stock market was up today...

#10,551
#10,551
MontyPython said:
Well, here's another problem... the market was overvalued to start with.

At the start of 2020, we were already in a bubble rivaling that of 2000.

Dude... just so I'm clear here, I'm in the market to make money. Normally I'm long. But now... no way.

Do yourself a favor, if you're substantially long, brush up on the Buffett Indicator (his personal favorite single indicator btw). It's one of many showing we're heading into rough seas.

View attachment 290120

This ain't my first rodeo. Been an active investor / occasional trader since the 80s. I got burned being long in 2000 and lost my ass. But then, I was short on the market in late 2008 / early 2009. Rode my puts on Chinese ETFs and American bank stocks to the bank.

I could be 100% wrong now, I admit it. But, my money is where my mouth is.

Holding / accumulating puts in RCL, CNK, RUTH, QQQ.
Click to expand...
The 2020 PE ratios aren’t the 2000 PE ratios.
 
#10,557
#10,557
Rasputin_Vol said:
Yes.
So what are you saying?
Click to expand...
The PE ratios in 2000 were much much higher than they are today. The Nasdaq was trading at close to 200 at the time.

We may be in a bubble, but comparing it to the levels seen in 2000 is pretty off base. We are no where near as “overvalued” based on earnings.
 
#10,558
#10,558
85SugarVol said:
The PE ratios in 2000 were much much higher than they are today. The Nasdaq was trading at close to 200 at the time.

We may be in a bubble, but comparing it to the levels seen in 2000 is pretty off base. We are no where near as “overvalued” based on earnings.
Click to expand...
As overvalued... but it is overvalued, you do admit.
 
#10,559
#10,559
Rasputin_Vol said:
As overvalued... but it is overvalued, you do admit.
Click to expand...
That is a matter of opinion, not a yes or no answer.

From a pure price to earnings perspective, no we are not way outside the historical averages of 10 to 20.

The S&P is currently around 23, slightly elevated.

In 2000, the Nasdaq was at 200
In 2008, the S&P was at 60

Are we “overvalued”? Depends on your perspective.
 
#10,560
#10,560
85SugarVol said:
That is a matter of opinion, not a yes or no answer.

From a pure price to earnings perspective, no we are not way outside the historical averages of 10 to 20.

The S&P is currently around 23, slightly elevated.

In 2000, the Nasdaq was at 200
In 2008, the S&P was at 60

Are we “overvalued”? Depends on your perspective.
Click to expand...
FAANG stocks?
 
#10,561
#10,561
85SugarVol said:
The PE ratios in 2000 were much much higher than they are today. The Nasdaq was trading at close to 200 at the time.

We may be in a bubble, but comparing it to the levels seen in 2000 is pretty off base. We are no where near as “overvalued” based on earnings.
Click to expand...


One thing I dont understand is the disconnect between the way people judge the market moving forward based on immediate numbers, bur ignoring things like last month 30 % of payments for residential properties were not made. Retail closing left and right. Airlines running by at 20 percent capacity.

The market treats all of this like its a short term speed bump. That just seems unrealistic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MontyPython
#10,562
#10,562
lawgator1 said:
One thing I dont understand is the disconnect between the way people judge the market moving forward based on immediate numbers, bur ignoring things like last month 30 % of payments for residential properties were not made. Retail closing left and right. Airlines running by at 20 percent capacity.

The market treats all of this like its a short term speed bump. That just seems unrealistic.
Click to expand...

See, you are starting to use your thinking cap. It simply doesn't make sense when you look at the terrain right now for the market to be behaving the way it has since April. The only logical and sensible conclusion you can reach is that the markets/Wall Street have nothing to do with the real world/Main Street.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MontyPython
#10,563
#10,563
Rasputin_Vol said:
See, you are starting to use your thinking cap. It simply doesn't make sense when you look at the terrain right now for the market to be behaving the way it has since April. The only logical and sensible conclusion you can reach is that the markets/Wall Street have nothing to do with the real world/Main Street.
Click to expand...
Duh.

What makes you think Wall St gives a fuq about Main St?
 
