SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: GraceZ who wrote (152655)9/30/2008 12:37:46 PM
From: MulhollandDriveRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 306849
 
The equities markets are an open game.

....not as long as you have investors totally hamstrung on the long side (401k's) and you have 'cannot short lists'

the 'game' has rules imposed that are weighted to one side, despite that, there are entities (hedge funds) that are not constricted by the same rules, btw, doesn't mean they can't lose money as well, their liquidating as we speak

btw...looks like yet even more market intervention (rule breaking) isn't working, not to worry though, and extra $700B will fix all that

LONDON (MarketWatch) -- Massive liquidity injections haven't freed up crucial money markets, leaving the world's central bankers little choice but to try more radical measures in order to dampen the odds of a wider economic collapse, economists said Tuesday.


Overnight borrowing rates and other key short-term interest rates and credit spreads rose sharply a day after the House of Representatives dramatically and unexpectedly rejected a $700 billion U.S. bank-bailout plan, leaving Washington in a state of shock and roiling global financial markets.
'A coordinated central-bank rate reduction ... is certainly not off the table.'
— Brian Bethune, Global Insight
Commercial banks have grown increasingly reluctant to provide each other with short-term loans, partly out of fear of further bank failures and concerns about the health of their own balance sheets.
"Money markets are in a state of extreme distress," said Neil Mackinnon, chief economist at ECU Group, a research firm.
The overnight London interbank offered rate, or Libor, registered a record one-day increase, reaching 6.875% from 2.56875% on Monday, according to news reports. Libor rates for sterling and euro loans also rose.
And three-month dollar Libor, a closely followed short-term rate, climbed to 4.0525% from 3.8825%.
Mackinnon said central banks should now "rip up the rule book" and take extraordinary steps to get money markets moving, including measures to guarantee interbank loans.
Unless markets are thawed soon, "we face financial-market and economic meltdown. I think that is not an exaggerated scenario," he said.
Fears about the ability of banks to fund near-term obligations has contributed to bank failures and steep declines in financial stocks, while the drying up of the commercial-paper market and other strains on credit indicate that the money-market woes are beginning to take a toll on the broader economy, Mackinnon warned.
'Self-fulfilling run'
Marco Annunziata, chief global economist at UniCredit MIB, said the depth of the broader crisis of confidence in financial markets is "now threatening to turn into a self-fulfilling run on the system, which could trigger a global financial and economic meltdown."
Rising rates come despite massive and unprecedented moves by central banks to inject liquidity into the global financial system. And interest-rate spreads that serve as measures of tensions in the money markets were elevated and at or near record levels, observers said.
The failure of money markets to respond to liquidity injections has fostered speculation that the central banks may move -- sooner rather than later -- to cut official interest rates. The severe strains in credit markets as well as subsiding inflation pressures and mounting recession worries have fueled growing conviction about the need to ease rates.
What next for rates?
"A coordinated central-bank rate reduction of 50 basis points, or more -- by the Fed, the Bank of England, the Bank of Canada and the Reserve Bank of Australia -- is certainly not off the table given the scale of the crisis," said Brian Bethune, chief U.S. economist at Global Insight.
"At a minimum, we would be looking for the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates sooner rather than later," he said Monday night.
Economists at Danske Bank said odds for coordinated rate cuts by global central banks have risen. However, the Fed may be reluctant to move while lawmakers on Capitol Hill haggle over another version of the bailout plan out of fear of being accused of political interference, they said.
Also, said Mackinnon, the European Central Bank remains strait-jacketed by its sole mandate to contain inflation, which despite slowing to an annual pace of 3.6% in September remains well above the ECB's target of near but just below 2%.
As a result, prospects for a rate cut at Thursday's meeting of the ECB's governing council remain a long shot, he said, though ECB President Jean-Claude Trichet is widely expected to adopt a tone underscoring potential downside economic risks at his monthly news conference.
Extraordinary measures
Central banks have taken unprecedented steps to inject liquidity into money markets in recent weeks.
On Monday, the Fed boosted its dollar-swap arrangements to $620 billion, up from $290 billion previously. The agreement, with nine central banks, allows authorities to provide short-term dollar loans to commercial banks in an effort to ease funding woes that have resulted from reluctance by commercial banks to lend short-term funds to each other through the interbank market.
The Fed also increased the size of its liquidity auctions and announced two forward auctions to provide funding over the year-end period.
And on Tuesday, the ECB provided a massive 120 billion euros in 38-day loans through a special auction. The Bank of England and other central banks have also taken added steps to provide added liquidity at various maturities.
Underscoring the reluctance to lend in the overnight market, euro-zone commercial banks deposited more than 44.35 billion euros, a record, in the ECB's overnight deposit facility on Monday, even though the facility pays an interest rate more than a full percentage point below the overnight market rate.
Meanwhile, banks borrowed 15.8 billion euros from the ECB's overnight lending facility at a 5.25% interest rate.
Reliance on overnight lending and deposit facilities confirms "banks are unwilling to lend to each other and that the ECB has so far failed to restore confidence in the interbank market," wrote economists at BNP Paribas. "A similar picture applies for other money markets."

