I THINK THE MARKETS HAVE BOTTOMED!!!

[quote author="sad.machine" date=1248520711][quote author="awgee" date=1248501755][quote author="BondTrader" date=1248481771][quote author="roundcorners" date=1248480869]P~



I was just talking about that this morning! My bro in Taiwan thinks that the US Dollar will collapse next year, and there will be a run up in gold, possibly up to $15,000/oz; how likely is that? That will be crazy if it does?</blockquote>


Wow, that's some very bold prediction on Gold. Here is mine, I believe Gold price ($960/ounce) will meet Dow Jones index (9000) somewhere in the middle, 4000? 5000?</blockquote>
Historically it goes at 1:1, Dow to one ounce. Check it out.</blockquote>


One share of the Dow to one ounce of gold? When the dow was at 14,000...when was gold ever at 14,000 per ounce?</blockquote>


Not a constant ratio. At the peaks of gold bull markets.
 
Next week is going to be interesting. Over 200 billion in Treasuries being auctioned. A big green week will play havoc with interest rates. A big red week to drop us back under 9000 is going to spook a lot of people.
 
[quote author="BondTrader" date=1248489625]

The following attachments are from the daily market update I sent to some of my people on 6/5/2009.</blockquote>


This only shows that the trades went through JPM's brokerage, not that JPM bought the shares. Both JPM and MS have a big brokerage business with a lot of big clients. I would be more inclined to accept this as proof if the broker was GS, as they do a lot more proprietary trading than JPM/MS. There was an article in Barron's a couple of months ago that compared GS and MS and one big difference between them was that MS CEO is trying to move the company away from the proprietary trading business, whereas GS is focused on it, that's where they make the big money. But if the trade went through JPM, I think it's more likely that it was one of their clients. And the "every 5 sec" part means simply that someone placed a big order that had to be executed in small pieces to match the multiple sellers. I don't see anything unusual about that.



I appreciate your market insight and I find myself agreeing with your view, but these two tables do not prove anything.
 
[quote author="hedgehog" date=1248663433][quote author="BondTrader" date=1248489625]

The following attachments are from the daily market update I sent to some of my people on 6/5/2009.</blockquote>


This only shows that the trades went through JPM's brokerage, not that JPM bought the shares. Both JPM and MS have a big brokerage business with a lot of big clients. I would be more inclined to accept this as proof if the broker was GS, as they do a lot more proprietary trading than JPM/MS. There was an article in Barron's a couple of months ago that compared GS and MS and one big difference between them was that MS CEO is trying to move the company away from the proprietary trading business, whereas GS is focused on it, that's where they make the big money. But if the trade went through JPM, I think it's more likely that it was one of their clients. And the "every 5 sec" part means simply that someone placed a big order that had to be executed in small pieces to match the multiple sellers. I don't see anything unusual about that.



I appreciate your market insight and I find myself agreeing with your view, but these two tables do not prove anything.</blockquote>


You are right, part of those purchases are probably TARP banks buying shares for their clients and two pics don't prove much. First of all, I don't think it's even necessary to post anything about GS, we all should know by now GS controls the all country and can do whatever they want. Secondly, I'm just being lazy and don't feel the need to attach all those screen shots I had back in the days about all other TARP banks buying either stocks or futures, and what's the chance those end of day rallies are fueled all by their road kill clients jumping in right at the support level or right before market was about to collapse. Anyways, one should at least now realizes what they've been teaching us in college about "invisible hand" theory is totally bull.
 
<a href="http://blogs.moneycentral.msn.com/topstocks/archive/2009/07/29/is-the-housing-market-recovering.aspx">Is the housing market recovering?</a>





<strong>No</strong>





The bruised and battered housing market is finally showing signs of life.



In the last few days, we've learned that new and existing home sales rose 11% and 3.6% respectively in June compared to May. June housing starts are up 3.5% to 582,000 -- the highest reading since last November. And home prices, as reported by the Case-Shiller Home Price Index, actually increased in the three months to May. This breaks a string of 34 straight months of decline.



