Down goes the Dow

[quote]K5 detector wrote:

Hey, Igy/K5, do you know what "smear" means?

Sure. When Z&onists and their dupes call people who introduce facts about them and their beloved Israel that they don't want to have to consider "anti semites and Jews haters," that is what we English speaking people living in the real world called "smearing".

You really don't get that?

Hey, K5/Igy, 9 minutes between posts with different names is not enough time to fool anybody.

I understand that article just fine. But it doesn't answer the question. You are clearly avoiding the question for whatever reason.

By the way, Hussman's formula is the simpler one, not Marty's. That doesn't mean one is better than the other, just a correction on what you said.

Econ 101 wrote:

I understand that article just fine. But it doesn't answer the question. You are clearly avoiding the question for whatever reason.

By the way, Hussman's formula is the simpler one, not Marty's. That doesn't mean one is better than the other, just a correction on what you said.

Econ,

You understand it clearly. If you did there would be no need for the question "ratio of ratios" nonsense, and you would know why Marty's formula was weak.

Igy

Yes, I do understand it clearly. I assume you do too. In that case you must agree that it does not answer the question.

I really don't care if Marty's formula is "weak". That's not what this is about. It is about your inability to explain something that you offer as being a superior product.

It's not a crime to admit that you don't understand something. But this runaround that you have been engaging in very unbecoming.

Whatever you say.

Igy

If you're waiting for Figy to admit he doesn't know the answer, don't hold your breath. He is the King of Narcissism around here, not to mention prone to error.

Sliggy is the queen of fools and prone to post nothing of substance.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Sliggy is the queen of fools and prone to post nothing of substance.

Based on the current conversation, the same can obviously be said about you. Where's that irony guy?

I apologize I was wrong in criticizing Marty's exponential formula. If the market moves higher, it advances on the belief that it is that simple, cash flows and valuation do not matter.

Igy

9 minutes again! Is there anyone who still doubts the obvious?

BOA earnings smash expectations! Financials are absolutely killing it this earnings season.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Earnie wrote:

Citi, JP Morgan Chase, and Wells Fargo have all reported this morning and all three beat expectations! Winners are dominating losers this earnings season.

Let's see how correct Earnie is:

3Q Year Revenue EPS

JPM 2015 $23.5 Billion $1.68

2016 $25.5 Billion $1.58

C 2015 $18.7 Billion $1.35

2016 $17.8 Billion $1.24

WFC 2015 $21.9 Billion $1.05

2016 $22.3 Billion $1.03

Clearly what Earnie sees in EPS is simply companies guiding the Street to a lower hurdle rate. Bottom line, across the board, each company had lower GAAP EPS than one year ago.

Igy

BOA year over year improvement .41 versus .38. One out of four major banks a year over year improvement.

Smashing it.....yea right......

Igy

K5 detector wrote:

9 minutes again! Is there anyone who still doubts the obvious?

That you are dumb beyond words?

Nope. Nobody doubts that.

U.S. stock futures on Monday pointed to a lower open, putting the equity market on track to add to its two-week losing streak.

"There have been signs that markets are struggling to sustain themselves at these levels," said Craig Erlam, senior market analyst at Oanda, in a note.

S&P 500 futures pulled back by 1.40 points, or 0.1%, to 2,125.50, while Dow Jones Industrial Average futures shed 16 points, or 0.1%, to 18,043. Nasdaq-100 futures lost 8.25 points, or 0.2%, to 4,796.

On Friday, the S&P 500 and Dow both closed slightly higher, but finished near their session lows and notched a second straight weekly loss.

"We saw some late selling in equity markets on Friday, with the FTSE, Dow and S&P all experiencing a late dash for the exit into the close, potentially indicating an anxiety among traders and a lack of confidence in the markets," Erlam said.

Read: The stock market is setting itself up for a possibly monster year-end rally (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-stock-market-is-setting-itself-up-for-a-possibly-monster-year-end-rally-2016-10-14)

1 minute! LOL! You are sooooo stupid.

K5 detector wrote:

1 minute! LOL! You are sooooo stupid.

Enjoy the ride down today

Econ 101 wrote:

Yes, I do understand it clearly. I assume you do too. In that case you must agree that it does not answer the question.

I really don't care if Marty's formula is "weak". That's not what this is about. It is about your inability to explain something that you offer as being a superior product.

It's not a crime to admit that you don't understand something. But this runaround that you have been engaging in very unbecoming.

It's obvious to anyone who has read the last few pages that GOI doesn't have a clue about the workings of Hussman's formula. That should come as no surprise since anyone applying a smidgen of critical thinking to that particular formula would easily find numerous flaws and inconsistencies. Only a Hussman fanboy would try to defend the indefensible.

I would recommend that other readers of this thread do as I plan to and ignore any further offerings from GOI.