Member Info for Seifert

This article may amuse (and inform?) you. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/active-stock-pickers-can-now-beat-the-market-2013-11-13?link=mw_home_kiosk

How are things with you? I hope you are cashing in some profit here as even a maniac at an institution investing(gambling with) other peoples' money can get the jitters. - I must take issue with your assertion that just because governments past were able to insulate most people form the turmoil of markets, things have now become so intertwined, that no one can classify the fall out from a total meltdown. Cyprus' recent robbing of investors savings should be a canary in the coal mine kind of event. This is Europe after all! The largest trading block on earth. I don't want people to suffer not for calamities to occur just to be proved right on any point, but I no more imagine that we can be immune from a total meltdown than anyone else on the planet. - The fact is, and this is undeniable, that in the 1980s. beginning with that p-impess Thatcher and the brain dead Reagan, by withdrawing regulation from finance, and allowing it to balloon (some refer that as innovation) the way it has, and allowing the real economy to atrophy, then this is a new game. Let me ask you a question. For each ounce of gold in a vault, how many leveraged claims are based on it? I would reckon it's in the hundreds. Now imagine what would happen if everyone at the same time tried to redeem promisory notes for physical bullion. Chaos would ensue. Apply that recipe to every asset class, and that is the derivates market we current have. If nothing else, one must surely be on one's guard. - I notice that the same broker (city group) giving a target price for IAG of over 500 p and a buy rating gives a target price for SSE of 1200 and a sell rating. Weighing up all the pros and cons, the attendant and potential risks to each company, which one would you safer holding? That's what I mean. When you can cease to use logic, then we are even beyond gambling. We are in the arena of crazed speculation of low and falling volumes.

Languishing.

Right angles

I am mindful of the speculation that a medium-hot curry and ESSR have a lot in common. Red chillies included in the mix seem about right. Coriander is left out. Nutmeg added generously.

The disconnected between Goldman's rating and that of Deutshce, for example, seem inordinate. They cannot both be using the same criteria. There is surely something missing here. At present, the stock seems to be driven by some momentum. P = 2T/M (classical)

Good morning. I am pleased we can agree that mangoes are the way to go! - I see from your post that you read a lot more (propaganda, scare mongering, opinionated self serving notes) more than I, or would ever be inclined to. I personally don't take any notice of many of these wallies, and would rather read a good book, or sit in silence. What I am rather alarmed and surprised by is your assertion that QE could be scaled up, let alone continue at the current rate. And you go on further to prepare for this dismal prospect with the notion of 'jumping off' at the right time. Jump off to where? I must side with the lies of the current governor of Bank of Canada and CEO Mr. Fink of Blackrock calling for the cessation of QE. Thee strategies are damaging capitalism (what is left of it!). This fake money is feeding into every asset class, derivatives, REITs, you name it. It would be better to take one big hit than wait and wonder what might happen. As as for 'headline' inflation. Humbug! as Mr Scrooge would exclaim. Look at the recent rise in energy prices, to be followed by water shortly. That feeds into everything. Lies, lies, and more lies.The media is complicity in establishment lies' dissemination. Moreover, I fear more the possibility of social disruption as demonstrated by the riots we experienced a while back. Look at what is happening in Brazil - typically, people there were assumed to be politically dormant, but events clearly reached a tipping point. Your $100 billion per month QE only bring that prospect a lot closer to the rest of us. This is what I am looking at - the possibility of social breakdown.

I feel this company is spending the bulk of its time managing the debt, and ways to circumvent the burdens this imposes, than managing the company. Yes, everyone needs power, but who are the best placed to provide this power on a sustainable basis? Any risk expended here should be seen and measured in the context of management's' competence. This is what you are taking a risk on, not the company per se, but the management, who may have their own interests to consider first and foremost.