So is it time to pop the champagne, call up your real estate agent, and return to the heady house-flipping days of 2005? Not quite.



I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there are still a number of issues hanging over the housing market. First, interest rates look ready to rise as the U.S. government finances its massive budget deficit just as corporate and international borrowers look to bypass tightfisted banks and raise cash directly from the capital markets. This will push up historically low mortgage rates and squeeze affordability. Check out my post from Tuesday on this topic.



Two, according to Gluskin Sheff economist David Rosenberg, as the mortgage problem becomes upwardly mobile and moves from subprime borrowers to upper-crust prime borrowers, more expensive homes are being foreclosed upon. In his words:



"?an increasing number of high-end homes are now entering the foreclosure sales process, which are skewing these price indices higher after a prolonged period when the data were being pulled down by the preponderance of ever-cheaper subprime units hitting the auction market. As an aside, at the beginning of the year when prices were sliding more than 2% per month, half the sales were coming from foreclosures auction and many of these were low-end units; now the foreclosure share is down to 30% and more of these are higher-end homes seeing as prime-based mortgage default rates are now rising faster than subprime."



Three, a recent moratorium on foreclosures is ending. Banks, mindful of their damaged public image and hoping for great things from the Obama Administration's homeowner assistance plan, decided to take a wait-and-see approach. They waited. They saw. They were disappointed. And now, as unemployment continues to rise, banks are once again clamping down on delinquent homeowners. This promises to unleash another flood of distressed property onto the market just as buyers were beginning to overwhelm supply.



And finally, the reason everyone got excited about the home sales data earlier this week was because it indicated that supply was falling, boding well for further price stabilization. New home inventory plunged from 10.2 months' supply to a three-year low of 8.8 months -- down from a high of 12.4 months in March. Moreover, the number of units under construction fell to a 42-year low.



But there is a huge glut of vacant homes will mop up demand and dampen prices. Of the 130.8 million housing units in the United States, 18.7 million are vacant. At the current rate new households are being formed, which Rosenberg puts at 800,000 annually, it will take more than 20 years to work off this inventory.



Plus, there are a large number of homeowners, especially those with negative equity, that are eagerly waiting for an improved housing market to sell into. A recent Zillow survey found that one-third of all homeowners would be willing to sell their home if prices improved. This means there is a "shadow" inventory of between 11 million and 30 million homes. Add to this a rental vacancy rate of 10.6% or 6.6 million units (an all-time high) for apartments and rental homes, and it's clear we have far too many homes given the falling number of the employed.



Surely, this means we've yet to fully deflate the home price bubble even as prices have fallen 33% since the peak in 2006. In this context, the 30% rise in the S&P Homebuilders Index (XHB) looks like a false dawn.



Disclosure: The author does not own or control a position in any of the funds or companies mentioned.



Anthony Mirhaydari is a researcher for the Strategic Advantage investment newsletter. He can be contacted at anthony.mirhaydari@live.com.
 
<a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/foreclosures-percent-county-2513340-year-kyser">Foreclosures plummet; is housing's bottom near?</a>



<strong>No</strong>



Home foreclosures dropped dramatically and unexpectedly in Orange County this spring, with some economists speculating the most toxic home loans have worked their way through the system and the housing market may bottom by year end.



However, economists also caution that unemployment remains high and could climb into next year. As people lose their jobs, some also lose their homes.



Foreclosures plummeted in roughly 75 percent of ZIPs tracked by DataQuick in the three months ended in June vs. the same period a year ago. And some of the most heavily impacted central county areas saw declines of 35 to 65 percent.



Jack Kyser, founding economist of The Kyser Center for Economic Research in Los Angeles, said most of the "really rotten loans" have already been shaken out of the system.



For the past three months, foreclosures averaged 635 a month. Kyser doubts they will return to the peak 1,300 to 1,400 a month the county saw in summer 2008.



With housing sales up and prices moving sideways or falling at a slower pace, Kyser is optimistic the worst is over.



