“Everybody is long, the few are getting ever larger and the Fed and Trump are both doing their parts in disconnecting asset prices ever further from underlying economic reality. We’re building an inverted pyramid here with the majority of the weight on top of the pyramid and everybody sitting up there enjoying the view but with no exit plan on how to get back down.”
Sven Heinrich, The Northman Trader
Maserati wrote:
Scoreboard, Igy.
This.
Very wrong, actually this:
“When thinking about excess, it is easy to see the reflections of excess in various places. Not just in asset prices but also in “stuff.” All financial assets are just claims on real wealth, not actual wealth itself. A pile of money has use and utility because you can buy stuff with it. But real wealth is the “stuff” — food, clothes, land, oil, and so forth. If you couldn’t buy anything with your money/stocks/bonds, their worth would revert to the value of the paper they’re printed on (if you’re lucky enough to hold an actual certificate). “
—Lance Roberts, Real Investment Advice
Racket wrote: This market is going straight up until November....
Maybe... but I’d give better than even odds there will be a sharp correction of some degree before then.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Very wrong, actually this:
“Blah blah blah“
—Lance Roberts, Real Investment Advice
Sorry but scoreboard is the bottom line. Nothing else matters.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
“Everybody is long, the few are getting ever larger and the Fed and Trump are both doing their parts in disconnecting asset prices ever further from underlying economic reality. We’re building an inverted pyramid here with the majority of the weight on top of the pyramid and everybody sitting up there enjoying the view but with no exit plan on how to get back down.”
Sven Heinrich, The Northman Trader
Igy, in all due respect, i must ask, if the promised correction keeps not happening, of what value is it? From my estimation, each day that it keeps not mateializing, it becomes more worthless. The freakin' fact is that most investors cannot afford to sit out a prolongued bull market. And these forecasts of 60% drops have been going on for years.
There's some saying about insanity being defined about repeating the same mistake and expecting different results, that comes to mind.
Hi Seattle, I have always found that saying facile and worthless.
One can easily achieve completely different results by doing the same thing, but under different conditions.
With due respect SP, Igy has never told anyone (that I remember) to sit entirely out of the market. He has been cautioning people to position themselves according to their risk profile. Me, being “not young” and also not wealthy, I’ve adjusted my holdings to accept lower returns given the expectation, with some unknown probability, of a correction (of unknown magnitude). Those among us with unlimited resources or blessed by relative youth don’t need to take the same precautions. But my nest egg is finite and needed sometime in the next 5 to 10 years, hence I have hedged accordingly. To each their own of course...
“But real wealth is the “stuff” — food, clothes, land, oil, and so forth. If you couldn’t buy anything with your money/stocks/bonds, their worth would revert to the value of the paper they’re printed on...”
An over-simplified materialistic view.
Wealth is about personal richness of life. One can be penniless and starving, yet inwardly wealthy. Roberts ignores ego, feeling, self-construct, and all the rest of what makes us complex people, and not simple material organisms. Food, clothes, land, oil, etc are used for many more purposes than basic biological subsistence, and emotional/cultural/historic/personal dimensions are of quantifiable value to not only the individual, but to groups of individuals.
This source of value is reflected in current equity prices.
eg. every thinking guy knows diamonds are an artificial ripoff, yet still pay a lot for them because essentially every woman loves them.
Especially consider this type of thing in some of the stocks that are rising the most, like AAPL. Look at TSLA, when you buy it you are buying a part of the future, unlike buying GM. It’s why Beyond Meat was essentially the only successful IPO last year.
Unfortunately for cannabis stocks, stoners don’t have enough money left over after munchies to put behind the stocks. Part of the whole point of getting high is to dissociate, and therefore not need, or even care about satisfying ego needs, even unconsciously. By the time they’re straight, they’re broke.
Amirite K5??
Maserati wrote:“But real wealth is the “stuff” — food, clothes, land, oil, and so forth....
I disagree with this, although maybe I misunderstand the precise intent. I DO agree with your second statement about wealth being about personal richness of life. I think that nails it.
Maserati wrote:
Hi Seattle, I have always found that saying facile and worthless.
One can easily achieve completely different results by doing the same thing, but under different conditions.
