A. Friend wrote:
Thanks!
You’re wasting your breath. Igy has no clue what that emoji sequence means.
A. Friend wrote:
Thanks!
You’re wasting your breath. Igy has no clue what that emoji sequence means.
Gruntz wrote:
A. Friend wrote:
Thanks!
You’re wasting your breath. Igy has no clue what that emoji sequence means.
Translation: Your running sucks, you’re in a running bear market.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Gruntz wrote:
You’re wasting your breath. Igy has no clue what that emoji sequence means.
Translation: Your running sucks, you’re in a running bear market.
Translation: Gruntz is right, so I’ll try to divert by changing the subject.
Gruntz wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Translation: Your running sucks, you’re in a running bear market.
Translation: Gruntz is right, so I’ll try to divert by changing the subject.
Nah, Gruntz is a dope, a market Muppet.
Deeply puzzled by the assertion that cash on the sidelines is a myth, i ran a number of mathematical models to see if a series of trades in a falling market yielded less cash. Well, in a closed system, the amount of cash on the sidelines does stay the same, as long as the system is closed and does not allow for cash infusions.
But that simply is not reality. In fact, it's a long way from reality.
Since the republican corporate tax cuts, there has been a horde of money coming back from overseas by corporations and they have been vigorously buying back stock. Isn't that cash infusion exactly the tons of money on the sidelines that some say doesn't exist? And how about the reportedly 50% more cash in the bank that corporations have amassed over the last decade? And profits are at record levels, thanks to technological advances, increased access to cheap overseas goods and services, etc.
Isn't all that exactly a big infusion of cash on the sidelines, and isn't it exactly going back into the market through stock buybacks, to name one?
Sorry, but i just thought i would scrape a little below the surface of a claim being made here and see if it was credible. The suggestion that there hasn't been a lot of new cash on the sidelines seems to fly in the face of what's been and may continue to drive this market.
Seattle,
Nice story but.....In regards to corporations, it is record debt. Check out MSFT and MCD Annual Reports if you really think this is Igy's ranting. Much of the debt was denominated in cheaper foreign currencies. So the cash is retrieved but debt has to be repaid or refinanced. Do some more research.
Igy
debt at record low interest rates, so money is being used for better purposes (more profitable purposes) than if they were to immediately repay it, which they could do. Well documented amongst the informed and those that have done the research, by the way, my friend.
Off to grab a bear at the local pub.
Later.
Seattle,
Enjoying a libation myself. One thing to consider is the debt has to be refinanced and now at higher rates.
Igy
Seattle,
Read this, there is more if you are interested:
Igy
Igy, i refer you to the views of another specialist in the field as noted in a recent article on the subject in Forbes magazine:
"However, Erin Browne, head of asset allocation UBS Asset Management, says the problem may not as bad as it appears: 'Debt in the U.S. corporate sector is at an all-time high. It is at about the same level as was seen in the previous two recessions – 2001 and 2008. However, when is this a real concern? Net leverage has not risen nearly as high and is, in fact, near its 30-year average. Interest cover is also pretty solid.'
The debt is relatively short term in nature. Corporates have been more responsible in the way they've borrowed and have a manageable maturity schedule, she argues. Interest cover is relatively healthy and, while there are potential dangers, in her view, there is no imminent crisis."
link:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
In regards to corporations, it is record debt.
Stock buybacks are not always funded by debt. There are many examples of corporations using cash, as seattle suggested, for this purpose.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
One thing to consider is the debt has to be refinanced and now at higher rates.
Debt does not have to be refinanced.
Very few corporations are using cash for stock buybacks. Yes, the other option is to pay the debt off at maturity with cash. Read some Annual Reports to see what is really going on rather than research reports that paint pretties.
So you agree. Good.
Stay the eff out of this market.
It is heading down. Way down,
Hi, K5/Igy!
K5 detector wrote:
Hi, K5/Igy!
Hi, DD/Yutre/Gruntz/Oh Snap!/Whatever latest handle
Oh by the way I am not K5 dopey.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
K5 detector wrote:
Hi, K5/Igy!
Hi, DD/Yutre/Gruntz/Oh Snap!/Whatever latest handle
Oh by the way I am not K5 dopey.
Don't speak to that guy. Whatever he has that has eaten away his cerebellum may be communicable.
Don't speak wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Hi, DD/Yutre/Gruntz/Oh Snap!/Whatever latest handle
Oh by the way I am not K5 dopey.
Don't speak to that guy. Whatever he has that has eaten away his cerebellum may be communicable.
The most bizarre thing is why would you go to the trouble of creating a dozen or more registered handles. Must really be a weirdo.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
K5 detector wrote:
Hi, K5/Igy!
Hi, DD/Yutre/Gruntz/Oh Snap!/Whatever latest handle
Oh by the way I am not K5 dopey.
You may not be “K5 dopey”, whoever that is, but the fact that your posts appear within minutes of each other tells us the truth.