfs and doesn't make sense.

I suggest to study the Market Caps as well as PROFITS of the Western Banks and Thai Banks and make a comparison.

It's like comparing grains of sand on the beach of Koh Samet with Rocks from the Rocky Mountains or The Alps.

LaoPo

What I mean by bullish trend is that the SET remains above it's daily, weekly and monthly rising trendline. It wouldn't need to fall much further to negate that view however.

Sorry, Lannarebirth, almost forgot you're the man with the statistics and graphs; nothing wrong with that tho. I'm curious to see where we are December 31st 2007. But...who cares; it's just a Polaroid picture every day again.

Let's enjoy the weekend. My wife is waiting...

LaoPo

I certainly don't know where it will be, but I do expect greater volatility soon. I think the last days of November and the first 2 weeks of December will be memorable. I'm making a short trip to China so will be on thesidelines watching.

Edited November 24, 2007 by lannarebirth

[fletchsmile]

Thanks for pointing out the bullish trend on the SET. Exactly the point we need more of. Yes, US may be bearish, but US alone is not global.

Bullish trend on the SET ? What bullish trend ?

The SET dropped 100 points in the LAST 3 weeks from 915 to 807; you Gents call that a Bullish trend ?

Or are you talking lowest 616 this year versus highest point 915 ? The year 2007 hasn't finished yet....

Apart from that, comparing GIANT Banks, in the US or EU, with Thai banks is comparing Giants with Dwarfs and doesn't make sense.

I suggest to study the Market Caps as well as PROFITS of the Western Banks and Thai Banks and make a comparison.

It's like comparing grains of sand on the beach of Koh Samet with Rocks from the Rocky Mountains or The Alps.

Oh, and, if I'm 20th century thinking, well if that's what you think, be my guest.

So are Buffett, Greenspan and Mr. Li-Ka-Shing, if you know who they are...

LaoPo

As you quoted Warren Buffet to support your views. Perhaps you'd like to reconsider. I think you'll find his thinking is moving on in this topic, even if yours hasn't

1) Us sneezing and world catching cold. Even he raises that US is no longer so important

2) If life is so global, why is he pro Korean stocks, while expecting US to have hard times ahead.

BTW You're posts would carry more weight without words like "nonesense", "silly", etc

http://www.cnbc.com/id/21530734Monday, 29 Oct 2007Warren Buffett Sees "Fairly Significant" Chance U.S. Going Into RecessionPosted By:Alex CrippenTopics:Economy (U.S.) | Asia | South Korea | China | Warren BuffettCompanies:Berkshire Hathaway Inc.Warren: Well, the takeaway is that both of those countries (China and South Korea) are on the move in an extraordinary way. And even though you read about it, particularly in China, it still makes a difference when you see it.

I have done a lot of reading about China, but driving past hundreds and hundreds of companies from all over the world that have gone to Dalian, where we were, the money that's been spent, the buildings that have been built, it is a country that is exploding.

Becky: If the U.S. does go into recession, do you think it going to be the type of thing that catches around the globe like a cold? Are other economies going to get dragged into it?

Warren: Well, historically they've always said that if we get a cold, the rest of the world gets pneumonia or something. But, we are still very important in the U.S., and we are still very linked in many ways. But we aren't as important as we used to be relative to the rest of the world.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/21465921

Thursday, 25 Oct 2007Warren Buffett in Korea: Stocks There Look Good, U.S. Dollar Doesn't and Subprime Fallout Will DeepenPosted By:Alex CrippenTopics:Economy (U.S.) | Subprime Lending | Asia | South Korea | China | Warren BuffettCompanies:Berkshire Hathaway Inc.Warren Buffett is now in South Korea, his first-ever visit to that country. He's there to see the Korean subsidary of Iscar, the Israeli tool maker purchased by Berkshire Hathaway last year.Unlike Chinese stocks, which he sees as generally too "hot" and unlikely to be good investing hunting ground for him, Buffett says South Korean stock prices are "no higher and probably somewhat less" than stocks in the United States. That echoes what he told a South Korean business newspaper by email before leaving on his Asian trip. (WBW Post: Warren Buffett Calls Korean Stocks "Still Attractive" Despite Gains.)

The wire services are also headlining his prediction that we haven't seen the worst of the fallout from bad subprime loans in the U.S. "It will have more of an impact," he told a news conference in Korea. "In the next 6 months, one year, two years the problems in the mortgage market can cause a lot of problems with consumers and hurt buying power in the United States" but "overall the economy will make progress" when you take a longer-term view.

