Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd say these sellers are rational, just in a different way. Each of us has a different risk tolerance, for instance. You probably know there's been a debate for years between two Nobel Prize winners: Gene Fama and Robert Schiller. Fama is efficient markets, Schiller is irrational exuberance. Seems there's a lot of data to support either, but I'd say it's harder to make money in an irrational market.
Your comment on forced sales is a good one. Wonder if the markets account for that in advance?
Thanks. Mathjak is very knowledgeable and has very good ideas, but he doesn't need to stoop to personal stuff. Maybe that wasn't his intention, but that's how it came across and, of course, no apologies by him. All I did was posted a link.
nothing personal .all the statement means is everything we do has an element of risk and if we are going to react to everything that happens as a potential bust we may as well not drive or fly .
nothing personal .all the statement means is everything we do has an element of risk and if we are going to react to everything that happens as a potential bust we may as well not drive or fly .
It all depends on the degree of probability and what the downside actually is. Not all risks are the same
But if you know this, so do millions of other investors, and they've acted on it already, driving the price of those good companies up to reflect the survival advantage. So their action reduces your upside and increases your downside. You can't win with any targeted strategy like this unless you have either superior market knowlege (very superior, since you're competing with pro investors) or you have insider information. Either can be very useful!
Well, if you don't like selecting, then you can buy an index fund or an ETF. Then you just flow with the market. Now, if the market's average is 8% a year, I'm not sure I like giving up 1% to an investment group, but that's just me, and I don't mind swimming with individuals.
The rest is taking a step back and looking at the world around you. What will be good in 15 years, what might be bad? Will newspapers be around in 15 years? Will rental car agencies? Will gasoline stations? The first represents something everyone feels is dead, but may come back as printing technology a company to print all kinds of periodicals...do I want to chase that (no). The second represents something that people see as dying, but are on the fence yet (again, good luck to them). The third represents something normally though of as a safe bet, but the tech bet is that 1/3 of the vehicles on the road by 2025 will be electric....what will that do to oil prices? (Not something I want to find out with skin in the game)
So what will be here? Well, banks will be here, loaning money. Defense spending will be here, looking for new ways to blow things up. Manufacturing will be here, though markedly changed. Information and data will still be here, and there will probably be a lot more of it. Real Estate may no longer house Sears, but it will house something. Then try to think of who would be the best in that area and look them up.
For me, stalwarts are WF, CME, LMT, MMM, INTC. These are big companies that may have to weather a tempest or two, but are largely built into the US economy. They pay a dividend. Their debt is reasonable. There's nothing that would make me think one of these companies will not be here in 15 years.
Sometimes they are hard to get on sale because of this, just don't let the cherry on top replace the ice cream sundae. Also, they will fall. Before the last recession, MMM was trading in the 90's before it took 6 months to crater into the 30's. That's all that premium leaking out, and it's scary to watch. But the business cycle will bring back business it takes away. Now it's over 200, having just had it's single biggest day sell-off. You didn't have to be a financial insider to make money on MMM. You had to buy it and then ignore it. If you have your cash reserve set aside to wait it out, you're ok. It would have taken you 2 years to get back to the 90's.
Now, there's certainly bigger jumps. Ford was on her knees. Gambling seemed to be forever dead and indebted, with an amazing turnaround. Don't go chasing that. Just stick with the companies that are good, relevant and not overly indebted. They'll come back. Sleep well at night.
The rest is simply people hating to feel like they're losing. Nobody wants to lose their money. The reality is that the only days that matter are the day you buy and the day you sell. Buy a good company, and the timing won't matter. Don't gamble, invest.
nothing personal .all the statement means is everything we do has an element of risk and if we are going to react to everything that happens as a potential bust we may as well not drive or fly .
OK, I guess it was the "maybe YOU should not drive or fly..." that made it sound kind of condescending and sarcastic, etc.
Perhaps saying "perhaps ONE should not ..." would have made it better...still sarcastic, but not personal...
Predictions are easy and very common. No one counts misses, but if someone hits, it will get lots of press, so there's incentive to make lots of forecasts on the extremes.
Yep. Exhibit A: Peter Schiff
Still getting air time and referenced as a guru despite being the proverbial broken clock.
Still getting air time and referenced as a guru despite being the proverbial broken clock.
That's for sure! And I indicated on his Twitter feed that he'll be correct once of these decades!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.