#10,565
#10,565
lawgator1 said:
One thing I dont understand is the disconnect between the way people judge the market moving forward based on immediate numbers, bur ignoring things like last month 30 % of payments for residential properties were not made. Retail closing left and right. Airlines running by at 20 percent capacity.

The market treats all of this like its a short term speed bump. That just seems unrealistic.
Click to expand...
The markets are not priced on “immediate numbers”. The markets are forward looking.

They’ve already priced in the current and expected bad news.

Did you miss the massive drop a few months back?
 
#10,567
#10,567
Rasputin_Vol said:
I never said it GAF. Your reading comprehension is terrible. I'm saying that there is no connection between the stock market going up and the health and stability of Main St.
Click to expand...
I know exactly what you’re saying. It’s not news. It’s cute you think it is.
 
#10,568
#10,568
85SugarVol said:
I know exactly what you’re saying. It’s not news. It’s cute you think it is.
Click to expand...
Its not me thinking that. You are the one making the connection between Wall Street and Main Street.

85SugarVol said:
The markets are not priced on “immediate numbers”. The markets are forward looking.

They’ve already priced in the current and expected bad news.

Did you miss the massive drop a few months back?
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: MontyPython
#10,570
#10,570
85SugarVol said:
From a pure price to earnings perspective, no we are not way outside the historical averages of 10 to 20.
Click to expand...
Some of them are.

EbbEBgdWoAMybMs
 
  • Like
Reactions: MontyPython and Rasputin_Vol
#10,573
#10,573
Velo Vol said:
Some of them are.

EbbEBgdWoAMybMs
Click to expand...

Most likely they have the same vision that the long term trend is much more work from home and rising demand for video. Therefore they are damaging current earnings (which are already under pressure from the C19 economy) by investing heavily now to be the major players for the long haul. Internet companies aren't facing a bleak future so investing in R&D and having bigger capital budgets now is a very good strategy if they have access to the funds to expand their businesses. These aren't rich valuations from sock puppet monkey dot coms. The valuations are from building out more fiber and establishing robust platforms of servers, routers, and other infrastructure. This is a real sea change in the making. Compare these multiples to what Amazon did building their business over 20 years rather than the fake dot coms that were trading banner ads with each other 20 years ago to inflate their recorded revenue when nobody understood their businesses. These are companies with actual track records. Plus there is less of a threat for these companies today from China dumping cheap hardware while getting away with IP theft. No doubt the 90 companies in that basket of internet stocks are royalty and not shady operations.
 
#10,574
#10,574
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Most likely they have the same vision that the long term trend is much more work from home and rising demand for video. Therefore they are damaging current earnings (which are already under pressure from the C19 economy) by investing heavily now to be the major players for the long haul. Internet companies aren't facing a bleak future so investing in R&D and having bigger capital budgets now is a very good strategy if they have access to the funds to expand their businesses. These aren't rich valuations from sock puppet monkey dot coms. The valuations are from building out more fiber and establishing robust platforms of servers, routers, and other infrastructure. This is a real sea change in the making. Compare these multiples to what Amazon did building their business over 20 years rather than the fake dot coms that were trading banner ads with each other 20 years ago to inflate their recorded revenue when nobody understood their businesses. These are companies with actual track records. Plus there is less of a threat for these companies today from China dumping cheap hardware while getting away with IP theft. No doubt the 90 companies in that basket of internet stocks are royalty and not shady operations.
Click to expand...
Of the FAANG stocks, only two actually engage in trading real products (Apple ans Amazon), and technically, only Apple actually makes real tangible products. How will future Chinese relationships affect Apple manufacturing and supply chains and Amazon's ability to sell products from those same supply chains? Do you foresee our relationship with China being better or worse looking into the near future? How is that reflected in their stock price?
 
#10,575
#10,575
Velo Vol said:
I don't know. I think this is where the graph was publicly posted. QNET?

Click to expand...

Date range seems convenient to me, if we’re looking to be comparative.

Need to see 2000 & 2008 for real perspective. Showing where we were in 2011 doesn’t tell us much imo.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top