Buffett also repeated his pessimism on the U.S. dollar: ""We still are negative on the dollar relative to most major currencies." (WBW Post: <A href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/21435354/site/14081545/">Warren Buffett to CNBC - U.S. Dollar Not the "Best Currency in the World" to Own Right Now.)

Interesting series if you care to follow it

[fletchsmile]

Sir, I disagree with you on so many points that it is -almost- useless to discuss them.

But, let me try, just briefly.

Your first points:

1. Asia is decoupling from the US ? That's utter nonsense.

2. That's the understatement of the year; the SET's movements are based upon the political situation ? nonsense as well.

3. The Dow is less and less important according to your view and becoming an exception...? Well, Sir, if the Dow farts, it's storming in Asia.

Sir, we're living in a global world but the axe: DJIA <> FTSE <> DAX/Frankfurt is still of the utmost importance to Asia and the rest of the world.

Asia can NEVER be seen as 'decoupled' from the rest of the world.

I wish you well with your 'decoupling' investments in Asia.

LaoPo

Lao Po

As mentioned, you're posts lose credibility when you use such words as nonesene, and portray such a close-minded approach. While it may be open to debate, and you may disagree, there are many views on either side. It doesn't come across as mature debate to shut your ears and claim it's "utter nonesense", because it doesn't fit what you want to believe and your own views

Agree or disagree. There's some pretty big names out there who support the concept. They are also able to argue it maturely without simplying dismissing the opposing view as nonesense.

Sorry, but I attach more weight to the likes of Goldman's, Lehman Bros and Merril's, than your simple dismissals. Interesting Citibank are against the idea. If I recall their CEO made a few other bad calls recently.

I think the article below is much more balanced than your spurious claims of nonesense... You'll note I've even chosen someone who supports your view...While I disagree I can a least acknowledge an opposite view

Either way, I've a feeling it will get put to the test in the not too distant future...

http://commonsenseforecaster.blogspot.com/...ng-markets.html

<H2 class=date-header>Saturday, October 27, 2007</H2>The Weekend's Contemplation – Emerging Markets Can't Pick Up the Slack

Over the last several months there have been a number of posts on whether or not the rest of the world would slide into a recession if the US slid into a recession. Some believe that if the US slides into a recession other economies will not because their economy is sufficiently strong to get along without us (the whole idea behind de-coupling). Others believe that the opposite, that economies outside the US, primarily emerging markets, lack the size to make up for the US. This article from <A href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=auhSx4a0tgkY&refer=home">Bloomberg supports the latter position. Text in bold is my emphasis.

China is among the world's fastest- growing economies. Shanghai and Shenzhen are home to its hottest stock market. Now many investors regard the evolving Asian behemoth as the antidote to a slowing U.S. economy, picking up the slack in global growth as the American consumer retreats.

They probably shouldn't. China's growth has been fueled by exports and investment, not consumers, whose share of the country's gross domestic product is declining. From almost 80 percent in the first half of the 1980s, Chinese household consumption fell to 46 percent of GDP by 2000 and shrank further to 36 percent in 2006.

``The average consumer in China isn't a credit-card-toting shopper roaming malls in search of fashionable jeans or a large- screen television,'' says Joseph Quinlan, New York-based chief market strategist at Bank of America Capital Management.

Instead, the Chinese are savers. The average household banks a quarter of its after-tax income. That's to compensate for reduced government outlays for health care, unemployment benefits and pensions; more costly housing; the loss of guaranteed lifetime employment; and rising school-related expenses in a country obsessed with education.

``While China's global presence in certain industries has grown in significance over the past decade, Chinese consumers are not ready to drive global demand,'' Quinlan says. ``The Chinese are in no position to fill a consumption vacuum left by the U.S.''

China is part, a big part, of a growing consensus that emerging-market countries, can not only break free of their traditional dependence on the American consumer but that their own expanding domestic demand can cushion the global impact of a slowing U.S. economy.

Proponents of this thesis that the meek shall inherit the Earth -- or, at the very least, help stabilize it -- include Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co. and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

Strong growth in emerging markets ``could balance the drag effect from the world financial turmoil,'' Lehman told clients at the end of August. On Sept. 12, Goldman economists boldly proclaimed: ``Our view of global decoupling has become the consensus view.'' Emerging markets generally and the so-called BRICs -- Brazil, Russia, India and China -- specifically, are key to global decoupling, they said.

