周议

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-8-29 10:59 PM

胡同儿串子发表于 2012-8-29 09:06 PM
军师，对周五的那个神马hole的meeting，有啥FA方面的看法吗？感觉大Ben不会给市场什么大surprise。

我也觉得大本不会有什么实质动作。只会动动嘴皮子。而且在开会之前大家期望还挺高。除非本能说出非常让人震惊的东西来，不然搞不好要大瀑布。

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-8-30 08:22 AM

胡同儿串子发表于 2012-8-29 09:06 PM
军师，对周五的那个神马hole的meeting，有啥FA方面的看法吗？感觉大Ben不会给市场什么大surprise。

Ben可能玩不出新花样
http://www.hutong9.net/forum.php ... 10&fromuid=9090

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-9-4 02:52 PM

F
http://hutong9.net/forum.php?mod ... 48&fromuid=9090

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-9-9 02:23 PM

QE3, TIF, and RAX
http://www.hutong9.net/forum.php ... 59&fromuid=9090

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-9-11 12:38 AM

My Reading List
http://www.hutong9.net/forum.php ... 38&fromuid=9090

水明善 · 发表于 2012-9-13 03:15 PM

Diffusion 发表于 2012-9-11 01:38 AM
My Reading List
http://www.hutong9.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=186038&fromuid=9090

感谢你的sharing！

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-9-13 09:47 PM

从QE1 & QE2应该能清楚地看出，大本印的钱进不了实体经济，只能在金融市场里打转。公司手里钱多，普通消费者手里钱少。公司把钱buy back shares + issue dividend，钱留进投资人口袋。可是另一方面，公司不创造就业机会，失业率持续高企，再加上食品和能源涨价，老百姓的真实购买力降低。搞QE3只能加剧这一不平衡。所以不看好消费股。因为没有消费支撑，公司的revenue不会有growth，将来也会影响earnings，进而影响股价。所以结论是，炒什么股都不如直接炒commodity。

凯恩斯毁了英国乃至整个欧洲，大本要毁了美国。

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-9-14 12:59 PM

QE1 and part of QE2 是成功的。他应该在QE2之后淡化Fed的影响，把公众注意力引导到财政政策上去，敦促美国政府削减赤字。那样他就修成正果了，将来万代传颂。可惜大本太有使命感了，非要把所有问题都自己扛，结果纵容政府过分依赖货币政策上，在财政政策上不作为，甚至肆意妄为。QE3是他手里最后的牌了，大本将来是上天堂还是入地狱，这一刻已经决定了。

greenback · 发表于 2012-9-14 01:58 PM

Diffusion 发表于 2012-9-14 01:59 PM
QE1 and part of QE2 是成功的。他应该在QE2之后淡化Fed的影响，把公众注意力引导到财政政策上去，敦促美国 ...

Well, the problem is the intrinsic political system of the US. The House has the final say in fiscal policy and budget, which the President and Senate can only approve or disapprove. This is a reasonable system reflecting the principle that the power belongs to the People. However, it leads to infighting. In the end, we have to wait for the People to come to their sense in electing the same party into the House and the Presidency.

You can say that Ben's current policy is buying more time for the political system to evolve into a more productive state so the fiscal cliff can be avoided after Nov. If not, run away from all risk assets.

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-9-14 02:28 PM

greenback 发表于 2012-9-14 01:58 PM
Well, the problem is the intrinsic political system of the US. The House has the final say in fisc ...

Maybe I shouldn't blame him for doing too much.

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-9-19 06:02 PM

收藏一下。

据说我所知，SeekingAlpha文章是有版权问题的。反正大家可以随便看，我就不贴了。给个link，另外总结一下要点。

1. However, while growth in M2, which augments M1 with retail money-market funds and savings deposits, has risen to multi-decade highs as well, it has lagged the growth of M1 significantly, one sign that money supply increases are not being transmitted effectively to the real economy.
2. A 2002 paper by the British central bank (click here for reference), affirmed Friedman's general findings that it takes well over a year to transmit money supply growth to inflation.
3. Contrary to popular belief, equities as an asset class are not a good inflation hedge.
4. Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS), commodities, timber and farmland to have the best inflation hedging capabilities.
5. Interestingly, gold was found to be a better return diversifier and crisis hedge than it was an inflation hedge.

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-10-20 02:31 PM

More Down Ahead
http://www.hutong9.net/forum.php ... 22&fromuid=9090

snowrider · 发表于 2012-11-24 03:05 PM

Diffusion 发表于 2012-9-11 12:38 AM
My Reading List
http://www.hutong9.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=186038&fromuid=9090

Wow ... you've got a lot of time!

90ufo · 发表于 2012-12-14 07:11 PM

本帖最后由 90ufo 于 2012-12-14 06:12 PM 编辑

军师, MIKE SANTOLI 今天发话了 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100316318 (see the video, more than the comments quoted below)

"We've gotten this little 6 percent lift. We've kind of wobbled sideways for a little while now. And I feel like the market, just in general, is probably in search of a little bit of an excuse before too long to back off in some hard way," he said.

"So therefore, as opposed to people thinking that the only thing standing in the way of a much higher market is some kind of a 'cliff' agreement, you might be able to get more of a sell-on-the-news response."