"By the end of the year, people will be saying we have hit bottom," he said.



Whatever the reasons, foreclosures plummeted across most of the county. Banks seized 42 properties in the second quarter in Santa Ana's 92701, which had the county's highest ratio of foreclosures to existing homes at 8 per 1,000. Yet the 42 foreclosures represented a 65 percent drop from a year ago.



More examples: Buena Park's 90620 saw foreclosures drop 57 percent to 29 homes seized. In Costa Mesa's 92627 they dropped 37 percent to 22, and in Ladera Ranch's 92694, foreclosures dropped 40 percent to 30.



Yet experts say government intervention has played a role in the declines. The question is whether foreclosures are being prevented or merely delayed by state and federal programs.



Kyser said foreclosures fell early this year partly because of anticipation over President Barack Obama's foreclosure prevention plan, which was announced in February and expanded in April to include second mortgages.



The Obama plan focuses on making mortgages more affordable for struggling homeowners by encouraging lenders and loan servicers to lower the interest rate. Servicers are eligible for cash payments for aiding homeowners.



But the program is having a limited impact. Back in February, Obama administration officials said they hoped to help up to 4 million homeowners. On Tuesday, they said just 200,000 trial loan modifications are under way.



Critics have said the plan does not address the central issue that too many borrowers owe more than their home is worth, a big psychological barrier to making payments. Also, it's too complicated, doesn't go far enough to tackle second mortgages, and doesn't free servicers from contracts that limit the modifications they can do, critics say.



Government officials met with heads of companies last week to discuss how to improve results. The Administration's goal now is to reach half a million trial modifications begun by November 1.



To nudge lenders and servicers, the administration will begin publicly reporting how many loan modifications companies are doing. The first report will be released by August 4.



In any case, with the plan something of a disappointment, foreclosures will trend back up in Orange County, economist Kyser said. While he doesn't expect them to return to highs of last summer, they might return to the range of 1,000 per month or so. That's above the peak of 674 foreclosures in October 1996, during the housing downturn of the '90s.



Mark Boud, owner of Real Estate Economics in Irvine, also predicts foreclosures will rise to the range of 1,000 per month ? and that may be the total for July. But he sees them flat and then dipping slowly in later months.



He said foreclosures fell in spring partly as a residual impact from a state law enacted in September 2008. The law requires lenders to attempt to talk to borrowers at least 30 days before filing a notice of default and discuss options to avoid foreclosure. It affects loans made at the tail end of the housing boom.



When the rule began, NODs dropped immediately but rebounded within three months. Foreclosures also dropped and rebounded somewhat by January. But they trended downward for the next three months, bottoming at 482 in April, when Obama announced the expansion of his foreclosure relief effort. Since then they have begun climbing again, hitting 833 in June.



Boud dismisses talk of a second wave of foreclosures coming from the end of low introductory payments on adjustable-rate mortgages. Like economist Kyser, Boud says those most likely to default have already done it, including speculators who bet on multiple properties.



He said the bottom for housing sales in Orange County was last year and for prices was in January. He said prices will "ride the bottom" this year, rise perhaps 1 percent next year and maybe 2.5 percent in 2011.



"We think 2011 will be a pretty healthy year," Boud said.



Boud may be right for the county as a whole, but the county's pricier cities are still showing signs of trouble, with slower sales and rising foreclosures.



Despite the Obama plan and all the political pressure on lenders to do loan modifications, foreclosures still rose in 14 ZIPs in the second quarter. These were some of the priciest ZIPs in the county, including ones in Yorba Linda, Corona Del Mar, Huntington Beach, Irvine, San Clemente, and Trabuco Canyon.



To be sure the totals were sometimes small: foreclosures in Corona Del Mar's 92625 rose 300 percent but only totaled 4 properties.



There is one final cloud over the county's housing recovery: an unemployment rate that hit 9.2 percent in June. Economist Kyser expects the rate to hit 9.7 percent next year.