The four BRICs, which sport growth rates of 5.4 percent to 11.5 percent, may be the toast of the evolving economic order. But declaring them the new citadels of the world economy is a stretch and premature.

Although developing countries are projected to account for about three-quarters of global growth in 2007, their size is still too small to power the world economy. Take the four BRIC nations: Collectively their GDP amounted to $5.6 trillion at the end of 2006. That's 43 percent of U.S. GDP, 56 percent of the 13- nation euro area's and 130 percent of Japan's.

When it comes to stock markets, the gap is even wider. The aggregate free-float value of the Brazilian, Russian, Indian and Chinese stock markets is a mere 4.9 percent of world market value, according to Morgan Stanley Capital International. The four BRICs are 12 percent of the U.S. market value, 16 percent of Europe's and 56 percent of Japan's.

China's CSI 300 Index has more than tripled in the past 12 months. Still, the country's stock market represents just 1.9 percent of total world-market value compared with U.S. equities' global share of 42 percent.

Even though developing countries are trying to boost domestic demand, they remain dependent on exports, accounting for about 45 percent of the world's cross-border sale of goods, according to Merrill Lynch.

Furthermore, the Japanese and German economies -- respectively, the world's second- and third-biggest -- are slowing, adding to the woes of emerging-market exporters already thumped by weaker U.S. growth. Japanese GDP fell an annualized 1.2 percent in the second quarter, and there's a good chance the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, eager to remain in power, will backslide on promised fiscal changes.

Meanwhile, Germany suffers from sluggish consumption, a strong euro that threatens exports, and a credit crisis that will increase the cost of financing investment.

No doubt, developing countries have come a long way since the 1997-1998 Asian financial crisis and the Russian default in 1998. Back then, Asian countries were starved for cash; now emerging-market economies, led by Asia, account for 66 percent of global foreign-exchange reserves. Inflation is down. And many countries have adopted flexible currency regimes.

As a group, the countries' total external debt-to-GDP ratio has been falling since 2000. And the aggregate current-account surplus of 54 countries studied by Goldman Sachs rose to 4.7 percent of GDP in 2006. That compares with a deficit of 1.4 percent of GDP in 1995.

Nonetheless, ``there are still plenty of vulnerable economies in the emerging-market space,'' says Gray Newman, New York-based senior Latin America economist at Morgan Stanley. South Africa, Turkey, Hungary and the Czech Republic have run current-account deficits averaging more than 4 percent of GDP for three years, while Turkey, Poland, Hungary and India have posted fiscal deficits of 3 percent to 8 percent of GDP in the last three years.

What's more, ``before we ring in the decoupling era, it is worth recalling that it has not been tested with a U.S. economy in recession,'' Newman says.

Bottom line: ``The old saying, `If the U.S. sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold,' remains relevant,'' said the International Monetary Fund in its April 2007 edition of the World Economic Outlook.

How much of a cold depends on how big the sneeze.

Posted by CSF at 5:56 AM

Edited November 24, 2007 by fletchthai68

[lannarebirth]

Goldman warns of a substantial US recession

By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, International Business Editor

Last Updated: 12:02am GMT 18/11/2007

Goldman Sachs has sent a shudder through the debt markets, warning that sub-prime mortgage losses could force banks to slash lending by $2,000bn (£980bn) and push the United States into a deep recession.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard: a whisper in your ear from City gurus

Fund managers hold their nerve despite fears

Jan Hatzius, US chief economist for the Wall Street bank, said potential losses of $400bn from the whole debacle did not begin to capture the scale of any squeeze on bank lending.

Goldman Sachs said there was a growing risk that

US troubles would spread to Britain and Europe

http://www.traders-talk.com/mb2/index.php?showtopic=79840

[fletchsmile]

Bolton 1 Man U 0

The good times are here already. Best indicator yet that a global crisis will be averted.

http://www.bwfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/Gener...0.html#continue

Gary Meggson recorded his first win as manager of the Club with Wanderer's first league win on home soil against Manchester United in almost 30 years.... against a side they hadn't beaten in Bolton since 1978.

