Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Market WrapUp (11-21-03)
Financial Sense Online ^ | 11/21/03 | Tim W. Wood

Posted on 11/21/2003 4:18:18 PM PST by arete

Home  l  Broadcast  l  Market Monitor  l  Top 10  l  Storm Watch  l  Sitemap  l  About Us

Today's WrapUp by Tim W. Wood 11.21.2003  Mon   Tue   Wed   Thu   Fri   Archive

THE DOW REPORT
"The Setup Continues"

A lot of technical damage has been done this week. The DJIA lost 140.15 points for the week closing the week at 9,628.53. The DJTA lost 82.32 points for the week closing the week at 2,845.32. It is not the number of points lost this week that is so negative. It is the fact that my intermediate term indicators have turned bearish. However, in spite of the down turn of these intermediate indicators, price has continued to hold up rather well given the technical weakness that has now surfaced. Also, the Dow Industrials have managed to remain above their 50% level at 9,504.64. The Dow Transports have now closed below their 50% level at 2,862.85. The short-term indicators are getting pretty over sold and we are moving into the timing window for a short term low. Therefore, we should expect to see a short term low in the market in the next few days. It is certainly due.  Any rally that materializes from this short term low is very important. Should any such rally prove to be a failure it could be real trouble for the market. 


It also looks to me as if the gold stocks are now also due a correction. This is not to bash the gold stocks. It is simply to say that everything ebbs and flows and this certainly includes the gold stocks. This sector has had a good run and my cycles work tells me that a correction is on the horizon. Please understand that I am bringing this up as a warning. What I mean by this is that so far, I have not actually seen any significant technical deterioration nor has the short or long term trend changed. Actually, the price action of the last few weeks has served to confirm the longer term bullish structure of the gold market. It is the shorter term work that is now suggesting to me that a correction in this sector is coming due in the not too distant future. It is my fear that any serious decline in the stock market could also bring the gold stock down as well. After all, we must not forget, they are stocks too.

I now want to share a section from the book Manias, Panics, and Crashes by Charles P. Kindleberger. In this book Mr. Kindleberger examines the history of financial crises. I found this section “The Model” to be particularly fitting. It truly seems that the more things change the more they remain the same. I hope you enjoy it.

Anatomy of a Typical Crisis
The Model

We start with the model of the late Hyman Minsky, a man with a reputation among monetary theorists for being particularly pessimistic, even lugubrious, in his emphasis on the fragility of the monetary system and its propensity to disaster. Although Minsky was a monetary theorist rather than an economic historian, his model lends itself effectively to the interpretation of economic and financial history. Indeed, in its emphasis on the instability of the credit system, it is a lineal descendant of a model, set out with personal variations, by a host of classical economists including John Stuart Mill, Alfred Marshall, Knut Wicksell, and Irving Fisher. Like Fisher, Minsky attached great importance to the role of debt structures in causing financial difficulties, and especially debt contracted to leverage the acquisition of speculative assets for subsequent resale.

According to Minsky, events leading up to a crisis start with a “displacement,” some exogenous, outside shock to the macroeconomic system. The nature of this displacement varies from one speculative boom to another. It may be the outbreak or end of a war, a bumper harvest or crop failure, the widespread adoption of an invention with pervasive effects---canals, railroads, the automobile---some political event or surprising financial success, or debt conversion that precipitously lowers interest rates. An unanticipated change of monetary policy might constitute such a displacement and some economists who think markets have it right and governments wrong blame “policy-switching” for some financial instability. But whatever the source of the displacement, if it is sufficiently large and pervasive, it will alter the economic outlook by changing profit opportunities in at least one important sector of the economy. Displacement brings opportunities for profit in some new or existing lines and closes out others. As a result, business firms and individuals with savings or credit seek to take advantage of the former and retreat from the latter. If the new opportunities dominate those that lose, investment and production pick up. A boom is under way.

In Minsky’s model, the boom is fed by an expansion of bank credit that enlarges the total money supply. Banks typically can expand money, whether by the issue of bank’s notes under earlier institutional arrangements or by lending in the form of addictions to bank deposits. Bank credit is, or at least has been, notoriously unstable, and the Minsky model rests squarely on that fact. This feature of the Minsky model is incorporated in what follows, but we go further. Before banks had evolved, and afterward, additional means of payment to fuel a speculative mania were available in the virtually infinitely expansible nature of personal credit. For a given banking system at a given time, monetary means of payment may be expanded not only within the existing system of banks but also by the formation of new banks, the development of new credit instruments, and the expansion of personal credit outside of banks. Crucial questions of policy turn on how to control all these avenues of monetary expansion. But even if the instability of old and potential new banks were corrected, instability of personal credit would remain to provide means of payment to finance the boom, given a sufficiently throughgoing stimulus.