While that's a big number, both Kyser and Boud say the lack of new construction combined with an increase in sales will be the deciding factors for housing. Boud said some people who lose their jobs will find a way to hold onto their homes.



"We got rid of most of the speculators, investors and unqualified buyers," Boud said. "Now we are cutting into the bone"



Contact the writer: 714-796-6726 or mapadilla@ocregister.com
 
I know, I know...most think me crazy when I post a new postion but I am officially going long the dollar again. UUP $23.11.
 
Interesting article on "Shadow" inventory.



<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Housing/idUSTRE56U5YZ20090731?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true">"Shadow" inventory lurks over U.S. housing recovery </a>(Reuters)



Note: "Shadow" here refers to the pent up supply and not bank owned shadow inventory.
 
[quote author="morekaos" date=1249345544]I know, I know...most think me crazy when I post a new postion but I am officially going long the dollar again. UUP $23.11.</blockquote>


If you are right, which by your record you usually are, then just how screwed will <a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/08/andy-xie-china-has-become-a-giant-ponzi-scheme/">China be with a strong dollar</a>?



<em>Many would argue that China isn?t experiencing a bubble. The high asset prices just reflect China?s high growth potential. One can never make an ironclad case to pin down an asset boom as a bubble. An element of judgment based on experience is inevitable when one calls a market boom a bubble. I have had a reasonably good record at calling bubbles in the past. I wrote my doctoral thesis arguing that Japan was a bubble in late 1980s, a long report at the World Bank in earl 1990s arguing that Southeast Asia was a bubble, research notes at Morgan Stanley in 1999 calling dotcom boom a bubble, and numerous research notes from 2003 onwards arguing that the US property market was a bubble. On the other hand I have never called something a bubble that turned out not to be a bubble.



I want to make myself perfectly clear on China?s asset markets today. They are a big bubble. Its bursting will bring very bad consequences for the country. However, as so many are enjoying what?s going on, I don?t think the government would act preemptively to eliminate the bubble. Indeed, many, if not the majority, in the policy circle argue that the bubble is good for reviving the economy. This sort of thinking seems to work because the dollar is weak, as the bubble can be revived with more liquidity when it cools off. When the dollar revives, China?s asset markets and, probably, the economy would have a hard landing. I hope that the people who advocate the benefits of the bubble would stand up then to accept the responsibilities for the damages.



The most basic approach in studying bubbles is to look at valuation. For property the most important measures are price to income ratio and rental yield. China?s average price per square meter nationwide is quite close to the average in the US. The US?s per capita income is seven times China?s urban per capita income. The nationwide average price is about three months of salary per square meter, probably the highest in the world. As far as I can tell, a lot of properties can?t be rented out at all. Those that can bring in 3% yield, barely compensating for depreciation. The average rental yield, if one including those that can?t be rented out, is probably negligible. China?s property price doesn?t make sense from affordability or yield perspective. Some argue that China?s property is always like this: appreciation is the return. This is not true. The property market dropped dramatically from 1995-2001 during a strong dollar period.



A special angle in China?s property bubble is its role in local government finance. As land sales and taxes from property sales account for a big portion of local government revenues, they have powerful incentives to pump up the property market. Land sales are often carefully managed to spike up expectation. For example, those who bid extraordinarily high prices for land are laurelled as land kings. Lately, the land kings are often state-owned enterprises. When state-owned enterprises borrow from state owned band and give the money to local governments at land auctions, why should the prices be meaningful? The money circulates within the big government pocket. Tomorrow?s non-performing loans, if land prices collapse, are just today?s fiscal revenues. If private developers follow the SoEs to chase the skyrocketing land market, they could be committing suicide.</em>
 
<em>The stock market is in a final frenzy again. The most ignorant retail investors are being sucked in by the rising momentum. They again dream of getting rich overnight. As in the past, retail investors usually lose, especially like the ones jumping in now. The final frenzy usually doesn?t last. The turning points in China are often related to political calendar. Retail investors hold the popular belief that the government won?t let the market drop before October 1, the 60th anniversary of the PRC. Last time it was the 17th Party Congress in October 2007. This sort of belief is self-fulfilling in the short term. The market tends to roll over around the time. If the past is of meaningful guidance, this wave will taper off before October.



