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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Waiting for the big Kahuna -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: N who wrote (26798)	9/8/1998 12:10:00 AM
From: Investor-ex!	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 94695

Nancy, I'll take a shot at interpretation: AG says that, at least until very recently, there is no US inflation or deflation, interest rates are pretty low, and stock prices were very high. AG goes on to express that high equity prices are OK when things are this benign, but that this stability cannot be expected to last and by extension, the lofty values in stocks are therefore inherently unsustainable if either deflation or inflation kicks in. IMO, he's talking the market down. He frames the issue this way because we are basically at the end of the benign disinflation period of the past several years. Now, we either maintain current policy and fall into deflation or begin easing and start another inflation cycle. He's saying stocks are at risk either way, but note that he doesn't indicate what direction he plans to pursue! I'd wager no cut until we are well below his "irrational exuberance" speech levels. He won't be played the fool! IMO, current Asian rebound = grasping at straws, manipulation, and/or some short covering as a result, unless they're all considering currency controls, which would basically simulate the 1930's Smoot-Hawley trade restrictions. That would not be a good thing.

To: N who wrote (26798)	9/8/1998 12:23:00 AM
From: AlanH	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 94695

Nancy, re:Greenspan and risk/equity premiums Indeed, AG is rambling -- of course, to avoid blame for any meltdown. However, reading between the lines: Things are so ridiculously overvalued that ya gotta look 2-3 decades out to justify P/E's -- under optimal conditions. So take off the rose-coloured glasses and evaluate equities as you would any other 'future.' [For convenience, here's the requote.] The second consideration with respect to how high asset values can rise is: How far can risk and equity premiums fall? A key factor is that price inflation has receded to quite low levels. The rising level of confidence in recent years concerning future outcomes has doubtless been related to the fall in the rate of inflation that has, of course, also been a critical factor in the fall in interest rates and, importantly, the fall in equity premiums as well. Presumably, the onset of deflation, should it occur, would increase uncertainty as much as a reemergence of inflation concerns. Thus, arguably, at near price stability, perceived risk from business-cycle developments would be at its lowest, and one must presume that would be the case for equity premiums as well. In any event, there is a limit on how far investors can rationally favorably discount the future and therefore how low equity premiums can go. Current claims on a source of income available 20 or 30 years in the future still have current value. But should claims on the hereafter? JMO, but 'irrational exuberance' sounds less threatening -- ESPECIALLY when in context with warnings of global economic impact. (Sounds like, "Only under the most optimal conditions could you even hope for a favorable outcome over such a vast interval; and -- oh, by the way -- things are already sub-optimal.") Maybe I'm being liberal in interpretation?