Hennessy, `Dogs of Dow' Follower, Says Index May Rise to 15,000
By Sree Vidya Bhaktavatsalam
Aug. 30 (Bloomberg) -- Neil Hennessy, known for his ``Dogs of the Dow'' mutual fund, said the index of the largest U.S. companies may rise as much as 15 percent through the end of the year.
``I don't see anything to hold back this market except excuses,'' the 51-year-old manager said in an interview yesterday in Boston. ``Earnings are increasing, there are plenty of jobs out there and the economy is still in great shape.''
Hennessy, who oversees $1.8 billion as chief executive officer of Hennessy Funds in Novato, California, said the 30- member Dow Jones Industrial Average will rise to between 14,000 and 15,000 by Dec. 31. The Dow, which traded as low as 13,043 yesterday, had gained 6.6 percent from the beginning of January.
Turbulent financial markets, triggered by increasing defaults in subprime loans in the U.S., have stoked concerns that economic growth will slow. The deepest slump in housing in 16 years may also hold back consumer spending, which accounts for the biggest part of the U.S. economy. The Dow has fallen 4.9 percent since rising to a record 14,000 on July 19.
Still, the economy expanded at a 4 percent annual rate in the second quarter, the fastest in more than a year, as exports and business spending rose, the Commerce Department in Washington reported today. Gross domestic product rose 0.6 percent in the first quarter.
``No one is believing that we are in a bull market, but just take a look at the numbers out there,'' Hennessy said.
Underperforming Fund
Hennessy's $94 million Total Return Fund owns shares of 10 companies that have been the worst performers on the Dow index over 12 months and pay the highest dividends. This year, the fund has risen 4.1 percent through yesterday, half the gain of the Dow Jones Industrial Average. In 2006, the fund advanced 22 percent, beating the Dow's 19 percent return.
Hennessy said the Dow is undervalued because member companies' average price-to-sales ratio is $1.27, less than his fair-value estimate of $1.50.
Hennessy said his favorite stock in the Dow is oil company Exxon Mobil Corp., which his fund doesn't own because it has returned 28 percent in the past year including dividends to rank in the top 10.
``If I were pushed to put all my money into a single stock, I would choose Exxon Mobil,'' Hennessy said.
The company's 1.63 percent dividend yield and average quarterly net income of $10 billion over the past year make it attractive, he said.
Hennessy's funds hold General Motors Corp., whose shares have risen 5.7 percent in the past year including dividends, and Citigroup Inc., which has fallen 2.2 percent.
The dogs approach gained attention after investor Michael O'Higgins published the book ``Beating the Dow'' in 1991. O'Higgins wrote that investors could make money by simply buying the worst-performing stocks that pay above-average dividends.
The strategy faltered in the late 1990s when technology- related companies soared in value. After the technology bubble burst in 2000, many investors shifted money to shares of smaller ``value'' companies that are cheap relative to earnings growth.
To contact the reporter on this story: Sree Vidya Bhaktavatsalam in Boston at sbhaktavatsa@bloomberg.net .
By Sree Vidya Bhaktavatsalam
Aug. 30 (Bloomberg) -- Neil Hennessy, known for his ``Dogs of the Dow'' mutual fund, said the index of the largest U.S. companies may rise as much as 15 percent through the end of the year.
``I don't see anything to hold back this market except excuses,'' the 51-year-old manager said in an interview yesterday in Boston. ``Earnings are increasing, there are plenty of jobs out there and the economy is still in great shape.''
Hennessy, who oversees $1.8 billion as chief executive officer of Hennessy Funds in Novato, California, said the 30- member Dow Jones Industrial Average will rise to between 14,000 and 15,000 by Dec. 31. The Dow, which traded as low as 13,043 yesterday, had gained 6.6 percent from the beginning of January.
Turbulent financial markets, triggered by increasing defaults in subprime loans in the U.S., have stoked concerns that economic growth will slow. The deepest slump in housing in 16 years may also hold back consumer spending, which accounts for the biggest part of the U.S. economy. The Dow has fallen 4.9 percent since rising to a record 14,000 on July 19.