I am more for mangoes myself, and have friends in Egypt who have asked me to find a market for such fruit (among others) in the UK. They have the goods, but not the marketing skill or resources to move forward. I need to go over there and organize the effort. Raspberries are not one of the pick. We leave that market space for you. I will keep a lookout in my local store of Tesco for the 'Luddite Brand'. I would appreciate a discount, mind! - Back to humdrum matters. There is a very good article in the TF today (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c98ca8e-37e7-11e3-8668-00144feab7de.html#axzz2iPMPiUrd). The title is 'Forget fundamentals, Fed liquidity is king'. This reinforces my view (not shared by others) that QE is expressly an act of failure in times of peace. This wall of money is a gigantic bluff, and sooner or later some one is going to blink. If I were Chinese, and I have $1.7 of hard earned dollar bonds, while the FED's balance sheet is ballooned to over $3.5 trillion (of printed money) and both hold the same assets, the former purchased with real money, the latter with the printed kind. I will being to ask, how can you print money out of thin air and buy real assets? Describe this for me? - Now, I have seen and been in societies and groups where everyone there acts and pretends a certain state of affairs. This charade (or bluff) can endure for quite some time. But it will out. If that were not the case, the assets in the 1929 crash would still be with us and valued at monstrous prices. I read an article on marketwatch.com where a trader remarked with glee that 'The Fed has our backs, the bulls win, the bears will flounder.' We are in, or near, the realm of Tulips and IT dot.com land. The Fed made a terrible mistake. It is adding around $1 trillion a year to its balance sheet. How on earth are we going to get out of this? The only hope I see on the horizon is your raspberries which remind us what is real, and what is a bluff.

I hope you are planting raspberry bushes in your garden, as this will come in handy. - The news you refer to about the politicking and comedy in Washington is not economically significant because it does not change a thing. What I find surprising is how ever evidence of failure spurs markets. QE is an admission of failure, it is spurring markets. Comedies in politics are failure, and they spur markets. The whole edifice at present appears to be predicated on spurring markets from failure. - The reason I don't go long in my strategy is this, that the whole 'growth' story is built on an admission of failure. - Now, I would like to pose a question, which is not terribly fair, as it forces 'investors' (I am become a speculator now, no longer an investor) to confront their own convictions. - If you are convinced that IAG will rise to £4, can I assume you are adding to your stake? You probably do not, and here is the fact that keeps me on the fence - financiers are taking leverage, using other peoples' money to do exactly that - keep buying IAG (or other companies in a similar situation). This is the underpinning of a lot of what we are seeing. And with energy prices going up around 10 percent, clearly this is going ot feed through to inflation because everything will be affected. - Lastly, the reason I will not go long on this market is because the growth story is built on failure, an admission of failure, that the economy can barely grow even with effectively zero rates of interest, and plenty of fake money poured into it. I will go long (become an investor) when real growth (above inflation, not nominal growth) returns. The rest is just a speculative bubble. And it does matter when markets are allowed to behave like this, because it is drawing in all the money that should be going to real investment. It is an appalling misapplication of resources into rampant speculation. That nothing has changed is evidence by the shenanigans (criminality) at JP Morgan etc. These guys are like addicts. They can never change, and crisis in financial markets will recur with greater regularity, no matter what the regulators do.