Let us assume, then, that the urge to speculate is present and transmuted into effective demand for goods or financial assets. After a time, increased demand presses against the capacity to produce goods or the supply of existing financial assets. Prices increase, giving rise to new profit opportunities and attracting still further firms and investors. Positive feedback develops, as new investment leads to increases in income that stimulate further investment and further income increases. At this stage we may well get what Minsky called “euphoria.”  Speculation for price increases is added to investment for production and sale. If this process builds up, the result is often, though not inevitably, what Adam Smith and his contemporaries called “overtrading.”

Now, overtrading is by no means a clear concept. It may involve pure speculation for a price rise, an overestimate of prospective returns, or excessive “gearing.” Pure speculation, of course involves buying for resale rather than use in the case of commodities or for resale rather than income in the case of financial assets. Overestimation of profits comes from euphoria, affects firms engaged in the production and distributive processes, and requires no explanation. Excessive gearing arises from cash requirements that are low relative both to the prevailing price of a good or asset and to possible changes in its price. It means buying on margin, or by installments, under circumstances in which one can sell the asset and transfer with it the obligation to make future payments. As firms or households see others making profits from speculative purchases and resales, they tend to follow: “Monkey see, monkey do.” In my talks about financial crisis over the last decades, I have polished one line that always gets a nervous laugh: “There is nothing so disturbing to one’s well-being and judgment as to see a friend get rich. When the number of firms and households indulging in these practices grows large, bringing in segments of the population that are normally aloof from such ventures, speculation for profit leads away from normal, rational behavior to what has been described as “manias” or “bubbles.” The word mania emphasizes the irrationality; bubble foreshadows the bursting. In the technical language of some economists, a bubble is any deviation from “fundamentals,” whether up or down, leading to the possibility and even the reality of negative bubbles, which rather gets away from the thrust of the metaphor.  More often small price variations about fundamental values (as prices) are called “noise.” In this book, a bubble is an upward price movement over an extended range that then implodes. An extended negative bubble is a crash.

As we shall see in the next chapter the object of speculation may vary widely from one mania or bubble to the next.  It may involve primary products, especially those imported from afar (where the exact conditions of supply and demand are not known in detail), or goods manufactured for export to distant markets, domestic and foreign securities of various kinds, contracts to buy or sell goods or securities, land in the country or city, houses, office buildings, shopping centers, condominiums, foreign exchange. At a late stage, speculation tends to detach itself from really valuable objects and turn to delusive ones. A larger and larger group of people seeks to become rich without a real understanding of the processes involved. Not surprisingly, swindlers and catchpenny schemes flourish.

Although Minsky’s model is limited to single country, overtrading has historically tended to spread from one country to another. The conduits are many. Internationally traded commodities and assets that go up in price in one market will rise in others through arbitrage. The foreign-trade multiplier communicates income changes in a given country to others through increased or decreased imports. Capital flows constitute a third link. Money flows of gold, silver (under gold standard or bimetallism), or foreign exchange are a fourth. And there are purely psychological connections, as when investor euphoria or pessimism in one country infects investors in others.  The declines in prices on October 24 and 29, 1929, and October 19, 1987, were practically instantaneous in all financial markets (except Japan), far faster than can be accounted for by arbitrage, income changes, capital flows, or money movements.

Observe with respect the money movements that in an ideal world, a gain of specie for one country would be matched by a corresponding loss for another, and the resulting expansion in the first case would be offset by the contraction in the second. In the real world, however, while the boom in the first country may gain speed from the increase in the supply of reserves, or “high-powered money,” it may also rise in the second, despite the loss in monetary reserves, as investors respond to rising prices and profits abroad by joining in the speculative chase. In other words, the potential contraction from the shrinkage on the monetary side may be overwhelmed by the increase in speculative interest and the rise in demand. For the two countries together, in any event, the credit system is stretched tighter.

