Down goes the Dow

Substance begets substance.

OK, since I posted the article, give me points you disagree with rather than the "trollish" comment you made.

Serve it up and I will give you a thoughtful response.

Igy

Say wha? wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:http://wolfstreet.com/2017/06/15/what-happens-when-the-machines-start-selling/

I thought you were of the belief that it is NOT different this time.

Actually the point of the article is how fundamental analysis is being ignored. If you were a student of the markets you would know this has been a characteristic of bubbles.

Igy

As the author said, they're being ignored because they can't explain what is happening. In other words, it's different this time.

The author wrote that valuations don't matter in this market. Igy agreed with that in another thread.

I respectfully believe that is a wrong interpretation. Fundamental investing does not work in an environment where technical and algorithmic trading dominate the action. I believe it was 60% technical and 10% fundamental. I know as a fundamental investor it is very difficult to find value. Large and small trading firms have programmed computers to trade fractions of a dollar in ETFs and Index Funds. Those same algorithms that serve on the upside will crash in a crisis. Twenty years ago when I entered the business small and large firms served as liquidity to the market. Today that system does not exist in the same form. You have a system of traders connected by computers, when one refuses to trade or the algos are losing, they're pulled off line. We got a taste of that in the Flash Crash a number of years ago. This era may have a nuance that is different, but the bubble is no different since investors are not looking at cash flow as justification for purchase. Stocks are traded as tickers with your profit based on your ability to sell to another. I can't think of a more distorted market.

Igy

Why did you post that article then, if you disagree with the author?

Try to keep up wrote:

The author wrote that valuations don't matter in this market. Igy agreed with that in another thread.

You believe it will never matter since you will happily ride your index fund down 60%. At that point your 20 year return will be annualized at -2%.

You will be trying to keep up. But you found out too late that you were a sap. Don't worry you be back annualized at +2.5% by 2027.

Say wha? wrote:

Why did you post that article then, if you disagree with the author?

You obviously can 't read or analyze information. Perhaps as I originally noted just a troll.

In any case read the last two paragraphs.

Good luck, you'll need it.

Igy

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Try to keep up wrote:

The author wrote that valuations don't matter in this market. Igy agreed with that in another thread.

You believe it will never matter since you will happily ride your index fund down 60%. At that point your 20 year return will be annualized at -2%.

You will be trying to keep up. But you found out too late that you were a sap. Don't worry you be back annualized at +2.5% by 2027.

That has nothing to do with what I wrote. Try to keep up.

There's no need for insults, unless that's all you have.

I can read just fine. This is part of what I read..."Fundamentals no longer matter in this market. Valuations have been surgically removed from any sense of fundamental reality."

Agree, or disagree? (I'm not really expecting a straight answer since I suspect you cannot formulate an honest one.)

Say wha? wrote:

There's no need for insults, unless that's all you have.

I can read just fine. This is part of what I read..."Fundamentals no longer matter in this market. Valuations have been surgically removed from any sense of fundamental reality."

Agree, or disagree? (I'm not really expecting a straight answer since I suspect you cannot formulate an honest one.)

Sure, fundamentals do not matter in this market I said as much in my lengthy response to you.

You conveniently left out the author's conclusion "But without fundamentals, what will hold up stock prices...This environment has amassed phenomenal risks."

See you did not read very well, or wish to draw your own conclusions, which I suppose supports an alternate reality.

Good night, I have an early workout in the morning before work.

Igy

Nothing you wrote disputes what the other fellow read.

Reading comprehension is not his forte (pronounced "fort").

Pronounciation is not yours. Avoidance is.

Gruntz here is another article that will challenge your view point. But like most purveyors of the Bubble you will discount it's significance.

http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2017/06/can-we-see-bubble-if-were-inside-bubble.html

You have no idea what my viewpoint is. Stop applying your fantasies to others.

Sure, glad to, once you stop applying your fantasies to me.

You stalk me, then have the audacity to suggest I'm the one with fantasies? Get a grip.