Nine games without a win, and now this. The world is changing. The contrarians are in the ascendancy, and proof that there's more to predictions than mere statistics

Edited November 24, 2007 by fletchthai68

[chinthee]

It's a yes/no/yes/no market. Perfect for people like me, but hard on investors I imagine.

why would you think it's hard for investors? there's always a way to make money no matter in what direction the markets go IF you are well diversified, have enough cash and have not taken huge lopsided leverage risks.

Yes, you're completely right. I don't do my own trading as my private bankers handles that, but I like reading your comments and this thread.

[LaoPo]

fletchthai68: Do you really expect me to read your unreadable posts and quotes ?

Sorry, I have better and nicer things to do in the weekend but apart from that I wouldn't like to see you worrying about me. There's no need for that, I assure you.

And as for lecturing me about China: don't worry since I left many footsteps in China for over 30 years and I have contact with China on a daily basis

I'm well 'informed' so to speak.

Don't always believe what 'Asian specialists' write or say and be cautious what analysts (if those analysts knew...they would be wealthy) of these giants you named, are telling you and the rest of the world.

Happy investing !

LaoPo

[lannarebirth]

fletchthai68: Do you really expect me to read your unreadable posts and quotes ?

Sorry, I have better and nicer things to do in the weekend but apart from that I wouldn't like to see you worrying about me. There's no need for that, I assure you.

And as for lecturing me about China: don't worry since I left many footsteps in China for over 30 years and I have contact with China on a daily basis

I'm well 'informed' so to speak.

Don't always believe what 'Asian specialists' write or say and be cautious what analysts (if those analysts knew...they would be wealthy) of these giants you named, are telling you and the rest of the world.

Happy investing !

LaoPo

More often than not those "analysts" are either frontrunning the trading division of their own bank or trying to create a pool of buyers fior what they themselves are selling. I've seen several instances whereby, what bank's analysts put out for public consumption is the exact opposite of what they are telling their high networth clients. It's a business after all, and not really one known for its high integrity.

Edited November 25, 2007 by lannarebirth

[up-country_sinclair]

so if this global correction is going to happen, how would that affect the global bond market? with my limited knowledge of international finance, I would think that the cost of bonds would increase significantly---and even if the correction is primarily limited to US markets, wouldn't that make global bonds increase too?

Edited November 25, 2007 by up-country_sinclair

[fletchsmile]

fletchthai68: Do you really expect me to read your unreadable posts and quotes ?

Sorry, I have better and nicer things to do in the weekend but apart from that I wouldn't like to see you worrying about me. There's no need for that, I assure you.

And as for lecturing me about China: don't worry since I left many footsteps in China for over 30 years and I have contact with China on a daily basis

I'm well 'informed' so to speak.

Don't always believe what 'Asian specialists' write or say and be cautious what analysts (if those analysts knew...they would be wealthy) of these giants you named, are telling you and the rest of the world.

Happy investing !

LaoPo

More often than not those "analysts" are either frontrunning the trading division of their own bank or trying to create a pool of buyers fior what they themselves are selling. I've seen several instances whereby, what bank's analysts put out for public consumption is the exact opposite of what they are telling their high networth clients. It's a business after all, and not really one known for its high integrity.

What's interesting is the split between analysts as to whether decoupling is happening or not. To dismiss it is "utter nonesense" would be a naive move. Interesting to note whereas more analysts were open to the idea at the start of the year, fewer seem to support it now. For me it's a question of when, rather than if.

When I see people like Warren Buffet touring Asia and bullish on Korea, while believing US is facing tough times, I get comfort. Korea does more trade with Asia now than the US, an increasing trend.

I think if there was going to be any sort of global bust it would have happened in October. While a little nervous in October, I didn't believe it would happen, and feel even more confident now. US is in bad shape, however you want to measure it. Yet so much bad news has been thrown out in the last 6 months, but weathered to date by this side of the world. US is still important, but it's in decline, and unlikely to be as important again as it used o be.

The most interesting question is the extent that the rest of the world will brush off US problems (or not). If US enters a recession, it will be the first of the new millenium, and a new era. Much of the US' histroric importance, came from European migration, and then it's favourable economic position after World Wars. Personally I think this time round, a US recession could simply accelerate the US decline, as Asians in particular buy up the US on the cheap. We know Chinese Banks have expressed interest in trying to acquire western banks, and perhaps after a recession, some of the US banking giants. It's a question only of when, not if...