Firstly, an answer to the $10 trillion question. Banks' valuations of their assets and capital ratios plunged, and the hole had to be filled. Why? Because the huge derivatives' pile was sitting atop this over-leveraged collateral. This is why $10 trillion has produced a null result. But someone has to pay that back. Who? Either (accelerated growth), which we see no evidence of, or the future. The latter is the fall guy! And so future savers etc. have had their assets mortgaged. One easy way out of this is to have a world war and wipe the slate clean. That's not going to happen. The task then is what to do, how to 'secure' yourself and enough durable assets? - The derivative pile, as you asserted earlier, had merit. But only in the hands of responsible agents, not, as we have presently, in the claws of avaricious psychopaths who will crash whole nations to make a buck. There is no point in buying a top range Porsche and handing the keys over to an inveterate alcohoholic! It's not the product you worry about. It's the user (consumer) of that product. - We are unfairly picking on IAG as though it is some exception to what is happening generally to asset classes in general. I am in a conundrum. If I use fundamentals to price an asset, and wager accordingly, what are my chances of getting it right and turning a profit? Not high in the current scenario. On that basis I have two strategies to pursue. Firstly, jump on the bandwagon of assets rising on the wave of free money handed over to banks, for example. The second is to take a view that this is not a (financial) market I can believe in, and so opt for a shorting strategy. This is not a doom-mongers charter. It is a default position from experience. I won't take a generally long view (at present) because I don't believe in this market but, more importantly, distrust the market makers. Had governments admitted that banks had failed, were insolvent, and nationalized the lot, I would take a more bullish view. So I have decided, at present, to skirt around the various shenanigans and play generally short. This may change in time, depending on events, but presently, I will keep to this strategy.- Another thing that really troubles me is the undercurrent of resentment among so many different groups in society who feel (justifiably) cheated over what happened, and is happening. The recent sell-off of Royal Mail exacerbates this resentment. It gives the impression that government is abetting financiers. Moreover, there is a view that the support the governmen tprovides the housing market (against the advice of the former Bank of England governor, Mervin King, who FAILED in his job circa the Lehman and sub-prime fiasco) that this is a front for supporting banks balance sheets. There is so much rampant dishonesty that I want to stand back and not jump in to something I may not be able to escape from if I had to run for cover, sharpish!. PS. I would not allow you to affect my strategy, not should I effect yours

There are two ways to make money in this market. You either get lucky, or you cheat. All those crooks who are manipulating benchmarks understand that all too clearly. They don't have the patience to wait on capricious luck. So they cheat. What would be your prognosis of their faith in the system, that intellect, financial models, graphs, and such can aid you in winning big? There are just too many people doing exactly the same thing, and this crowd of parasitic clowns is growing in size every single day. - As for who owns the assets of AIG. Forget the crass accounting fraud that the company's accountants may engineer for your amusement. Just like the banks whose property portfolio on their books is still valued at pre-crisis bubble values. The authorities tolerate this in order to keep the sham alive and kicking, and as long as 'the market' know this intention, they keep on buying. These valuations stay on their books, until or if they sell the property (as per the Spanish banks, for example). The valuation of IAG's assets are not mark-to-market. To sell those used assets on the open market you are looking at 10 percent of what you see on those accounting fiddles. Look at AMR and other 'peers'. Use common sense. - My view is that ETF's have taken over the pricing mechanism of stocks, bonds, and other assets. There is no longer 'price discovery' like in the 'good old days'.. This is total BS. These 'financial innovations' have killed that. A price is set for an asset, and the relevant parties do everything to push it there. Now, sure, IAG can go to £4 or even £5 if that is where the ETF that this stock is part of demands it. On fundamentals?! It should be trading at a real price-discovery valuation of 90 pence or so. But reality is not what trading is about. I would like to leave you with a question. The governments pumped up to $10 trillion into the financial system (not the real economy, the financial system). Where is the $10 trillion recovery? Where is it? Where has all that money gone? Is it even real money? What has the world got to show for $10 trillion?

All these models and methodologies are really humbug. I reiterate, there are too many players all doing or trying to do the same thing with the same resources. There is no precedent for what we have today. None. Put yourself in the shoes of a trader, and consider the comparison. You trade with your own money. The so called 'professional' traders trade with other peoples' money. A worm or a cockroach can do that without blinking an eye, hesitating, or worrying about losses. It's only when the game is up, margin calls are made, and people want their money back that the real patterns (fundamentals) emerge. You can not out run QE. And I apply the same criteria and caution to myself - I can no way protect what I have. I am fully exposed, come what may. All your assets, whether you like it or not, know it or not, and care or not, are mortgaged. The derivatives are not there to add liqudiity to anything. They are bets and hedges, pure and simple, devised and traded by self-interesed parties without a care for anyone, or anything. - Short term (say up to 2017) I really think only some kind of crisis can restore an equilibrium. Longer term, financialization will have to be tamed, and the real economy grow. It should not go unnoticed that following the financial crisis of 2008 when RBS etc had to be rescued, that a guy at the bank of england (monkeys, all I concur) was seething with contempt at the behaviour of money market traders, bankers, and financiers. This behaviour is still the prevalent type. It will not disappear. It may be in abeyance, but given any opportunity (and QE fake money pumped into the system is that opportunity) these guys (who are reminiscent of psychopaths) will surge up and take the system to the brink. As someone once presciently said, they are like lemmings following each other over the cliff. - As for IAG, it will sooner or later come crashing down to earth. Those bonds may not have an imminent redemption date, but that time is coming. And you should know, bondholders and banks own this company, not the shareholders. - Incidently, have a look at this amusing graphic on gold: http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/15745438/Trading/Gold-Price-Prediction.pdf

