Every major bear is now bullish

Quote from richrf:

I may be mistaken, but I don't recall there ever being a large downturn in the stock market during a period of massive government spending and monetary expansion.

Good point. In part, that's why I believe that next year could be the best single year in the US stock market in decades. 40% up or more.

The market can go up in the face of bad earnings, bad news, bad job reports, bad everything. Bull markets climb a wall of worry.

By January or February the market may have already factored bad news in to prices and may be waiting to see if Obama's economic plan is going to work.

At this point, the only way the S&P is going to go lower than 700 is if the market (the market, NOT ET'ers--LOL) has decided that Obama's plan is NOT going to work to save this dangerously deflationary economy from slipping into a depression (the market has already priced in a severe recession).

By June, the market will have made that decision.

If Obama's plan appears to be working, then 2009 will be one of those rare 40% or more up years, like 1933 (1933 was up more than 50%)

If the plan does not work or it seems that it will not work, then it will seem like 1930. And our grandchildren will be reading about this depression in their history classes.
 
Quote from smilingsynic:

Good point. In part, that's why I believe that next year could be the best single year in the US stock market in decades. 40% up or more.

The market can go up in the face of bad earnings, bad news, bad job reports, bad everything. Bull markets climb a wall of worry.

By January or February the market may have already factored bad news in to prices and may be waiting to see if Obama's economic plan is going to work.

At this point, the only way the S&P is going to go lower than 700 is if the market (the market, NOT ET'ers--LOL) has decided that Obama's plan is NOT going to work to save this dangerously deflationary economy from slipping into a depression (the market has already priced in a severe recession).

By June, the market will have made that decision.

If Obama's plan appears to be working, then 2009 will be one of those rare 40% or more up years, like 1933 (1933 was up more than 50%)

If the plan does not work or it seems that it will not work, then it will seem like 1930. And our grandchildren will be reading about this depression in their history classes.

It will "work" to a degree and for a while, as would any "throw money at it" plan. Some unemployed people will be in entirely new lines of work... like holding signs at a road repair site.... and they will have income rather than being unemployed.

But that's all just moving money from one hand to the other... we'll just have to see how long and to what degree the markets celebrate this.

(And rather than spending $5T in Iraq, I'd much rather Bush had spent our money this way... :mad: )
 
Quote from richrf:

Roubini continues to forecast a possible 10 - 20% decrease in stocks, but he himself is 100% vested in equities. Hmmm ....

Roubin's Latest Interviews]


hm...are we reading the same article? He predicts further 20-30% decline:

Unlike so many others, Roubini's not calling a bottom, for sure: He sees another 20%-30% downside risk for stocks, and advises that investors avoid all "risky assets," including commodities for the foreseeable future.
 
Quote from Maverick74:

Here is Bill's letter to investors:

"After considerable thought and deliberation I have decided to make a major change in my life: I am going to close my hedge fund. I have several reasons for no longer wishing to run a short-only fund as I have for the past 12 years. First, my original reason for starting the fund was because of developments I saw occurring in the late 1990s that I wanted no part of. I felt that Greenspan was fomenting an environment that would lead to disaster, as consultants, financial advisors, and the public at large were losing all respect for risk. Of course, the reckless behavior carried far higher and lasted much, much longer than I ever imagined it could. However, the recent carnage in the stock market, real estate market and the financial system (as well as the job losses) has washed away those excesses to a large degree and it has violently demonstrated the risks associated with investing.

A future goal of mine, when I set up the fund in 1996 -- as I attempted to step aside from the madness -- was to return to the long side of the business at some point in time when I felt that investors had become more rational regarding risk and stocks offered a more favorable risk/reward proposition. I considered this option very briefly in 2002 after the stock bubble imploded, but the cleansing process was postponed due to the burgeoning real-estate bubble.

Second, though I think that the stock market still has unfinished business on the downside, I believe that 2009 is the year to prepare for a return to managing money in a more balanced fashion, with longs (and some shorts), as there are currently plenty of interesting ideas that appear to offer a margin of safety. On the flipside, compelling opportunities on the short side are not as abundant as they were just a few months ago (though there still are plenty.) The "value restoration project," to quote Jim Grant, has been brought about by the consequences of disastrous Fed policies and the madness of the crowd, both of which have concerned me for the last 15 or so years.

Lastly, on a personal note, I no longer want to run a short-only hedge fund, as it is very stressful, nerve-wracking and generally not very much fun, entailing an intense focus on the short term to effect risk control. In addition, one views the world differently when operating solely from the short side and I would like to widen my focus as I did when I managed money from 1982-1995. My wife is especially happy about this potential change.

My efforts in 2009 will be directed towards setting up an investment vehicle managed by Fred Hickey and me that won't be a hedge fund, which hopefully will be available to everyone. I feel that many (but certainly not everyone) in the "hedge" fund community have behaved in a disgraceful manner in the last couple years by taking huge fees along the way and then either running at the first sign of trouble (by giving money back to avoid having to recoup draw-downs from high watermarks), or locking people up and not giving them their money back at all. Consequently I'd rather not be part of that "industry" going forward. The Rap will continue as it has."
================

Interesting/thoughtful read,Maverick74;
as a 200 day moving average is,
as a 50 week moving average is.:cool:

Part of his reasons noted was [personal] stress on short only fund for 12 years;
especially since he had no such restrictions years before.

Mr Fleckenstein is so right , on excellant reasons not to gov bail out GM & its bad managers.As his '' Meddlers in the Marketplace'' column notes, if rust belt steel companys had gotten gov bailouts, sunbelt states would NOT have gotten more efficient steel mills.

Mr. Fleckenstein is already starting to be vindicated on GM[Senator Dodd is calling for firing the GM CEO......] No telling what kind of hatemail he got from the GM bulls, if any???But he may have wanted to buy a Saturn, also made by GM. Perhaps now he can buy a steel mill,Saturn or Honda/hybrid, if he wants to.

:D
 
Back
Top