As the speculative boom continues, interest rates, velocity of circulation, and prices all continue to mount. At some stage, a few insiders decide to take their profits and sell out. At the top of the market there is hesitation, as new recruits to speculation are balanced by insiders who withdraw. Prices begin to level off. There may then ensue an uneasy period of “financial distress.” The term comes from corporate finance, where a firm is said to be in financial distress when it must contemplate the possibility, perhaps only a remote one, that it will not be able to meet its liabilities. For an economy as a whole, the equivalent is the awareness on the part of a considerable segment of the speculating community that a rush for liquidity---to get out of other assets and into money---may develop, with disastrous consequences for the prices of goods and securities, and leaving some speculative borrowers unable to pay off their loans. As distress persists, speculators realize, gradually or suddenly, that the market cannot go higher. It is time to withdraw. The race out of real or long-term financial assets and into money may turn into a stampede.

The specific signal that precipitates the crisis may be the failure of a bank or firm stretched too tight, the revelation of a swindle or defalcation by someone who sought to escape distress by dishonest means, or a fall in the price of the primary object of speculation as it, at first alone, is seen to be overpriced. In any case, the rush is on. Prices decline. Bankruptcies increase. Liquidation sometimes is orderly but may degenerate into panic as the realization spreads that there is only so much money, not enough to enable everyone to sell out at the top. The word for this state---again, not from Minsky---is revulsion. Revulsion against commodities or securities leads banks to cease lending on the collateral of such assets.  In the early nineteenth century this condition was known as discredit. Overtrading, revulsion, discredit—all these terms have a musty, old-fashion flavor. They are imprecise, but they do convey a graphic picture.

Revulsion and discredit may go so far as to lead to panic (or as the Germans put it, Torschlusspanik. “door-shut-panic”), with people crowding to get through the door before it slams shut. The panic feeds on itself, as did the speculation, until one or more of three things happen: (1) prices fall so low that people are again tempted to move back into less liquid assets; (2) trade is cut off by setting limits on price declines, shutting down exchanges, or otherwise closing trading; or (3) a lender of last resort succeeds in convincing the market that money will be made available in sufficient volume to meet the demand for cash. Confidence may be restored even if a large volume of money is not issued against other assets; the mere knowledge that one can get money is frequently sufficient to moderate or eliminate the desire.

Whether there should be a lender of last resort is a matter of some debate. Those who oppose the function argue that it encourages speculation in the first place. Supporters worry more about the current crisis than about forestalling some future one. There is also a question of the place for an international lender of last resort. In domestic crises, government or the central bank (when there is one) has responsibility. At the international level, there is neither a world government nor any world bank adequately equipped to serve as a lender of last resort, although some would contend that the International Monetary Fund since Bretton Woods in 1944 is capable of discharging the role.

Dilemmas, debates, doubts, questions abound. We shall have more to say about these questions later on.”

Tim W. Wood

Copyright © 2003 All rights reserved.

Tim W. Wood, CPA
Editor, Cycles News & Views
www.cyclesman.com

Expert Page
Editorials
Commentary Archive
The Dow Report on FS Newshour

Home  l  Broadcast  l  Market Monitor  l  Storm Watch  l  Sitemap  l  About Us  l  Contact Us

Send this site to a friend! (click here)

Copyright ©  James J. Puplava  Financial Sense™ is a Registered Trademark
P. O.  Box 503147 San Diego, CA 92150-3147 USA  858.487.3939
Disclaimer


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: 1bircherpatsienutzos; 1buymygold; 1preciousroy; 1tellmelies; bonds; boom; bubble; bust; crash; credit; currency; debt; deflation; depression; dollar; economy; fed; fraud; gold; inflation; investing; jobs; money; recession; silver; stockmarket
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last
As firms or households see others making profits from speculative purchases and resales, they tend to follow: “Monkey see, monkey do.” In my talks about financial crisis over the last decades, I have polished one line that always gets a nervous laugh: “There is nothing so disturbing to one’s well-being and judgment as to see a friend get rich. When the number of firms and households indulging in these practices grows large, bringing in segments of the population that are normally aloof from such ventures, speculation for profit leads away from normal, rational behavior to what has been described as “manias” or “bubbles.” The word mania emphasizes the irrationality; bubble foreshadows the bursting. In the technical language of some economists, a bubble is any deviation from “fundamentals,” whether up or down, leading to the possibility and even the reality of negative bubbles, which rather gets away from the thrust of the metaphor. More often small price variations about fundamental values (as prices) are called “noise.” In this book, a bubble is an upward price movement over an extended range that then implodes. An extended negative bubble is a crash.

So what's not to like about bubble economics?

I am the Maestro.

Richard W.

