Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AllansAlias who wrote (14662)	8/29/2000 8:24:29 PM
From: chic_hearne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Re: I can only envision March/2001 myself. Allan, I think it depends how it happens. We could chug along for the next 10 years only losing 10% a year. Or we could lose 75% next year. I agree with your timeframe of March 2001 as a cap (IE, we won't go up anymore), but I'm not sure how far we go down. What is the latest you can see this running until a serious chitstorm begins to change peoples lives? It's already happening. The have not's in the Silicon Valley area are already feeling the pain. (some "have beens" since the dot com bubble went)

To: AllansAlias who wrote (14662)	8/29/2000 10:02:35 PM
From: Lucretius	Respond to of 436258

sounds about rt...

To: AllansAlias who wrote (14662)	8/30/2000 12:47:30 AM
From: Perspective	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

I think the market spends all of 2001 going down. The strongest single cycle in the market is the presidential election cycle; it produces a low every four years. The next low is due sometime in 2002. It's the natural result of the tampering with the economy performed by the Executive branch and the Fed to keep smiles on the faces of the few people who vote. The low arrived on time in 1966, 1970, 1974, 1978, and 1982. In 1986, the market tried to produce such a low, and the immense positive feedback from the newly-popular momentum investing resulted in an upside explosion instead. The result was a postponed correction that, when it came, was fairly severe - October 1987. Then stocks took over three years to manage significant new highs. Enter the Bubble. The 1994 cycle low was so slight that it was virtually undetectable. Positive feedback engages, and the market again begins rolling back risk premiums. Momentum investing takes over as the dominant strategy. I thought maybe the 1998 cycle low would start unwinding the bubble, but that was averted by a panicked Fed. Risk premiums shrink again. The ensuing print fest launched things up, and I thought maybe the Y2K thing would produce the end of the bubble, delayed a year as in 1987. No such luck. Fed panics again, stocks rocket again. The concept of demanding a discount for a security to compensate for the immediate liquidity risk vanishes and is replaced with the notion that one should PAY a premium to purchase a security that might lose 90% of its value next year. Now, with the cycle postponed a full two years, and the Bubble over 5 1/2 years old, the spring is coiled, the hammer is cocked, the chamber is loaded. The Fed has totally painted itself into a corner. Instead of deflating things when the economy was robust, Bubble-boy has waited until the economy is at a natural inflection point, having neared exhaustion in credit demand. As a result, companies have flushed mountains of good borrowed money down the toilet (witness the ridiculous takeovers, stock options, and the recent 3G license auctions). People filled tons of forward demand for products (look at all the new cars around you); wait til the buyers' remorse hits. Nothing could more chilling to the capital formation process than the wasting of billions of dollars of IPO or borrowed money by corporations taking foolish risks with other people's money on ventures that can never make a dime... BC