Still, the economy expanded at a 4 percent annual rate in the second quarter, the fastest in more than a year, as exports and business spending rose, the Commerce Department in Washington reported today. Gross domestic product rose 0.6 percent in the first quarter.
``No one is believing that we are in a bull market, but just take a look at the numbers out there,'' Hennessy said.
Underperforming Fund
Hennessy's $94 million Total Return Fund owns shares of 10 companies that have been the worst performers on the Dow index over 12 months and pay the highest dividends. This year, the fund has risen 4.1 percent through yesterday, half the gain of the Dow Jones Industrial Average. In 2006, the fund advanced 22 percent, beating the Dow's 19 percent return.
Hennessy said the Dow is undervalued because member companies' average price-to-sales ratio is $1.27, less than his fair-value estimate of $1.50.
Hennessy said his favorite stock in the Dow is oil company Exxon Mobil Corp., which his fund doesn't own because it has returned 28 percent in the past year including dividends to rank in the top 10.
``If I were pushed to put all my money into a single stock, I would choose Exxon Mobil,'' Hennessy said.
The company's 1.63 percent dividend yield and average quarterly net income of $10 billion over the past year make it attractive, he said.
Hennessy's funds hold General Motors Corp., whose shares have risen 5.7 percent in the past year including dividends, and Citigroup Inc., which has fallen 2.2 percent.
The dogs approach gained attention after investor Michael O'Higgins published the book ``Beating the Dow'' in 1991. O'Higgins wrote that investors could make money by simply buying the worst-performing stocks that pay above-average dividends.
The strategy faltered in the late 1990s when technology- related companies soared in value. After the technology bubble burst in 2000, many investors shifted money to shares of smaller ``value'' companies that are cheap relative to earnings growth.
To contact the reporter on this story: Sree Vidya Bhaktavatsalam in Boston at sbhaktavatsa@bloomberg.net .
ECONOMIC REPORT
Growth revised higher to 4% in second quarter
U.S. GDP revisions due to improved trade balance, commercial building
By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch
Last Update: 9:57 AM ET Aug 30, 2007
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The U.S. economy bounced back in the second quarter, growing at a 4% annual real growth rate, the Commerce Department reported Thursday.
The upward revision to second-quarter gross domestic product is likely to have a minimal impact on financial markets, however, which are preoccupied by the credit crunch.
"Though the top-line growth number has changed, our conclusion has not -- the rate of growth seen during the second-quarter is clearly not sustainable, and was not even before the credit markets went wobbly on us," wrote Richard Moody, chief economist for Mission Residential.
The upward revision to GDP was largely due to an improved trade balance and to the biggest increase in investments in commercial buildings in 26 years. Read the full government report.
Final sales increased 3.7%, revised from 3.2%.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=9 width=135 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=left>'Though the top-line growth number has changed, our conclusion has not -- the rate of growth seen during the second-quarter is clearly not sustainable, and was not even before the credit markets went wobbly on us.'
— Richard Moody, Mission Residential.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Growth was led by trade and business investment. Consumer spending, government spending and inventories also contributed, while housing remained a strong drag.
Economists surveyed by MarketWatch were expecting GDP in the April-June period to be revised to 4.1% from the 3.4% growth rate originally estimated a month ago. See Economic Calendar. The economy grew at a 0.6% rate in the first quarter.
In the past year, the economy has grown 1.9% after adjusting for inflation, and has risen at a 2.3% pace so far this year.
In nominal terms, GDP increased 6.7% in the second quarter to an annual rate of $13.77 trillion.
The economy grew at the fastest rate in five quarters, but most economists now expect much slower growth through the rest of the year: the boost from trade and government spending isn't sustainable, while a worsening housing sector has now shaken financial markets. A credit squeeze hit in late July and has extended through August.
