Down goes the Dow

dip buyer wrote:

It'd be cool if some these cocky algorithm outfits went BK and never came back.

They've cost investors a lot of money by ramping the market and making people overpay for shares.

Yes, well, a big office in Chicago has apparently been brought to its knees.

I have a friend in a big office, they have been told to do essentially as little as possible to just roll stuff over, and not to try to be cute. He says that is impossible. He was told that layoffs will result. He is the functional head of the shop, second only to the guy who heads it and who is effectively in complete control.

Once again, I warn you to watch lenders, that will be the key.

jesseriley wrote:

Hi buyer,

Didn’t see the bonnie conference, going more with UK numbers & personal knowledge that many are currently at the edge financially and we have no plan to care for them or even acknowledge what is happening at street level.

Trump’s only plan is to lie about the problem, as always.

Ohio, after not having reported any cases, just received its first batch of test kits.

All of India, Indonesia, Philippines, Bangladesh, Africa, etc will have it in short order, if they don’t already.

the idiot wrote:

the idiot wrote:There's some chance I'm overreacting, ....

I'm also starting to think that the markets are going to tank as the US public gains a better appreciation of what's been developing elsewhere. Igy may have been onto something the last several years...

My view has been and remains that one needs to examine their risk tolerance relative to their time horizon. Cheap and plentiful liquidity stretched valuations to record highs, subsequently reducing the investor cushion with each new advance. The Covid-19 outbreak may be the pin this bubble was looking for. There are important political ramifications at S&P 500 2,100, which wipes out the entire market performance of the Trump Administration. The Fed and Administration are constrained on what they can do to stop any further decline. Hard to imagine why anyone would want to be President in 2021. Events are challenging the speculation and Zeitgeist of this period. Who would have known?

Igy

Got to say it's tough being on the bear side. Does the fed ever raise rates to stop runaway stock market exuberance? Almost never. Yet if stocks decline a little from all time highs they pull out all the stops.

Fed cuts all the way down in 2000 and 2008 from much higher levels, and it did not stop the decline. Perhaps slowed it down,

Fisky posted about the importance of technicals at this time. Here is Sven Henrich, The Northman Trader latest piece.

https://northmantrader.com/2020/03/08/vix-shock/

the idiot wrote:

the idiot wrote:There's some chance I'm overreacting, ....

I'm also starting to think that the markets are going to tank as the US public gains a better appreciation of what's been developing elsewhere. Igy may have been onto something the last several years...

Of course one might expect this, but i do believe it must be tempered with the extremely high probability that speculative forces are already largely in play that foresee this likelihood. The markets are forward looking, and perhaps this is factored in. And once a hint that the selling pressure is subsiding, perhaps very large short positions will be covered and we will see a bounce.

Look at China. And if you don't, i can only expect that the big players have. Their economy is rebounding from the effects of the pandemic. US and other countries are far behind in our progression of the economic cycle, but it might offer insight into its reach and duration. One might reasonably expect this calculation is going on. The evolving news that more cases were found in more states is kind of like, 'well duh!'

Granted, this is all just conjecture, be that as it may.

seattle prattle wrote:Look at China. ... Their economy is rebounding from the effects of the pandemic. US and other countries are far behind in our progression of the economic cycle, but it might offer insight into its reach and duration. One might reasonably expect this calculation is going on. The evolving news that more cases were found in more states is kind of like, 'well duh!'

Granted, this is all just conjecture, be that as it may.

For sure it makes sense to look at China first. But then, look also at South Korea, Iran and Italy second. And then the rest of Europe maybe third.

Over the past seven days, cases in Italy have been 1694, 2036, 2502, 3089, 3858, 4636 and 5883. As of yesterday, Italy is on lock down (the north for now; the rest is sure to follow).

Over the same time period, the rest of Europe has been 508, 692, 855, 1246, 1877, 2865 and 3755. So, lagging a bit behind Italy, but catching up rapidly. I won't be surprised if it's difficult for me to get back home at the end of the week, and then much more difficult for me to get back to North America as planned early April.