I heartily am in accord with agricultural land as an asset class that can hold its own. No one can agrue with a man's gut, and in any environment, that comes first. - Unlike you, I can imagine the derivatives swell to over 50 times their present size. A bout of inflation will inflate this pile easily, for example.It will not be so easy unwinding all that QE. The central bankers may opt for a bout of inflation to do the job. They are not that clever. Moreover, as you may discern, the financial markets are attractors for all kinds of scams, rigging of libor and other benchmarks. This happen for two reasons. Firstly, there are too many players chasing the same goals with the same tools, and advantage comes from luck (a capricious gal!) or cheating (much easier and more reliable!). Secondly, greed and temptation - human characteristics that are wont to bring the house of cards down. - Building opportunity on such an edifice is tantamount to walking on water. I see hope in the remarks from some steelmakers that the USA is re-industrializing. It is greatly hoped that the UK, and Europe, and not far behind the curve here. - Investing in CFD, spread betting, etc. is not much different any more from buying stocks. These are all mimicking each other, as the same methodologies are applied across the board. - Time to grow raspberries en masse, methinks!

Time machines aside, there is no going back, but that does not mean what we have today will endure. Let me take your scenario a few steps ahead and let's imagine a China doing exactly what the Americans, Brits, etc., are doing with finance (not the real economy, finance). Imagine leveraging China say 10 times ten years from now when it's economy eclipses the US, and outstanding derivatives swell to over 50 times what they are today. The speculators will do that, no worries there, but what is underneath it? A real economy can grow and evolve, rising up like building a structure from the ground up. Financialization starts from the sky and wants to go higher. This is a structure floating on clouds! Don't misunderstand me, if/when this edifice implodes I will be hit as hard as anyone else. What asset class will protect me with everything on the planet has been mortgaged? Sometimes humanity, like a man, (to grossly paraphrase Shakespeare) get's itself into a rut, and the only way out is some kind of catastrophic event that sweeps again an entire paradigm that everyone took for granted. I can see Boeing jets and Airbus planes evolving one day to space planes. What evolutionary line will/can finance take? It can't. It's not based on an idea. It's an addiction. It just keeps going until it burns out. We can only hope it does not burn everything else with it, or the real economy by that time is robust enough to shrug it off.

Good morning. - One thing, among many others, that have struck me over the years is that though we may not be looking for something (per se) something may be looking for us. Financialisation is not a riddle. It is not a development of capitalism or an evolutionary factor of glabalization. It is narcotic-like gambling. Not creative asset building, not additive, but moving things (money) around in order to gamble. Building cars, designing smartphones is not a gamble, it is an additive accretive process. When you have a gargantuan activity (narcotic-like gambling) over-ride reality, something is bound to rebound on all of us. But we have been on this ride before. Let's rather see this edifice in action. In a couple of weeks, the US will hit its debt ceiling. The Democrats are convinced the Republicans will back down. They won't. This will go over the cliff and the USA will be in default. The financial markets will gyrate senselessly, while Ford, Siemens, Boeing, Airbus etc will carry on as normal, as will you local plumber, for he could not give a fig about all this BS. The real economy will not react. Financialization will. All that fake money, the options and futures, the derivatives and currency bets, the interest rate bets, all of this gambling will unwind. Nothing is achieved. It's all puerile and predictable. And this drama will repeat until the whole shebang burns itself out.