The "most important question mark for growth is whether consumer spending will finally succumb to the housing mess," wrote Stephen Stanley, chief economist for RBS Greenwich Capital. "Our bet is that spending will be noticeably softer than it would otherwise have been but may hold up better than the consensus expects. However, our confidence level (and anyone else's who is being honest) in our forecast is mighty low right now."
The Federal Reserve is expected to lower its target for overnight lending rates at its meeting on Sept. 18, both to calm markets and stimulate growth, despite its warning that inflation remains a threat.
In a separate report, the Labor Department said first-time claims for state unemployment benefits rose to 334,000, the highest level since April. See full story.
On the inflation front, the Fed got some good news in the GDP report, with core consumer prices revised down to a 1.3% annual growth rate during the quarter from 1.4%, the slowest pace in four years and well within the Fed's unofficial target zone of 1% to 2%. Core prices have risen 2% in the past year.
Headline inflation, however, surged 4.2% during the quarter, led by higher energy costs.
The report contained the first word on corporate profits for the second quarter. Before-tax profits increased $98.3 billion, or 6.4%, after rising $16.5 billion, or 1.1%, in the first quarter. In the past year, corporate profits are up 4.5%.
Personal income growth was also slightly higher than initially reported after revisions to both the first and second quarters.
Details
Growth was led by trade, which contributed 1.4 percentage points, and to business investment, which contributed about 1.1 percentage points.
Consumer spending contributed 1 percentage point, while residential investments subtracted 0.6 percentage points. Government spending contributed 0.8 percentage point.
Consumer spending increased 1.4% annualized, including 1.7% for durable goods and 2.3% for services. Spending on nondurable goods fell 0.3%, the weakest in 14 years.
Business investment increased 11.1%, including 27.7% for structures, the largest gain in 26 years. Investments in equipment and software increased 4.3%.
Investments in residences fell 11.6%, after four quarters of even larger declines.
Exports increased 7.6%, while imports fell 3.2%, the biggest decline since early 2003.
Government spending increased 4.1%, including 5.9% for the federal government. Federal defense spending increased 8.6%, while federal nondefense spending rose 0.5%. State and local government spending increased 3%, the most in five years.
Corporate profits increased by $98.3 billion to $1.65 trillion annualized. Before-tax profits are up 4.5% compared with a year ago. After-tax profits are up 3.5% in the past year.
In the second quarter, profits at domestic industries rose $89.8 billion, with financial industries' profits up $57.6 billion, the most in six quarters. Nonfinancial corporate profits rose $32.2 billion.
Rex Nutting is Washington bureau chief of MarketWatch.
<!-- StoryTop, clearall, StoryBottom --><!-- THERE MUST NOT BE ANY CONTENT BETWEEN END OF StoryBottom DIV AND START OF MidRail DIV!!!!! -->
Growth revised higher to 4% in second quarter
U.S. GDP revisions due to improved trade balance, commercial building
By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch
Last Update: 9:57 AM ET Aug 30, 2007
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The U.S. economy bounced back in the second quarter, growing at a 4% annual real growth rate, the Commerce Department reported Thursday.
The upward revision to second-quarter gross domestic product is likely to have a minimal impact on financial markets, however, which are preoccupied by the credit crunch.
"Though the top-line growth number has changed, our conclusion has not -- the rate of growth seen during the second-quarter is clearly not sustainable, and was not even before the credit markets went wobbly on us," wrote Richard Moody, chief economist for Mission Residential.
The upward revision to GDP was largely due to an improved trade balance and to the biggest increase in investments in commercial buildings in 26 years. Read the full government report.
Final sales increased 3.7%, revised from 3.2%.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=9 width=135 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=left>'Though the top-line growth number has changed, our conclusion has not -- the rate of growth seen during the second-quarter is clearly not sustainable, and was not even before the credit markets went wobbly on us.'
— Richard Moody, Mission Residential.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Growth was led by trade and business investment. Consumer spending, government spending and inventories also contributed, while housing remained a strong drag.