marketwatch.com.

*********

yeah, just RIP UP THE RULE book, that will inspire confidence...the more the rules are changed in the middle of the game the more market participants are just being driven off the field



To: GraceZ who wrote (152655)10/1/2008 11:48:58 AM
From: Wyätt GwyönRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 306849
 
The stock market as a whole, is not a zero sum game because... money is added to the return of investors via stock dividends

although you mention "stock dividends" (a/k/a stock splits), it appears you are really talking about cash dividends. w/r/t stock splits, as you know they merely slice a given pie into smaller pieces and add nothing (zero sum). because you presumably know this, i believe you are not talking about stock dividends, but cash dividends.

w/r/t cash dividends: actually, money is not "added" to the "sum" or wealth or return or whatever you want to call it via cash dividends. when a stock goes ex-dividend, ceteris paribus its ex-dividend price is equal to the pre-ex-dividend price plus the distributed dividend. iirc this is treated as a decline in Shareholder's Equity on the balance sheet. so, stock dividends simply move part of shareholder's equity from the company's pocket (where the shareholder has a pro-rata ownership), to the shareholder's pocket, in pro-rata fashion. in other words, dividends are also zero sum.

of course, in an accounting sense based on today's conventions, to figure total returns one must factor in cash dividends in addition to capital gains (or losses). but that is simply a quirk of the capital gain-centric outlook of investors which now (temporarily) prevails. after another decade or so or poor returns, investors will come to distrust capital gains (and stocks, and CEOs), and will require a more dividend-centric market in order to be lured in.

until 1958, US stock dividend yields exceeded the yield on the 10yr UST. this was considered an immutable truth of the market, and when the dividend yield fell below the 10yr yield it was considered "temporary". that temporary state of affairs has lasted fifty years. i doubt it will last another fifty. i believe in the future people will look at the entire market the way they now do energy trusts, i.e., look at the yield, and the presumed security of the yield.

i do agree with your general thesis, though: stocks are not a zero-sum game in the long run. unlike a poker table, where the cash in pot (or whatever they call it) can change hands but not grow or shrink (except as punters add or take away money), in the stock market, the pot itself can grow or shrink as company wealth grows or shrinks over time (following the growth or shrinkage of the overall economy).

if the economy and corporate wealth grow, the "sum", a/k/a Bogle's "fundamental return" will grow (absent a change in P/E, a/k/a Bogle's "speculative return"). if the economy and corporate wealth shrink, so will the "sum".

another factor to consider: just as P/E determines the stock price for a given E, the corporate profits as a share of GDP determine the E. this has been pointed out by Buffett, ContraryInvestor, inter alia many times. Buffett notes that we are very much on the high end of CP/GDP. given that we are about to have a Democratic landslide in the wake of a financial crisis and historic bailout of "fat cats" (as perceived by Main Street), one of the safer 5-10yr bets imo is that CG/GDP will fall.

hence E will fall.

and, like as not, P/E will fall.

if these hunches turn out to be true, the "non-zero-sum game" which we are all playing will be one of shrinkage, not growth, for the "foreseeable" future.