Posts
It's an epic battle of the ages pitting new economy high tech against old school turkey and gravy soda . There can be only one victor!
And the winner is... *drum roll*
Nortel vs. Jones Soda
Nobody!
In hindsight, I should have said that there can be at most only one victor. Zero victors was also a possibility. Oh well. Too optimistic yet again. It's my curse. I'm learning to live with it.
January 13, 2009
UPDATE 1-Nortel shares plunge ahead of interest payment
In November, it reported a $3.4 billion quarterly loss, cut its 2008 outlook and announced 1,300 layoffs, about 5 percent of its staff. It also said it would freeze salary increases, cut back on consultants and review its real estate portfolio.
Review its real estate portfolio? Um, gosh, that's a pretty bold and gutsy move.
November 7, 2008
Pop Plop, Fizz, Fizz, at Jones Soda
Jones Soda (Nasdaq: JSDA) is so edgy and anti-establishment that it even knows how to destroy itself.
See Also:
My First Sarcasm Report Revisited
How many people work for the U.S. federal government?
-
The new administration is talking about cutting the number of federal
government employees.
This raises the question of how many people are employed by the...
1 hour ago
6 comments:
Stag,
Like Hussman says, when you buy stocks, you are buying a long term stream of earnings. Unfortunately, it can be a long term stream of negative earnings.
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=ALU#chart1:symbol=alu;range=my;compare=nt;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined
The reality is that stocks were never a great long term deal until FDR started the nanny state. As government and the nanny state grew, so did the value of stocks.
Or so it seemed for a while.
mab,
As government and the nanny state grew, so did the value of stocks.
NaN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NaN
NaN is not the same as infinity
Now look what you've done. You've got me making up jokes and what not.
Q: What do you get if you offer infinite bailouts in an environment with zero workers?
A: A NaNny state!
Q: What do you get if you divide zero corporate earnings by a zero interest rate policy?
A: FiNaNcial Armageddon!
Q: What do you get if you print an infinite amount of money to pay for infinintely rising oil prices?
A: A BaNaNa republic!
Q: What financial innovations will the wizards of Wall Street think up next in order to profit off of our own demise?
A: StagNaNt Investment Vehicles (SIVs) and CoteNaNt Debt Obligations (CDOs)!
Stag,
What financial innovations will the wizards of Wall Street think up next in order to profit off of our own demise?
The TARP comes to mind.
Anyway, I've noticed a change of focus on wall street lately. For decades, wall street only talked about things that were under valued, mainly stocks. But lately, it's become popular to point out things that are over valued, mainly treasuries.
Although treasuries look expensive based on recent history, the fact that wall street is so certain they are over priced makes me bullish. The near free inflation insurance of TIPs is a real head scratcher too.
According to Biryini Assoc., since 1961, the average mutual fund investor has achieved returns of just under 2% annually. In that context, government guaranteed securities don't look so expensive. Especially if one believes that today's eCONomy is in far worse shape than the economy of 1961.
More & more investors are reaching the point where they just can't tolerate or afford ANY more losses. I sensed it in Ben Stein's writings, although he definitely harbored more hope.
Sadly, the opportunity for easy saving has past. The prospects for saving now are woeful.
mab,
More & more investors are reaching the point where they just can't tolerate or afford ANY more losses. I sensed it in Ben Stein's writings, although he definitely harbored more hope.
It takes a nearly infinite amount of liquidity to push on a string successfully.
If Bernanke plans to offer a nearly infinite supply of liquidity it won't be stocks, designer handbags, and fine dining that people hoard though. Go figure.
Stag,
NaN. That explains a lot.
I had many NaNs back in the late 1970s. My high school bought a very expensive computer and I was forced to take programing.
I absolutely hated it. We actually had to punch holes in cards to write programs. I had neither the patience nor the necessary hole punching skills. Oh how I cursed that computer and card reader. Things improved only modestly when the new card reader arrived - think number 2 pencils.
I avoided computers for the next decade except for a required FORTRAN class in college.
To this day computers hate me. I'm not kidding either. Bad karma.
Speaking of bad karma, everyone on bubble vision keeps wondering when the financials will turn around. I'd say it will happen when household balance sheets turn around. In other words, not soon. When households thought they were rich, the banks thought they were rich. Now that households are realizing they are broke, so are banks. It's as simple as that really.
Bad karma.
mab,
When households thought they were rich, the banks thought they were rich. Now that households are realizing they are broke, so are banks. It's as simple as that really.
Yeah, that seems to be the ONLY answer that counts.
Kenneth Fisher
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_L._Fisher
The Only Three Questions That Count was a New York Times best seller for three months in 2006. Also, it made Wall Street Journal and BusinessWeek best seller lists.
The Only Three Questions That Count
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Only_Three_Questions_That_Count
The first question addresses common investing errors, the second shows how to try and find bettable patterns which others may misinterpret, and the third deals with behavioral finance, pointing out cognitive errors such as overconfidence and confirmation bias.
Here's a glimpse of what avoiding common investing errors, trying to find bettable patterns, and sidestepping overconfidence and confirmation bias might have gotten you over the last decade.
Kenneth Fisher's Purisima Total Return Mutual Fund (PURIX)
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=PURIX&t=my&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pm?s=PURIX
Morningstar Return Rating: Average
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=PURIX
Total Expense Ratio: 1.41%
Post a Comment