Economists surveyed by MarketWatch were expecting GDP in the April-June period to be revised to 4.1% from the 3.4% growth rate originally estimated a month ago. See Economic Calendar. The economy grew at a 0.6% rate in the first quarter.
In the past year, the economy has grown 1.9% after adjusting for inflation, and has risen at a 2.3% pace so far this year.
In nominal terms, GDP increased 6.7% in the second quarter to an annual rate of $13.77 trillion.
The economy grew at the fastest rate in five quarters, but most economists now expect much slower growth through the rest of the year: the boost from trade and government spending isn't sustainable, while a worsening housing sector has now shaken financial markets. A credit squeeze hit in late July and has extended through August.
The "most important question mark for growth is whether consumer spending will finally succumb to the housing mess," wrote Stephen Stanley, chief economist for RBS Greenwich Capital. "Our bet is that spending will be noticeably softer than it would otherwise have been but may hold up better than the consensus expects. However, our confidence level (and anyone else's who is being honest) in our forecast is mighty low right now."
The Federal Reserve is expected to lower its target for overnight lending rates at its meeting on Sept. 18, both to calm markets and stimulate growth, despite its warning that inflation remains a threat.
In a separate report, the Labor Department said first-time claims for state unemployment benefits rose to 334,000, the highest level since April. See full story.
On the inflation front, the Fed got some good news in the GDP report, with core consumer prices revised down to a 1.3% annual growth rate during the quarter from 1.4%, the slowest pace in four years and well within the Fed's unofficial target zone of 1% to 2%. Core prices have risen 2% in the past year.
Headline inflation, however, surged 4.2% during the quarter, led by higher energy costs.
The report contained the first word on corporate profits for the second quarter. Before-tax profits increased $98.3 billion, or 6.4%, after rising $16.5 billion, or 1.1%, in the first quarter. In the past year, corporate profits are up 4.5%.
Personal income growth was also slightly higher than initially reported after revisions to both the first and second quarters.
Details
Growth was led by trade, which contributed 1.4 percentage points, and to business investment, which contributed about 1.1 percentage points.
Consumer spending contributed 1 percentage point, while residential investments subtracted 0.6 percentage points. Government spending contributed 0.8 percentage point.
Consumer spending increased 1.4% annualized, including 1.7% for durable goods and 2.3% for services. Spending on nondurable goods fell 0.3%, the weakest in 14 years.
Business investment increased 11.1%, including 27.7% for structures, the largest gain in 26 years. Investments in equipment and software increased 4.3%.
Investments in residences fell 11.6%, after four quarters of even larger declines.
Exports increased 7.6%, while imports fell 3.2%, the biggest decline since early 2003.
Government spending increased 4.1%, including 5.9% for the federal government. Federal defense spending increased 8.6%, while federal nondefense spending rose 0.5%. State and local government spending increased 3%, the most in five years.
Corporate profits increased by $98.3 billion to $1.65 trillion annualized. Before-tax profits are up 4.5% compared with a year ago. After-tax profits are up 3.5% in the past year.
In the second quarter, profits at domestic industries rose $89.8 billion, with financial industries' profits up $57.6 billion, the most in six quarters. Nonfinancial corporate profits rose $32.2 billion.
Rex Nutting is Washington bureau chief of MarketWatch.
<!-- StoryTop, clearall, StoryBottom --><!-- THERE MUST NOT BE ANY CONTENT BETWEEN END OF StoryBottom DIV AND START OF MidRail DIV!!!!! -->
The upward revision to GDP was largely due to an improved trade balance
That weak dollar is just killing our economy, eh?
Of course, this is why the current administration supports a weakening dollar while leaders of Japan, Europe & even India are complaining about how a weakening dollar is hurting their economies.
How many here have called such views about a weak dollar "stupid"?
:thumbsup:
That weak dollar is just killing our economy, eh?
Of course, this is why the current administration supports a weakening dollar while leaders of Japan, Europe & even India are complaining about how a weakening dollar is hurting their economies.
How many here have called such views about a weak dollar "stupid"?