The idea that the government wouldn?t let the market drop is rooted in Chinese market psychology. In financial jargon, it is called a put option. During the Greenspan era, financial markets believed that he would always bail out markets in a crisis, which was the so-called Greenspan put. <strong>The belief in China should be called the Panda put</strong>. However, in reality, the government couldn?t reverse the market trend when it turns. Chinese stock market has big ups and downs in the past, which shows the government?s inability to stop the market from falling. Nevertheless, this imaginary put option remains deeply rooted in popular psychology.



Many policy thinkers believe that bubbles are not that harmful. One popular theory is that in a bubble money is passed from one person to another and, as long as it remains in China, no permanent harms can be done. Hence, if people are happy now and unhappy tomorrow, they just cancel each other. They should look at Japan and Hong Kong to see how much damage a bubble can do even without leaking money out of a country.



In a bubble resources are diverted to bubble making activities. The resources will be permanently wasted. For example, businessmen in China are reluctant to focus on real economic activities and are devoting time and energy to market speculation. It means that China wouldn?t have many globally competitive companies in the future. Even though China has had three decades of high growth, few companies are globally competitive. The serial bubble making in the Chinese economy may be the reason.



A generation of young people is not interested in real jobs and is addicted to stock market speculation. They see their holdings changing in value in a day more than their monthly salary and have the illusion that they would make a lot of money in the market. Of course, most of them will lose everything and may take extreme actions afterwards. The social consequences could be quite serious.



A property bubble usually leads to overbuilding. The empty buildings represent permanent losses. Most people would laugh at such a possibility in China. After all, 1.3 billion would need unlimited properties. The reality is quite different. China?s urban living space is 28 square meters per person, quite high by international standard. China?s urbanization is about 50%. It could rise to 70-75%. Afterwards the rural population would decline on its own due to its high average age. So China?s urban population may rise by another 300 million people. If we assume they all can afford property (a laughable notion at today?s price), Chinese cities may need an additional 8.4 billion square meters. China?s work-in-progress is over 2 billion square meters. There is enough land out there for another 2. The construction industry has production capacity of about 1.5 billion square meters per annum. Absolute oversupply, i.e., there aren?t enough people for all the buildings, could happen quite soon. When it happens, the consequences are quite severe. Property prices could drop like Japan has experienced in the past two decades, which would destroy the banking system.



The most serious damage that a property bubble inflicts is in changing demographics. High property prices bring down birth rates. When property prices decline after a bubble bursts, the low birth rate culture cannot be changed. Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan all went through property bubbles during their development. Their birth rates dropped during the bubbles and didn?t recover afterwards despite government providing incentives. China?s one-child policy alone will lead to a demographic catastrophe in two decades. The property bubble makes the trend irreversible: when the government abandons the one-child policy, there wouldn?t be meaningful impact on birth rate. Within two decades Chinese population could be very old and declining. Of course, property prices would be very low and declining also.



In addition to net losses the redistribution aspect of a bubble has serious social consequences too. In the stock market bubble most households lose and a few win big. China?s wealth inequality is already very high. The bubbles make it worse. A sizable or even the majority of China?s population may not have meaningful wealth even after China?s urbanization is complete. It will lead to an unstable society. A market economy is stable and efficient when the majority has meaningful wealth and, hence, has a stake in the system.



In summary, the market frenzy now won?t last long. The correction may happen in the fourth quarter. There could be another wave of frenzy next year as China can still release more liquidity. When the dollar recovers, possibly in 2012, China?s property and stock market could experience collapses like during the Asian Financial Crisis.</em>
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1249406064]<em>In summary, the market frenzy now won?t last long. The correction may happen in the fourth quarter. There could be another wave of frenzy next year as China can still release more liquidity. When the dollar recovers, possibly in 2012, China?s property and stock market could experience collapses like during the Asian Financial Crisis.</em></blockquote>


That would be superbad news for my almonds, which come into production next year. A double whammy - strong dollar and a colapse in China.
 