Yeah, but the saying implies nothing is changing. I get your point, but the implication is for exact same action and circumstances...
the idiot wrote:
With due respect SP, Igy has never told anyone (that I remember) to sit entirely out of the market. He has been cautioning people to position themselves according to their risk profile. Me, being “not young” and also not wealthy, I’ve adjusted my holdings to accept lower returns given the expectation, with some unknown probability, of a correction (of unknown magnitude). Those among us with unlimited resources or blessed by relative youth don’t need to take the same precautions. But my nest egg is finite and needed sometime in the next 5 to 10 years, hence I have hedged accordingly. To each their own of course...
I cannot agree. His advice is without any such qualifications. I completely agree with your tactics and several of us on here spout off all the time about "investment horizon" and "risk adversity", but that is not the message being expounded. On the contrary, he commonly refers to investors in the aggregate, not individual cases. The qualfications you bring to the table about suitability and such are completely reasonable and ones i believe in and support.
Maserati wrote:
“But real wealth is the “stuff” — food, clothes, land, oil, and so forth. If you couldn’t buy anything with your money/stocks/bonds, their worth would revert to the value of the paper they’re printed on...”
An over-simplified materialistic view.
Wealth is about personal richness of life. One can be penniless and starving, yet inwardly wealthy. Roberts ignores ego, feeling, self-construct, and all the rest of what makes us complex people, and not simple material organisms. Food, clothes, land, oil, etc are used for many more purposes than basic biological subsistence, and emotional/cultural/historic/personal dimensions are of quantifiable value to not only the individual, but to groups of individuals.
This source of value is reflected in current equity prices.
Masy, Interesting. Three levels: the currency, it's buying power, and the worth that both bestow upon it holder.
You advocate that the real wealth stems from its worth in a wide realm of attibutes, including intangible ones like fulfillment and purpose.
That's the level we get into on here when we discussions like income inequality and student loans come up. It's instructive to remember that sometimes....
seattle prattle wrote:I cannot agree. His advice is without any such qualifications..
We must be reading different threads, or reading this thread differently. Igy certainly (annoyingly) overemphasizes the possibility of a falling sky, but for sure he has at times qualified this notion and stated quite clearly and directly that he doesn’t advise being wholly out of equities.
he advocates 20% of ones portfolio be in equities. In my mind, that needs no further comment, but perhaps i am a bit skewed to the other extreme (?)
And to the point, he advocates that without qualifying for age, investment horizon, buffers in terms of extend to liquid assets, amount of savings reserve, etc....
At least that is what is being thrown around on here.
Hey mas, throw me a crumb... Squadron(s)? Friends/partners? Program? Sports or clubs? Classification? One nugget... that is likely not enough to go on, but you never know. :-)
Pieces of the puzzle I've put together so far, assumed/guessed/inferred, are: long out of the military; from the west coast (Vancouver area); entrepreneurial; ex-pat somewhere, and has lived / worked abroad in multiple places; a dude; anglophone; semi-retired. From this (invented / imagined) profile, I don't think you were in my circle of close acquaintances, but you could have been. Other names that fit some (but not all) of that profile are BM (one of the demonstrably more successful members of our class, COO of a major corporation), AP (currently retired on the coast of Spain; this is not you), AP (moving around in various tricky parts of the world but with a home on the Mediterranean coast of Italy; this is not you), RJ (no idea what he's done since grad but there could be a personality match). You are not BB (currently running for leadership of the federal Conservative party). I can't believe you are GC (he had his own business back then that he built during high school and was worth about $250K; past president of the college club).
You are not RvP (you would have easily guessed my identity) or ML (high tech company owner / founder; you would also know me immediately). Could you be GK (chess master, pool shark, much more brilliant than his academic record would suggest), or PR (CEO of a US aerospace company)? or FW (best mustache in the gradating class)? PS (wrestler back in the day)? BF (nuclear physicist; I never would have seen that coming)? DW (fellow motorcycle enthusiast)? CB (high in the banking world)?
idiot is correct, 9/18/2018 just before the Q4 drip:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Body weight wrote:
I asked about someone living into their 90s.
I answered your post appropriately. The life expectancy of a 60 year old male is 83 not 90. Additionally there is greater short term portfolio risk at high valuations. I am probably one of the few posters here that actually has some real life experience managing retirement distributions for a diverse population over several complete market cycles. In summary I gave you the responsible response.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:idiot is correct, ...
Noe there's something you (i) don't hear every day! :-)
Igy, you can do your part squelching the noise in this thread by not taking the bait. You make it fun for your tormentors. Of course, I have told you this before...