:thumbsup:
Cuss, Ive been wearing out the WaMu card for sure...lol.
Been on vacation-went to Bristol last weekend,took the little lady to Graceland,Foxwoods,all kinds of good shit.Red Sox last night,2:25 tee time on the Milton 9 at Granite Links today,college football this week,NFL next OMG....overload.
BTW what do they have in your parts that signifies midwest culture,thats worth 20.00, that you can send me when the DJI hits 14k again?
PS no golf balls,I get them for free....lol.
Been on vacation-went to Bristol last weekend,took the little lady to Graceland,Foxwoods,all kinds of good shit.Red Sox last night,2:25 tee time on the Milton 9 at Granite Links today,college football this week,NFL next OMG....overload.
BTW what do they have in your parts that signifies midwest culture,thats worth 20.00, that you can send me when the DJI hits 14k again?
PS no golf balls,I get them for free....lol.
Agressive Fed action on house prices foreseen
<!-- END HEADLINE -->
<!-- BEGIN STORY BODY -->By Krishna Guha in Jackson Hole 50 minutes ago
Federal Reserve governor Frederic Mishkin set the stage for an aggressive monetary policy response by the US central bank to any fall in house prices in his presentation to the Jackson Hole symposium this weekend.
Mr Mishkin told fellow central bankers and top economists gathered for the annual retreat organised by the Kansas City Fed that policymakers should not wait until a decline in house prices leads to a fall in gross domestic product, but should "react immediately to the house price decline when they see it".
He said the optimal policy response involved quicker and more aggressive interest rate cuts than those suggested by a standard policy rule, in which policymakers respond only to deviations in output and inflation.
Simulations show that this approach "can be very successful at counteracting the real effects" of even a large house price slump, because of the long lags between changes in housing wealth and changes in consumer spending.
While Mr Mishkin emphasised that his analysis was not necessarily shared by his colleagues, it is likely to prove a good guide to how the Fed would react in such an eventuality.
His comments were followed by a bleak warning of the threat of a housing-driven downturn in the economy by Martin Feldstein, president of the National Bureau of Economic Research.
Mr Feldstein called on the Fed to adopt a risk-management approach, and cut interest rates by a full percentage point to guard against a downturn.
Mr Feldstein cited earlier presentations by Robert Shiller, a professor at Yale, and Edward Leamer, a professor at the University of California. Mr Shiller argued that the house price boom of recent years was a "classic speculative bubble" driven by investor mania and unrealistic expectations of future returns. It was likely to end in "substantial declines in real home prices".
Mr Leamer demonstrated that a sharp decline in residential investment had almost always in the past been followed by a recession - though he said he was not expecting a full-blown recession this time.
However, these gloomy scenarios were hotly disputed by other experts.
Chris Mayer, a professor at Columbia Business School, argued that most of the rise in house prices could be accounted for by the fall in the user cost of home ownership. Others argued that housing is only a channel through which monetary policy affects the economy, and not a cause of recessions in its own right.
The overall discussion was mixed and did not produce agreement that distress in housing and the financial markets would lead to a severe economic reverse.
But it gave policymakers a stark reminder that the worst-case scenarios of what could happen to housing and the economy are very nasty indeed.
This could influence the 34 central bankers gathered in Jackson Hole in favour of softer monetary policy to guard against the "tail risk" of these worst-case scenarios materialising.
Mr Mishkin said the experience with subprime loans in the US fitted a boom-bust pattern of financial innovation.
Rapid financial change, triggered by innovation and deregulation, leads to a lending boom. This process, Mr Mishkin said, deepens the financial system and is "vital" for the economy in the long run.
But he said a lending boom can "outstrip the available information resources in the system, raising the odds of costly, unstable conditions in financial markets in the short run."
He added that while housing and mortgage markets have not been "close to the epicentre of previous cases of financial instability" the current situation in the US "could prove to be different".
The Fed governor emphasised the wide uncertainty around house prices and their effects on consumer spending, which he said would force policymakers to rely on judgment more than models.
