my post was intended as a reply to ilovesilversilver as a joke since he has posted similar messages to me on other boards. Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion. The point is that we don't care what he is doing because his financial situation, risk tolerance etc are different from everyone else's, so his actions should have no impact on what each of us decides to do.
News out that chips shipments for the new iphone 7 are plunging 70-80% is taking Apple down below key support that has been holding in the $92-93 area. While Apple is currently oversold with an RSI of 23, if one looks at the 3 year chart, there doesn't look to be anyis no support until $70.
Stagg, I will try one more time to make it clear why several of us object to many of your posts. You say the board is about "investing" but posting your holdings day after day is not "investing" especially if you have nothing new to add about those picks. Everyone can see whether PSEC, BDCL or FRO are up or down at any point in time, so we don't need you to tell us every day. Look back at your posts and see how many of your posts are just repeating that you own these stocks and whether they include any NEW info about their fundamentals or technicals.
Further, you accuse many of us of being "doom and gloomers", but you are equally as guilty of being a "rainbows and unicorn" investor. There is risk in investing, and measuring and appreciating that risk is key. Look at all of the investments that have turned out really bad (and still haven't come back) because people (including you) didn't appreciate the risk. So if you are going to mention an investment pick over and over, and then it turns out bad and you don't come back and explain why it turned out bad, people are going to question why you kept pumping that pick and why you won't mention why it didn't turn out like you promoted. That is the definition of pumping and no board is served if posters are just going to pump their holdings and then disappear when they don't pan out.
For those playing along at home, the dollar has depreciated by a factor of 24.05 since 1913. So the Dow at 17711 is really worth 736.42. Next time DH talks about his 100 year chart on the Dow, ask him what it's worth in real inflation adjusted terms. Maybe that chart wouldn't look so great.
As with most triple ETFs, NUGT is hard to play because you have to get the trend correct. But putting NUGT aside, DH shows how little he knows about the history of monetary policy in the world. He probably doesn't even know that Barclays Bank recently admitted to fixing the price of gold with other investment banks and as part of their settlement, agreed to cooperate with plaintiffs. Over the years, gold has been money. Does DH think the Chinese are buying gold for kicks? Does he think both China and Russia are ok with the US dollar being the reserve currency forever or is there a possibility that some new reserve currency based on gold could develop sometime in the future? Throughout history, the country that has held the reserve currency has held it for about 100 years before they debased their currency. DH loves to tell us about the 100 year Dow chart, but what is the inflation adjusted price of the Dow? Does he even know? What is the US dollar worth now and what was it worth in 1913 when the Fed was formed?
William, I thought you threatened to put me on ignore. You have no idea of the history between me and DH and the insults that he has thrown my way. As for Stagg, I tried to get him to be a little less of a braggard and pumper, but you see the results of that attempt. Funny, how you object to my criticism of two posters, but then you throw your insults at me. Pot calling the kettle black. As for Sarge, I genuinely tried to get him to look at Apple with a more skeptical eye. Of course, he has now sold his position some 20 points lower than where he could have.
It has never been my goal to be the board policeman. But I reserve the right to challenge other's opinions and their recommendations, especially if they keep saying that all their picks always work out. If someone is going to post every day about how great their picks but only on the days that they are in fact up (Stagg) or criticize others for getting a pick wrong (DH) they are inviting others to scrutinize their views. It seems only fair. If they can dish it out, then they should be able to take it.
You seem to think that I have been off base with DH and Stagg, but others on the receiving end of DH's barbs are beginning to see it more my way, they are just too polite to say anything. And with bullies and braggards, that's why they never adjust their behavior, because enablers like you don't have the courage to speak up.
For the record, both DH and Stagg are knowledgeable in their own ways and each has something to contribute, as do most on this board.
See he just doesn't get it. Some people just have blinders on to their boarish behavior. You can tell them 1000 times that it is not polite to brag or boast about their good fortune and they will think that if they didn't, the public would be deprived of their contribution. DH and Stagg suffer from the same defect. They think the more they post, the more the board wants to hear from them, even if they keep repeating the same themes over and over. Who here doesn't know which stocks Stagg likes and what he owns? He tells us every day. DH used to do that too, but now he's back to commenting on everything and everyone's investing "mistakes" all in the name of "teaching" us poor neophites.
Not sure I agree with that. Here's the most recent stats of the S&P. Obama in 2009 was 26.5% but of course that came after the huge crisis in 2008 and the Fed's QE. Bush in 2001 was -11.9% and that was the first recession after the Clinton years. Clinton in 1993 was 10% and that was helped by the end of the savings and loan crisis. Bush I in 1989 was 31.5%. Reagan in 1981 was -4.9%. Carter in 1977 was -7.2%. So 3 out of 6 in modern times were up and 3 down.
Of course, this covers the modern times when our debt expanded by 20 times and inflation went from double digits to less than 2% and while the demographic trends put the baby boomers in their peak earnings.