In the past liquidity issues, have usually driven a flight back to "quality" in the US. Why would anyone other than an American want to repatriate money to the US at the moment? There are so many more choices now in the 21st century. There's a distinct lack of quality in US: Weak currency, sick economy, rising debt, potential recession, lack of household savings (unlike Chinese), property market problmes, countries switching their reserve holdings to other currencies and commodities etc.

When you've got Warren Buffet touring the world looking at alternatives, in our part of the world, that's enough for me. He's not battoning down the hatches pending a global bust. You do that at home. He's out there seeing first hand where it's at in the 21st century. Amazing guy, particularly for someone that age.

Edited November 25, 2007 by fletchthai68

[lannarebirth]

fletchthai68: Do you really expect me to read your unreadable posts and quotes ?

Sorry, I have better and nicer things to do in the weekend but apart from that I wouldn't like to see you worrying about me. There's no need for that, I assure you.

And as for lecturing me about China: don't worry since I left many footsteps in China for over 30 years and I have contact with China on a daily basis

I'm well 'informed' so to speak.

Don't always believe what 'Asian specialists' write or say and be cautious what analysts (if those analysts knew...they would be wealthy) of these giants you named, are telling you and the rest of the world.

Happy investing !

LaoPo

More often than not those "analysts" are either frontrunning the trading division of their own bank or trying to create a pool of buyers fior what they themselves are selling. I've seen several instances whereby, what bank's analysts put out for public consumption is the exact opposite of what they are telling their high networth clients. It's a business after all, and not really one known for its high integrity.

What's interesting is the split between analysts as to whether decoupling is happening or not. To dismiss it is "utter nonesense" would be a naive move. Interesting to note whereas more analysts were open to the idea at the start of the year, fewer seem to support it now. For me it's a question of when, rather than if.

When I see people like Warren Buffet touring Asia and bullish on Korea, while believing US is facing tough times, I get comfort. Korea does more trade with Asia now than US, an increasing trend.

I think if there was going to be any sort of global bust it would have happened in October. While a little nervous in October, I didn't believe it would happen, and feel even more confident now. US is in bad shape, however you want to measure it. Yet so much bad news has been thrown out in the last 6 months, but weathered to date by this side of the world. US is still important, but it's in decline, and unlikely be as important again as it used o be.

The most interesting question is the extent that the rest of the world will brush off US problems (or not). If US enters a recession, it will be the first of the new millenium, and a new era. Much of the US' histroric importance, came from European migration, and then it's favourable economic position after World Wars. Personally I think this time round, a US recession could simply accelerate the US decline, as Asians in particular buy up the US on the cheap. We've know Chinese Banks have expressed interest in trying to acquire western banks, and perhaps after a recession, some of the US banking giants. It's a question only of when, not if...

In the past liquidity issues, have usually driven a flight back to "quality" in the US. Why would anyone other than an American want to repatriate money to the US? There are so many more choices now in the 21st century. There's a distinct lack of quality in US: Weak currency, sick economy, rising debt, potential recession, lack of household savings (unlike Chinese), countries switching their reserve holdings to other currencies and commodities etc.

When you've got Warren Buffet touring the world looking at alternatives, in our part of the world, that's enough for me. He's not battoning down the hatches pending a global bust. He's out there seeing first hand where it's at in the 21st century. Amazing guy, particularly for someone that age.

You may very well be right, and so might Lao Po. I think it's clear that many of the posters on this board invest in many differnt time frames with differnt expectations on returns. Personally, I'll find myself agreeing with both of you at different times.

One of the things I find that is interesting, is many people often do painstaking research when deciding whether to make an investment, but few ever set out the parameters for what they will do if they're wrong. Nothing wrong with being wrong. I am about 35% of the time. The most important thing I've learned is how to recognize when I'm wrong and change. One should never let ones ego get in the way. Chok Dee!

[fletchsmile]

You may very well be right, and so might Lao Po. I think it's clear that many of the posters on this board invest in many differnt time frames with differnt expectations on returns. Personally, I'll find myself agreeing with both of you at different times.

One of the things I find that is interesting, is many people often do painstaking research when deciding whether to make an investment, but few ever set out the parameters for what they will do if they're wrong. Nothing wrong with being wrong. I am about 35% of the time. The most important thing I've learned is how to recognize when I'm wrong and change. One should never let ones ego get in the way. Chok Dee!

Very much agree with your post.