One intriguing - if unstated - implication of his work is that a central bank could even justify easing monetary policy before house prices fall on the basis of a forecast that such a decline is likely.
Mr Mishkin's strongest claim, however, is that "monetary authorities have the tools to limit the negative effects on the economy from a house price decline"
<!-- END STORY BODY -->
<!-- END MAIN CONTENT --><!-- BEGIN FOOTER -->Copyright © 2007 The Financial Times Limited.
<!-- start footer --><SCRIPT language=javascript> var ADFadids = "-1,1030392"; function ADFlaunch() {var w; var l="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12fuigcvn/M=224039.1983420.3465435.1919853/D=news/S=95506679:FOOT/_ylt=Ahb0xNTpItFxm13NB8CXIlv3ULEF/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1188778620/A=1030392/R=0/id=adfeedback/SIG=12graqn3m/*http://surveys.yahoo.com/user_ad_feedback?source=95506679:FOOT&.q28=news&.q26="+ADFadids; w=window.open(l,"AdFeedbackWin","toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable,location=no,height=400,width=640"); }</SCRIPT>
<!-- END HEADLINE -->
<!-- BEGIN STORY BODY -->By Krishna Guha in Jackson Hole 50 minutes ago
Federal Reserve governor Frederic Mishkin set the stage for an aggressive monetary policy response by the US central bank to any fall in house prices in his presentation to the Jackson Hole symposium this weekend.
Mr Mishkin told fellow central bankers and top economists gathered for the annual retreat organised by the Kansas City Fed that policymakers should not wait until a decline in house prices leads to a fall in gross domestic product, but should "react immediately to the house price decline when they see it".
He said the optimal policy response involved quicker and more aggressive interest rate cuts than those suggested by a standard policy rule, in which policymakers respond only to deviations in output and inflation.
Simulations show that this approach "can be very successful at counteracting the real effects" of even a large house price slump, because of the long lags between changes in housing wealth and changes in consumer spending.
While Mr Mishkin emphasised that his analysis was not necessarily shared by his colleagues, it is likely to prove a good guide to how the Fed would react in such an eventuality.
His comments were followed by a bleak warning of the threat of a housing-driven downturn in the economy by Martin Feldstein, president of the National Bureau of Economic Research.
Mr Feldstein called on the Fed to adopt a risk-management approach, and cut interest rates by a full percentage point to guard against a downturn.
Mr Feldstein cited earlier presentations by Robert Shiller, a professor at Yale, and Edward Leamer, a professor at the University of California. Mr Shiller argued that the house price boom of recent years was a "classic speculative bubble" driven by investor mania and unrealistic expectations of future returns. It was likely to end in "substantial declines in real home prices".
Mr Leamer demonstrated that a sharp decline in residential investment had almost always in the past been followed by a recession - though he said he was not expecting a full-blown recession this time.
However, these gloomy scenarios were hotly disputed by other experts.
Chris Mayer, a professor at Columbia Business School, argued that most of the rise in house prices could be accounted for by the fall in the user cost of home ownership. Others argued that housing is only a channel through which monetary policy affects the economy, and not a cause of recessions in its own right.
The overall discussion was mixed and did not produce agreement that distress in housing and the financial markets would lead to a severe economic reverse.
But it gave policymakers a stark reminder that the worst-case scenarios of what could happen to housing and the economy are very nasty indeed.
This could influence the 34 central bankers gathered in Jackson Hole in favour of softer monetary policy to guard against the "tail risk" of these worst-case scenarios materialising.
Mr Mishkin said the experience with subprime loans in the US fitted a boom-bust pattern of financial innovation.
Rapid financial change, triggered by innovation and deregulation, leads to a lending boom. This process, Mr Mishkin said, deepens the financial system and is "vital" for the economy in the long run.
But he said a lending boom can "outstrip the available information resources in the system, raising the odds of costly, unstable conditions in financial markets in the short run."
He added that while housing and mortgage markets have not been "close to the epicentre of previous cases of financial instability" the current situation in the US "could prove to be different".