One can understand why the markets sometimes react positively to a new president because people are hopeful and ready for a change and that optimism spills over into more spending etc. But several commentators have also noted that when the country is getting more pessimistic and hostile, that can have a negative effect on markets. I don't think this next election is going to be a uniting experience as both candidates are polarizing in their own ways.
I always wished I invested in MO, but couldn't get over the fact that their product killed so many people. I'm far from one of those investors who only invests in do-gooder companies, and one can make arguments against investing in a whole host of companies from defense companies to liquor to fast food and soft drinks, but MO is just one that I couldn't get over.
Gambler, I get what your saying about SFL. Since 2013, it has pretty much stayed between 11 and 16, give or take. And it really doesn't spend too much time in the 16 area.
I think now you and others are starting to get a feel for the know-it-all DH and why I think he is a jerk. He just can't help telling everyone when they are wrong while telling everyone how right he always is and how successful he is at investing. He's not really here to discuss others' views (despite his tribute to Shark) but rather to use it as an opportunity to blow his own horn. Probably blows himself too.
I have had this running debate with some posters on other boards as to whether to take a profit in a stock that could be a core holding because you like their business. It can help to look at long term charts to see if the stock will keep growing. MPW topped out twice around this level in 2013 and 2015. The good earnings report will prompt some new recommendations and some articles on s.a., so that could keep the momo going. I guess you have to figure out what your tax hit will be and what your breakeven price would be to re-enter the trade after you sold it (unless you have losses to offset). Assuming you had no losses to offset and your tax hit was 25%, your breakeven would be about $13 and while MPW could pull back some to work off overbought conditions, it could also just keep going up. Looks like there is support around $13.50, so it might never pull back to that breakeven level. Isn't one of the first rules of investing to let your winners run?
I bought GDO (the fund that invests in European debt) to take advantage of the ECB buying corporate debt and DPG (the global utility fund selling at a discount to NAV). I also added the Fidelity biotech fund a few weeks ago. While I am still bearish, the market can always find a reason to ignore fundamentals and the economy and go up, and in fact, at the end of previous bull markets, there is typically a blow off top.
I would avoid TVIX. On NYMT, their earnings were down and in their conference call they hinted that they may change their dividend policy, which could mean that a reduction is coming. While the market could react positively to a "right-sizing" of the divy to match their core earnings, I would think there's a better chance of a sell off which would give you a chance to buy it lower.
Thanks, but we don't care what you say you do because there is no way to prove it on a yahee message board.
And here is the post from Mar 16:
"Ok, in at $5.75. Also sold some low yield stocks that had reached RSI70 on the one year chart. Should be interesting from here."
Hey, we all can make a poor trade and then see the light of our mistake, but DH is almost Hillaryesque. He will now beat this drum on TVIX and people will think he was bearish on it from the beginning and forgot that he once bought it.
Didn't DH succumb to Gambler's recommendation and buy TVIX? I guess he has since sold it, but funny how he's now the expert on TVIX, but that didn't stop him from gambling on it.
JK, I agree and disagree. I agree that the charts look bad for most of the stock market indices, but we know that the charts can sometimes be fickle and all support or resistance can give way under the right circumstances (like the Fed announcing QE4). Some argue that this is a reason to ignore charts altogether, but no one can predict when extraordinary events like QE will occur, so the charts are better indicators of where the buying and selling will most likely occur. Of course the slow down in the averages is due to the fact that the Fed's balance sheet has been going sideways for the most part as most of QE has stopped (except for the reinvestment of principal), but as Prof Poole (former head of the St. Louis Fed) used to tell us, monetary policy works with a lag.
I disagree about the Fed pumping up the bond market (even though they own a huge portion of the outstanding debt) as I think long rates are staying low (the 10 year has been stuck below 2%) because of slowing growth. Also, there is a great demand for Treasuries by banks and finance companies that engage in hedging, and with less Treasury collateral available (because the Fed owns so much of it) that causes the prices to remain up even as we continue to run deficits.
I don't think one can say with a straight face that value/income stocks have been exactly unloved as many of the traditional income stocks like utilities and some equity REITS are trading at lower yields and higher p/e's than they historically have.
Stagg, it is good to have rules, but the beauty is in the eye of the beholder and you view them the way you want, not necessarily how they really are.
1. You claim to be an investor, but in reality, you trade your positions as much as anyone. You have had to sell several losers (there's nothing wrong with that). Your longest term holding is probably SFL, but aside from that, you don't have many long term holdings.
2. Your claim to have great research skills, but in essence you are just bottom fishing oversold high yield stocks without any appreciation for how those dividends are generated. Look at your investment in AVACF which is down again and for which you were recommending in the mid teens when the spot rate was clearly going down. We all make mistakes in research because none of us has access to 100% of the info.
3. Total Returns are just a rearview mirror. While some stocks have had great consistent performance over long periods, they usually aren't high yield stocks (SFL seems to be an exception).