When I push my own views, it's very much to have them challenged, not to say they are right. When I challenge others views, it's not to put them down, but to learn from them. No-one should be taking them personally. With the world changing, though, it's sometimes less easy to spot what is right and wrong.

eg Feel bullish on Thailand, but that's not to say I haven't been trying to look into ways to protect againts the opposite, just in case I'm wrong. Looking to increase exposure, but would also like to look at some out of the money put options to protect vs a drop of more than 10%, if anyone has any experience of Thai brokers and using relatively new SET options here?

Edited November 25, 2007 by fletchthai68

[fletchsmile]

... Personally, I'll find myself agreeing with both of you at different times.

.... Nothing wrong with being wrong. I am about 35% of the time. The most important thing I've learned is how to recognize when I'm wrong and change. One should never let ones ego get in the way. Chok Dee!

BTW Hope the times you agree, don't perfectly correlate to the 35% of time you get it wrong

Cheers

[Naam]

so if this global correction is going to happen, how would that affect the global bond market? with my limited knowledge of international finance, I would think that the cost of bonds would increase significantly---and even if the correction is primarily limited to US markets, wouldn't that make global bonds increase too?

i assume you mean the yield and in this respect you are right. except that yields of most (globally issued) bonds without high rating have ALREADY increased significantly.

[LaoPo]

When I see people like Warren Buffet touring Asia and bullish on Korea, while believing US is facing tough times, I get comfort. Korea does more trade with Asia now than the US, an increasing trend.

When you've got Warren Buffet touring the world looking at alternatives, in our part of the world, that's enough for me. He's not battoning down the hatches pending a global bust. You do that at home. He's out there seeing first hand where it's at in the 21st century. Amazing guy, particularly for someone that age.

You seem to think it's a kind of new idea that if Warren Buffett is touring Asia/World he's looking for alternatives. He is doing that for years and nothing new.

A few years ago he bought a large piece (up to 11%) of a Super-cake called Petrochina in which he invested less than $ 500 Million and recently sold for $ 3.5 Billion (a bit too early and missing another few Billions, but still a huge profit).

One of the main reasons Buffett was in Asia was because he was attending the opening of a new factory in Dalian/China. A new factory from an Israeli company called Iscar.

Berkshire Hathaway/Warren Buffett owns 80% of that company, valued at some $ 5 Billion.

However, Mr. Buffett still sees lots of opportunities in the old world/USA since he bought a big stake in the largest SECOND HAND CAR/USED CARS company in the US.

Now, if that's not a sign for the US economy, my name is Donald Duck.

I don't think anybody disagrees with you: Amazing guy indeed.

But, that WB is bullish on certain industries in S-Korea (not Korea as such) is also nothing new.

It's also old news that WB never gives away investment tips and I'm also sure that he never listens to 'analysts' but follows his own path.

You know HOW I see 'analysts' ? (and I have met quite a few of them):

Good students; graduated; applied for-and-got-them-jobs at financials/investment banks; overpaid and without any experience in the field; told by their bosses to 'follow' one or more -large- companies or even an entire industry and than advise clients what they should do and/or buy or sell.

My @ss

I suggest to anyone to read the ENRON story where EVERY SINGLE ANALYST (but one!) on Wall Street praised ENRON into heaven. It should have been H_ll instead.

It will happen again but in the meantime:

Happy investing; I like it.

LaoPo

[sonicdragon]

so if this global correction is going to happen, how would that affect the global bond market? with my limited knowledge of international finance, I would think that the cost of bonds would increase significantly---and even if the correction is primarily limited to US markets, wouldn't that make global bonds increase too?

i assume you mean the yield and in this respect you are right. except that yields of most (globally issued) bonds without high rating have ALREADY increased significantly.

I assumed the opposite, thinking that he was referring to a flight to quality type of situation. I was simply going to add that it depends on the maturities as well as the types of issuers. There would likely be flight to quality in the shorter dated government paper, while the long end should sell off - ie there should be significant pressure on the yield curve to steepen; but spreads would increase so the net effect on all but the top-rated issuers, even at the short end, would be a fall in price and this effect would be more pronounced on long-dated, lower-rated bonds. And as you say, this process is already under way.

Edited November 25, 2007 by sonicdragon

[up-country_sinclair]

I assumed the opposite, thinking that he was referring to a flight to quality type of situation

sorry for being unclear, but the above is what i was referring to.

there's an international bond ETF (BWX) that has caught my interest (late, i know) because i'm trying to further diversify my portfolio.

so as i asked in my post, shouldn't this type of fund increase in value if the US and international markets go through an even more significant correction?

