the unsettling truth about this market

trackstar · Dec 28, 2009

If i wasnt long I would be confident it was the trade I should be in. Since I am in it I am not comfortable.

For me no position is ever comfortable. The moment I get comfortable I normally should be exiting.

spinn · Dec 28, 2009

Quote from krazykarl:

I'm still long also - will get short-side protection for the january dump-off, but I see 20% upside in 2010 with minimal risk downward, pending a black swan of course. There are too many reasons to list why I am long.

Iran will have a nuclear bomb in the next 3-6 months. Thats means Israel has to attack them, or manipulate us into doing it. Before June.

Logic · Dec 28, 2009

Stratfor (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20091228_agenda_george_friedman) is suggesting that Israel/the US is probably going to attack Iran, given that effective sanctions will not work and that the US is not comfortable with a nuclear Iran.

That's the big story I'd be looking at. Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan make one big, contiguous theater, so a military conflict could turn into something really big.

That's the event I'd be watching out for in 2010.

crgarcia · Dec 28, 2009

Quote from tortoise:

I'm long, using put credit spreads, the indexes. And I'm really uneasy. Why?

Because I see no compelling reason to believe that this trend will not continue.

At the same time, it's just as clear to me that this price action is the direct consequence of unprecedented government intervention.

In other words, "they" want it to go up, so it's going up.

Any other longs out there who find this state-of-affairs unsettling? Or, even, creepy?

Gov't intervention is fading:
Banks are selling, to return TARP funds.

If you still want to be long, as least buy (a little) options to limit your risk.

ammo · Dec 28, 2009

Quote from Logic:

Stratfor (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20091228_agenda_george_friedman) is suggesting that Israel/the US is probably going to attack Iran, given that effective sanctions will not work and that the US is not comfortable with a nuclear Iran.

That's the big story I'd be looking at. Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan make one big, contiguous theater, so a military conflict could turn into something really big.

That's the event I'd be watching out for in 2010.

was looking at an article over the weekend where foriegners are rapidly decreasing there purchases of new US bonds,this to me would indicate a stall in this rally as it severely handicaps the stimulus option,your article makes me wonder if military issues is one of the reasons they (foriegners)would purchase

piezoe · Dec 28, 2009

Quote from spinn:

Iran will have a nuclear bomb in the next 3-6 months. Thats means Israel has to attack them, or manipulate us into doing it. Before June.

As a humanist, I hope you're wrong. As a pragmatist and investor, I hope you're right.

Mvic · Dec 28, 2009

The truth about this market in a microcosm is the stock price of Fannie and Freddie vs. their value based on their balance sheet.

Ivanovich · Dec 28, 2009

Quote from tortoise:

well, yes, but when will that happen? Next week. Next month? Years from now?

If we knew that then we wouldn't be left holding the bag! The very nature of the unknown "when" is what gets us, isn't it?

athlonmank8 · Dec 28, 2009

Here we go again..........

tmarket · Dec 28, 2009

Quote from Logic:
Stratfor (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20091228_agenda_george_friedman) is suggesting that Israel/the US is probably going to attack Iran

Guess who wrote 'Coming War With Japan', with Meredith LeBard (1991). St Martins Press? What ever happened to that war in the 90s?

George Friedman designs war games, that is what he thinks and breathes. He can't imagine Iran falling on its own, which is what is most likely to happen.