I get it. My point is that the other countries are following a trajectory similar to what China underwent, thereby offering a model of how we may expect it to evolve, and wth this in mind, China is on the rebound. I agree - it is currently getting worse, but if we learn anything from China, it does stabilize and the rate of infection slows, etc.

And if we look at fatal cases. The last seven days in Europe outside Italy, the total count has gone 2, 3, 5, 6, 11, 18 and 25.

Contrast this with 16 days of accumulating fatalities in Italy: 1, 2, 3, 7, 10, 12, 17, 21, 29, 34, 52, 79, 107, 148, 197 and 233. You can see the rest of Europe is about a week behind Italy.

It's easy to wave this off as an inevitable early demise for those who will die sooner than others anyway (elderly, sick, otherwise vulnerable), or to wave it away as being *the same* as the regular flu (which is roughly 30 times less lethal than this virus). A key difference, I think, as I've commented earlier in the thread, is that it's outside the norm. We are prepared to accept the regular slow loss of loved ones as a part of the regular *known* causes that take people every day. We don't, as a rule, like to tolerate losses that are unfamiliar, outside the norm, unexpected.

Maybe more importantly, though, is that the hypothetical is only academic until it affects you personally. I think that all of us are going to experience loss from COVID-19 somewhere in our networks of friends, colleagues and family, and this will make it different because it will be real, eventually, for everyone.

That, and we will all likely experience some significant disruption / inconvenience as our communities work to find a productive way through. Imagine living (or being on vacation) in Milan or Venice right now, or trapped on a cruise ship anchored offshore somewhere...

seattle prattle wrote:...if we learn anything from China, it does stabilize and the rate of infection slows, etc.

Ummm, well, yes but...

Do you appreciate the measures that were necessary in China to stem the spread of infection? That is what is coming our way also...

And it's not lost on me that now I've become the Igy of COVID-19... :-)

the idiot wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:...if we learn anything from China, it does stabilize and the rate of infection slows, etc.

Ummm, well, yes but...

Do you appreciate the measures that were necessary in China to stem the spread of infection? That is what is coming our way also...

Yes, and i believe China's authoritarian structure made it well suited to take the strict measures necessary to contain the spread as well as they did. I know, other countries (like ours) don't have that kind of reach. Not going to say what i think of leadership here on this, but point well taken, there may be significant spread rates based on how each country responds, or doesn't.

the idiot wrote:

And it's not lost on me that now I've become the Igy of COVID-19... :-)

Appreciate your detailed analysis.

"Yesterday a founder in SF told me she felt people in Silicon Valley were taking #COVID19 more seriously than other parts of the US including NYC.

I began to wonder why that might be.

Here’s my conclusion: SV understands the power of network effects and exponential growth."

Steve Schlafman @schlaf

the idiot wrote:

Racket wrote:OK not saying that I don't want everyone to be safe and healthy, but old and homeless people dying isn't exactly "unpredictable." Vulnerable populations are labeled as such for a reason. People expect them to take the brunt of it.

Racket, your contributions in this thread over time are often rash and, in my view, ill-formed and inadequately considered. You too will come around when this becomes "real" in your community, and more to the point, in your extended family and circle of friends / colleagues.

Of course, as I wrote earlier, I may be overreacting, acting the "boy who cried wolf," but as a numbers guy who's immersed himself in the WHO numbers these past few weeks, I expect not...

Wow that's harsh coming from someone who self professes to be such an idiot, not to mention in light of the outrageous Illuminati sh!t that gets said on this thread by others, but if you want to talk numbers than please excuse me while I pull the "I have a PhD in math" card. I suspect you're having trouble accurately articulating whatever argument you're trying to make regarding the expected outbreak

Racket wrote:... but if you want to talk numbers than please excuse me while I pull the "I have a PhD in math" card.

Is this going to be a PhD measuring contest, do you think?

“common sense ain’t so common”

https://twitter.com/NorthmanTrader/status/1236710649901780992

What is Fermat's last theorem?

Giles Corey wrote:What is Fermat's last theorem?

As it turns out, I have a tattoo that contains a winking reference to Fermat's last theorem.