Financialization a natural evoluion of capitalism? That's like saying you start out with aspirin and end up with heroin and that's a natural evolution for a headache because it leaves you feeling high! The former is a problem to be solved. The latter an addiction. I recall the 1980's when Thatcher gave owners of real assets the ease to shut down viable productive assets, and put all that cash into stocks, property and speculation. That was not economic evolution, it was aimed at smashing the unions. - The fact is, and it is a fact, when heroin economics (which is what financialization is) comes to dominate (which it has) then you had better watch out what you wish for. To have recurrent and ongoing gyrations on the scale we are now seeing, and with shorter recurrance, is like bending a bar, even the strongest wrecking bar. Sooner or later it will break, structurally. And you can feed an addiction as much as you like. It will never be satiated. Not until it completely burns itself out, and consumes itself.

This is getting quite heated! Well, I trust and hope it's all done in a beneficial spirit! - I have never heard of Bob Beckman, not am I interest to learn of his ramblings. I am in the habit of drawing my own conclusions. And while I see clearly the point you are making, I am not altogether sure you are clear of mine. So allow me to please clarify. - My assertion is that financialization is the new business model. This is radically different in aims from capitalism in that the latter, even if exploitative, is predicated on growing a business. The former is a corrupted variant of gambling on a colossal scale. That the 'London Wale' could burn through $6 billion on a stupid reckless bet, and walk away without any repercussions while if you or I stole a pint of milk we would be dispatched to a custodial center for 6 months, and have our biographers permanently tainted. In effect, financiers are encouraged by all this to take bigger and bigger risks (with other peoples' money). Moreover, the gyrations and meltdowns are occurring not ever hundred years of so, but the secular basis is now decadal or even every five years. How can a real economy company plan in that environment? Or take the recent case of Unilever. It's business in growing, but exchange rate shenanigans, aggravated by QE and misguided pledges to taper or extend it, are causing mayhem. How can Unilever plan ahead? Hedging? This only benefits the speculators and financiers. Unilever should be concentrating on retailing, not financial hedging. Ditto IAG. They should be putting all their clever people into building a business, not worrying constantly about exchange rates. All these disruptive patterns favour parasitic unproductive, useless financiers, not real-economy and real-company builders. - This is my point (gripe?) I want us to get back to predominantly real economy, even if that means compromising globalization, or trimming it down several notches. For the sake of sanity, we have to move back to a real economy, - In the meantime, exactly like you, I will speculate like hell, because these markets are encouraging us to speculate, not invest. And that is a real shame.

The real assets are in the hands of banks and bondholders. As for the real economy, that has been mortgaged by the unproductive parasites taking interest free fake money and pumping up asset prices. How can you value an asset bought with invented QE money loaned out at zero rates of interest?. Add in the gross leverage, futures, derivatives and other 'financial instruments' and never before in history has such a construct been seen. History is a plastic cow. You'll never get a drop of milk from that animal. These shysters gamble with your money, my money, the nation's money and mortgage the lot on a stupid bet. Never their own money. It's your savings and pension underwriting these shenanigans. And then there is the algorithmic HFT computer trading. They spit out millions of trades a second, and often withdraw them in order to manipulate prices. And they are located right aside the exchange to capitalize on a nanosecond. - And you assert you can compete with all this?!!! Go to the bank of England and tell these monkeys you want a level playing field and see where that gets you.Tell them you believe in capitalism and see what comes out. It's a totally rigged market. There is no historical equivalent with the financialization construct we have today. Tulip mania and South Sea bubblse - these were localized individuals gambling with the own money. Now, in fractions of a second, the whole globe shakes due to an event. There is no parallel. None. You have to do away with financialiaztation as the de facto model of business. Left alone, there will never be any real recovery. Not in your lifetime.

The bond holder and the banks own the assets of this company. The shareholders are like fleas, and count for naught! That is the logic of this. One can play, speculate, kick it around. But surely even you have to balk at the absurdity of stocks rising when there are so many factors weighing against them. There is no logic, no reason, no common sense It's only portfolio managers topping up because their 'models' tell them to. IAG should not be in the FTSE 100. It should be in the FTSE 350 somewhere. Stock picking is not hard if you have the mind of a fruitcake. (with some tea!)