The Fed governor emphasised the wide uncertainty around house prices and their effects on consumer spending, which he said would force policymakers to rely on judgment more than models.
One intriguing - if unstated - implication of his work is that a central bank could even justify easing monetary policy before house prices fall on the basis of a forecast that such a decline is likely.
Mr Mishkin's strongest claim, however, is that "monetary authorities have the tools to limit the negative effects on the economy from a house price decline"
<!-- END STORY BODY -->
<!-- END MAIN CONTENT --><!-- BEGIN FOOTER -->Copyright © 2007 The Financial Times Limited.
<!-- start footer --><SCRIPT language=javascript> var ADFadids = "-1,1030392"; function ADFlaunch() {var w; var l="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12fuigcvn/M=224039.1983420.3465435.1919853/D=news/S=95506679:FOOT/_ylt=Ahb0xNTpItFxm13NB8CXIlv3ULEF/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1188778620/A=1030392/R=0/id=adfeedback/SIG=12graqn3m/*http://surveys.yahoo.com/user_ad_feedback?source=95506679:FOOT&.q28=news&.q26="+ADFadids; w=window.open(l,"AdFeedbackWin","toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable,location=no,height=400,width=640"); }</SCRIPT>
arty:
The market is putting much confidence in a rate cut, which may only stop the bleeding and not permanently heal the wound.
People will eventually going to realize the business cycle is something that cannot be eliminated.
Heard Doug Kass yesterday, a well known bear, say countrywide financial could very well go
up very soon.
Also heard from a friend last night who owns and sells cottages/summer homes near Lake Erie, that the current local market is the worst hes ever seen.
People will eventually going to realize the business cycle is something that cannot be eliminated.
Heard Doug Kass yesterday, a well known bear, say countrywide financial could very well go
up very soon. Also heard from a friend last night who owns and sells cottages/summer homes near Lake Erie, that the current local market is the worst hes ever seen.
man summer homes/lake front property is already starting to feel the ripple effect already? thought they'd be the last to go and would be immune to this whole thing for a while.
I don't see how they can cut rates
dollar at 80.667....the 80 figure is historically a major blockade....and a level that is watched very carefully by traders.....rate cuts would likely smack the dollar through 80 in a heartbeat and the rush out of USD dollars and into other denominations would be rampant.
I don't see how they can cut rates
dollar at 80.667....the 80 figure is historically a major blockade....and a level that is watched very carefully by traders.....rate cuts would likely smack the dollar through 80 in a heartbeat and the rush out of USD dollars and into other denominations would be rampant.
here's a link to ARM resetting schedule...should be an interesting xmas for retailers that's for sure....supposed to peak in oct/november of this year
http://www.bubbleinfo.com/journal/2007/8/22/interpreting-arm-reset-chart.html
interesting take on things shows big decrease in early 2009 so might see a momentary comeback to housing at that time....but than down the road it will get worse as more resets come along.
http://www.bubbleinfo.com/journal/2007/8/22/interpreting-arm-reset-chart.html
interesting take on things shows big decrease in early 2009 so might see a momentary comeback to housing at that time....but than down the road it will get worse as more resets come along.
the USD's fall below 80 is inevitable.
It's been closely controlled and micro-managed for years, and I'm sure "they" have it all planned out years in advance. The only thing I know for sure is that we will see a new North American Currency (the Amero?) within our lifetimes.
When they plan on springing that on us, I do not know. But it is planned.
Free markets? If you believe that I have a lock pick for Thursday CFB game available for $25
I'm hoping to hell we get a year end rally, it will be the short opportunity of a lifetime. Get me to 14,500 or something. If the dollar goes low enough, it will. Gold signaling inflation. Oil as well simply as a result of being valued in dollars. Melt up is my hope. Then it will get interesting. Probably dreaming on my part though. And Dawoof is right on CFC. The IV like funding they got is not going to be enough. Don't think they'll bow out but the job cuts will be coming in mass and a 10 a share target is realistic.