[quote author="morekaos" date=1249345544]I know, I know...most think me crazy when I post a new postion but I am officially going long the dollar again. UUP $23.11.</blockquote>


i dont. deflation is actually what is going to come. that is what is going to bring real estate and gold to its knees in the coming years.
 
<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20603037&sid=aXsz8TNju_Zg">Tudor Investment Calls Stock Gain a Bear-Market Rally</a>



<em> Aug. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Tudor Investment Corp., the $10.8 billion hedge-fund firm run by Paul Tudor Jones, said equity markets could decline later this year, creating buying opportunities.



Slowing growth in China and the return of front-page stories on swine flu may be ?further catalysts for global equity markets to pause in September,? the Greenwich, Connecticut-based firm said in an Aug. 3 client letter, a copy of which was obtained by Bloomberg News.



Tudor said the 47 percent gain in the Standard & Poor?s 500 Index of the largest U.S. companies since March 9, when it fell to a 12-year low, is a ?bear-market rally.? The index topped 1,000 for the first time in nine months this week after companies reported better-than-expected profits.



?Impressive counter-trend rallies are a feature, not an oddity, of secular bear markets,? Tudor said. ?We are not inclined to aggressively chase the market here. Many doubts remain about the sustainability of this recovery, most prominently the weakness of household income growth.?



Tudor?s biggest hedge fund, the $8.9 billion Tudor BVI, gained 10 percent this year through July after losing 4.5 percent in 2008. Hedge funds on average lost a record 19 percent last year, according to Chicago-based Hedge Fund Research Inc.



The firm said that a year-end gain in stocks may be another bear market rally with equities falling in 2010.



Steve Bruce, a spokesman for Tudor, declined to comment on the letter.



Dollar



Tudor said it expects the U.S. dollar to fall by the end of the year as money managers diversify their currency reserves. The dollar advanced 0.4 percent to $1.4341 per euro after touching $1.4447 yesterday, the weakest level since Dec. 18.



?Reserve accumulation and diversification trends will be persistent and mutually reinforcing the direction of the U.S. dollar,? Tudor said.



Tudor was ?intrigued? by Japan, saying that a loss in lower-house elections by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party could lead to increased investments in the country by the end of the year, according to the letter.



The firm received $1.3 billion in new investments from March to July and reinvestments of $287 million from its $2.26 billion Legacy fund, created last year to hold hard-to-sell holdings.



Tudor last month opened the first managed account linked to its Tudor Tensor futures strategy, overseen by Steve Evans. The firm won?t offer managed accounts, in which clients hold their money separately and are allowed to make withdrawals at will, linked to its flagship fund, according to the letter. </em>
 
Is the Chinese government really going to let their stock market bubble burst before October? It's looking like it's starting to head down. If China pops, look out below.
 
[quote author="Oxtail" date=1249875888]Is the Chinese government really going to let their stock market bubble burst before October? It's looking like it's starting to head down. If China pops, look out below.</blockquote>


You make it sound like the Chinese government actually had that much control over their stock market, they would love to have you believe so. Wonder what was the government doing when the shanghai index went from 6000-1800.
 
[quote author="BondTrader" date=1249941992][quote author="Oxtail" date=1249875888]Is the Chinese government really going to let their stock market bubble burst before October? It's looking like it's starting to head down. If China pops, look out below.</blockquote>


You make it sound like the Chinese government actually had that much control over their stock market, they would love to have you believe so. Wonder what was the government doing when the shanghai index went from 6000-1800.</blockquote>


Trying to catch their breath?
 
China's stock market down 10% in the last week. You think the people running our own stock market bubble are getting nervous yet?
 
[quote author="Oxtail" date=1250089068]China's stock market down 10% in the last week. You think the people running our own stock market bubble are getting nervous yet?</blockquote>


Nope
 
Back
Top