[lannarebirth]

This is the ETF for long dated US Treasuries:

http://stockcharts.com/charts/gallery.html?tlt

Here's a better look:

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=TLT&p...id=p35367687897

As you can see it's been rallying for quite a while already.

Edited November 25, 2007 by lannarebirth

[Abrak]

Reading some of the posts in this thread I think that many investors are missing the bigger picture...

Namely that while the outlook for bonds and stocks remains unclear at best - we are clearly in a bull market for commodities.

Anyone who has been investing in bullion this year has done very nicely and if you have been in some of the fancier commodities such as oil you have done even better.

I cant help but feel the situation is similar to 1970-1980 where commodity investment dramatically outperformed stock investment.

I expect these trends to continue for some time driven principally by the weakening dollar.

[Azul_Blanco]

Jim Rogers has been a great person to follow regarding the commodities boom. He called it correctly in 2000 and made his fortune during the 70's-80's heading the quantum fund with Soros. The fund went up 4,000 percent while traditional investements were having a very hard time.

He knows his stuff and excells at pointing out what is going on currently. He's got a new book coming out in 2 weeks focued on China and commodities - it should be a very good read.

[up-country_sinclair]

This is the ETF for long dated US Treasuries:

http://stockcharts.com/charts/gallery.html?tlt

Here's a better look:

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=TLT&p...id=p35367687897

As you can see it's been rallying for quite a while already.

i appreciate your reply (and all your posts on this thread), but i was asking about international bonds not US. again, i don't know much about international finance, so perhaps i'm so daft that i'm misunderstanding your post. let me try to rephrase....if the US markets go through an even larger correction (and if there is a recession) would this eventually force international bonds to rise in value---meaning wouldn't an international bond ETN be worth more?

Reading some of the posts in this thread I think that many investors are missing the bigger picture...

Namely that while the outlook for bonds and stocks remains unclear at best - we are clearly in a bull market for commodities.

Anyone who has been investing in bullion this year has done very nicely and if you have been in some of the fancier commodities such as oil you have done even better.

I cant help but feel the situation is similar to 1970-1980 where commodity investment dramatically outperformed stock investment.

I expect these trends to continue for some time driven principally by the weakening dollar.

i've been reading about rogers and his perspective, but if someone is not already invested in commodities (particularly oil and gold) wouldn't it be wise to wait for a a minor pull back before getting in? for example, i've read that oil will almost certainly go back into the 80s within the next few months...and how much higher could gold actually go?

thanks to all on this thread for your replies (and your patience in dealing with this rookie)

[sonicdragon]

Reading some of the posts in this thread I think that many investors are missing the bigger picture...

Namely that while the outlook for bonds and stocks remains unclear at best - we are clearly in a bull market for commodities.

Anyone who has been investing in bullion this year has done very nicely and if you have been in some of the fancier commodities such as oil you have done even better.

I cant help but feel the situation is similar to 1970-1980 where commodity investment dramatically outperformed stock investment.

I expect these trends to continue for some time driven principally by the weakening dollar.

Of course you can be forgiven for not reading the entire thread, but I have been harping on about commodities in this thread (and others).

However I would add a little caution on the commodity story - if there is to be a global slowdown/recession it will be bad for some parts of the commodity space - industrial materials in particular. You wouldn't want big exposure to copper and zinc in that scenario. And of course oil would underperform. I favour bullion and some agricultural commodities.

[fletchsmile]

....

You know HOW I see 'analysts' ? (and I have met quite a few of them):

Good students; graduated; applied for-and-got-them-jobs at financials/investment banks; overpaid and without any experience in the field; told by their bosses to 'follow' one or more -large- companies or even an entire industry and than advise clients what they should do and/or buy or sell.

My @ss

I suggest to anyone to read the ENRON story where EVERY SINGLE ANALYST (but one!) on Wall Street praised ENRON into heaven. It should have been H_ll instead.

It will happen again but in the meantime:

Happy investing; I like it.

LaoPo

Not quite sure where all the negative comments about analysts come from.

Personally I've come across them regularly during working life, as well as in the info banks, investment house analysts etc mail out to me. Like the rest of us they get it wrong sometimes. I see them as just another potential source of info. It's always worth listening to someone else's point of view.

Can't say I have ever made an investment decision solely based on what one single source says, analyst or otherwise. Most interesting is when they have diverging views and don't follow the consensus.