29 Consecutive Equity Mutual Fund Outflows

zerohedge.com ^ | 11/24/2010 | Tyler Durden

[The Comedian]

Any minute now, any minute, we promise, investors will regain all their confidence in this non-charade of a market which reflects all the fundamental realities of the economy. Just not yet: last week saw the 29th consecutive outflow from domestic mutual fund flows, which incidentally surged to $2.8 billion from the $677 million outflow the week prior.

Sarcasm aside, nobody except for CNBC's Fast Money is putting money in the market. Well, so are the Primary Dealers, and to an extend the Hedge Funds. Although now that the letter no longer have access to pervasive insider info courtesy of expert network, it may be up to just the Fed, HFT and the 18 primary dealers to take the Dow to 36,000. After all, there is a wealth effect to be created.

[Quix]

Is that an organization or a screen name?

You have a link?

[Quix]

I’m just convinced that we have enough FREEPERS in positions suitable for monitoring such movements . . . whether at airports or working for such traitors or whatever.

If they would devise a safe rating scale to signal various sorts of movements . . . including

moving house or leaving the continent in a definitive way . . . when great percentages of them did . . . should be some sort of signal of something interesting, I’d think.

[houeto]

It is an organization.

http://alarmandmuster.com/

[Quix]

thx thx.

[grey_whiskers]

Part of the sales are due to concerns over income tax changes with 2011.

But not all.

...oh, and Happy Thanksgiving.

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

and we learned from statistics that the bigger the population the more likely that grabbing a single point will yield an abnormal data-point. So the more/bigger our economy the more likely that a single random trade will not be abnormal.

These two sentences appear to contradict one another at first reading. Can you clarify?

...oh, and Happy Thanksgiving.

Cheers!

[OneWingedShark]

>>and we learned from statistics that the bigger the population the more likely that grabbing a single point will yield
>>an abnormal data-point. So the more/bigger our economy the more likely that a single random trade will not be abnormal.
>
>These two sentences appear to contradict one another at first reading. Can you clarify?
>...oh, and Happy Thanksgiving.
>
>Cheers!

Oh, that first one should be “less likely” rather than “more likely.” Good catch.