Santoli suggested looking past any potential deal to avert the so-called "fiscal cliff" that would trigger tax hikes and federal spending cuts if Washington lawmakers fail to reach a budget agreement.

"I do think it's worth noting that when you have the market sort of presuming you're going to have a relatively easy path past this point, then maybe you have to wonder exactly what's going to be the catalyst to have it back off in, just in an overdue correction sort of way."

The argument doesn't hold true if Washington misses the deadline and engages in protracted negotiations late into January.
Santoli's stock pick: Johnson Controls, an "up-front company" with good management and a 2.7 percent yield.

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-12-14 07:28 PM

90ufo 发表于 2012-12-14 07:11 PM
军师, MIKE SANTOLI 今天发话了 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100316318 (see the video, more than the comme ...

多谢。fiscal cliff解决了以后sell on news是非常大概率事件。不过从技术上看1438应该再去一次，很多熊熊的止损在那里，MM不会轻易放过的。最有可能的情况是，随着谈判的进程，市场慢慢上拉。然后借news上冲1438，扫掉止损。

但是sell news结束之后怎么走就很难说了。fiscal cliff解决之后，uncertainty就降低了，中线来看应该是利好。这个我们回顾一下欧债危机就清楚了。虽然每次欧盟出台一个方案，都有负面的声音，可是股事还是在震荡走高。技术面预测基本面，市场不会对同一个事件多次反应。

所以，从基本面考虑，除非有recession的危险，我不会在fiscal cliff之后继续看中线熊。另外参照上图，至少XLF在1/15下个ER season开始前会有不俗表现。

从技术面考虑，至少需要一个清晰的顶部，我才会开始看熊，在此之前，buy dip应该是第一位的。

austinjoe · 发表于 2012-12-15 07:35 AM

Diffusion 发表于 2012-12-14 06:28 PM
多谢。fiscal cliff解决了以后sell on news是非常大概率事件。不过从技术上看1438应该再去一次，很多熊熊 ...

军师 thank you very much for your FA here. Very good info as Financial and telecom will be 2 sectors that MM could use to lift the market up before next ER.

learner2009 · 发表于 2012-12-17 01:07 AM

Diffusion 发表于 2012-12-14 07:28 PM
多谢。fiscal cliff解决了以后sell on news是非常大概率事件。不过从技术上看1438应该再去一次，很多熊熊 ...

Laoda, where did you get this information? and what's your opinion about it? Is it positive related with stocks? I mean: will the sector go higher because of high estimate? or will sector go down because estimate too high to be beat (so more chance to miss)?

Diffusion · 发表于 2012-12-17 02:14 AM

learner2009 发表于 2012-12-17 01:07 AM
Laoda, where did you get this information? and what's your opinion about it? Is it positive relate ...

It's from http://www.bespokeinvest.com/

我觉得应该能够肯定XLF会跑赢其他sector，也包括大盘。至于大盘是上还是下就很难说。

learner2009 · 发表于 2012-12-17 03:00 AM

Diffusion 发表于 2012-12-17 02:14 AM
It's from http://www.bespokeinvest.com/

我觉得应该能够肯定XLF会跑赢其他sector，也包括大盘。至于 ...

Thanks. got it.

90ufo · 发表于 2012-12-19 12:20 AM

http://www.businessinsider.com/g ... ng-earnings-2012-12

CHART: 27 Years Of Failed Wall Street Earnings Forecasts

As Wall Street's top strategists publish their 2013 stock market forecasts, Gerard Minack is mulling over Wall Street's embarassingly poor track record of predicting earnings, a key driver of stocks.

Minack, Morgan Stanley's Head of Global Developed Markets, notes that "consensus forecasts almost always imply that 2-3 years ahead economic and earnings growth will be at trend."

More from Minack:

As they say, forecasting is difficult – particularly the future. Consensus earnings forecasts show just how difficult: Exhibit 1 illustrates consensus EPS forecasts for the S&P 500 from 1985, with the initial forecast for each year indexed to 100.

Here's that chart. The farther the colored line strays from 100, the more inaccurate the initial forecast:
(i didnt copy chart)

Here's Minack's take on earnings forecasts as seen in this chart:

First, they are almost always wrong – almost always because they are too high. The initial forecast has been too low only twice in the history of this series; otherwise, it was too high. On average, the forecasts have been 61⁄2% too high one year ahead (that is, actual EPS were on average 61⁄2% below the EPS forecast a year earlier). The average error two years ahead has been 111⁄4%.

Second, forecasts for growth rates are also typically too high, with a larger error than for EPS levels. On average, forecasts have implied 151⁄2% EPS growth over the next 12 months; on average, EPS have risen 71⁄2%.

Third, revisions to two-year-ahead EPS largely reflect the error to current year forecasts. Exhibit 2 shows revisions to the two-year-ahead EPS forecast and the error in the current year forecast. To illustrate: EPS over the year to September 2012 were 5.5% lower than the forecast made a year ahead (in September 2011). As that error appeared, the two-year-ahead EPS forecast (earnings for the year to September 2013) were cut by 7.7% between September 2011 and September 2012.

Here's that second chart:

		自动登录	找回密码
密码			注册

周议

点评

评分

评分

评分