1 posted on 11/21/2003 4:18:19 PM PST by arete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tauzero; kezekiel; ChadGore; Harley - Mississippi; Dukie; Matchett-PI; Moonman62; Free Vulcan; ...
Market WrapUp is Delivered!

The Roger Arnold Show

Richard W.

2 posted on 11/21/2003 4:20:10 PM PST by arete (Merrily marching over the economic cliff for the greater good and Ken Lay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arete
Anyone got any advice about Amazon? Like an idiot I bought 90 shares last week at 54.63 it`s now at 48.58 This thing has been in a freefall ever since I bought it.. I`m new to stocks, and thought I`d give it a shot for the first time last week and so far I`m down $540. Some people have told me to sell, some others said wait, all I know is this thing went down today again and the market wasn`t that bad. I really don`t want to sell because in my income, $540 is a good chunk of change, but on the other hand so is the $4916 I paid for those 90 shares which I`m beginning to think I will lose completely the way this thing is going. What would you do? Beat up Jeff Bezos?
3 posted on 11/21/2003 4:33:10 PM PST by metalboy (I`m still waiting for the mass protests against Al Qaida and Saddam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: metalboy
If you've lost more than you feel comfortable with, or if you no longer believe in the position, then sell. Treat the loss as a sunk cost, and move on. Don't throw good money after bad (which is what you're doing if you hang on.)

4 posted on 11/21/2003 4:43:52 PM PST by sourcery (This is your country. This is your country under socialism. Any questions? Just say no to Socialism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: arete
Did Roger say he would be discussing the Barrick statement that they are no longer committed to selling bullion on forward markets (hedging)?
5 posted on 11/21/2003 4:53:13 PM PST by ItsMyVoteDammit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: metalboy
I'm with sourcery. Sell it. Sometime in the future you'll probably be able to buy it back at about $20.

Richard W.

6 posted on 11/21/2003 4:56:39 PM PST by arete (Merrily marching over the economic cliff for the greater good and Ken Lay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: metalboy
AMZN has broken the 50 Day Moving Average line. It is currrently sitting right on the 100 day MA. It also has lots of support between $45 and $47. If I owned it, having lived thru the recent drubbing, I'd wait for a "dead cat bounce" rally to sell it.
7 posted on 11/21/2003 4:56:45 PM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: metalboy
I was surprised to find AMZN's fundamentals weren't as horrifying as I expected.

Still, they don't have any earnings. It does look like they might be on the cusp of becoming profitable.

I suspect you purchased this stock because of its previous behavior in the 90's bubble and because of its excellent performance over the last year.

Their balance sheet makes my head hurt. Book value is, uh, -2.89 per share but they do have a quarter billion in cash flow.

You're speculating, not investing. No shame in that...but tell me why you think this stock should increase in value?

8 posted on 11/21/2003 5:04:16 PM PST by AdamSelene235 (I always shoot for the moon......sometimes I hit London.- Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: metalboy
Anyone got any advice about Amazon?

I think the future's bright for Amazon if they move to being the backend order fulfilment powerhouse that they could be. I did a little poking around with their "Amazon Web Services" program and its pretty neat: you setup a store front and send all your customers orders to Amazon to process.

The initial pilot was for people to make up websites that sold books. You didn't have to carry the books in stock or anything like that. So really you're just an Amazon VAR.

However if they can parlay this into more industries (for example, their Target and Toys R Us websites) then they have a lot of growth potential.

But my personal feeling is that I would avoid any stocks right now as I'm uncertain about their future. And as you found out, you can quickly loose $500. Granted you could of made $500 but was that worth the anxiety that you experienced? You have to factor in your mental health with the stock market.
9 posted on 11/21/2003 5:05:41 PM PST by lelio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sourcery; AdamSelene235
I have been keeping an eye on Fannie. Looks like da boyz jammed it up on the open two days in a row and then let it sell off on both days. Either they wanted to catch some traction on a short covering rally, or more than likely, the insiders and traders were jamming it and then distributing to a new set of bagholders between 70 and 71. What do you think?

Richard W.

10 posted on 11/21/2003 5:09:41 PM PST by arete (Merrily marching over the economic cliff for the greater good and Ken Lay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lelio
You have to factor in your mental health with the stock market.

Yeah, no kidding. LOL

Richard W.

11 posted on 11/21/2003 5:12:09 PM PST by arete (Merrily marching over the economic cliff for the greater good and Ken Lay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ItsMyVoteDammit
Did Roger say he would be discussing the Barrick statement

Yeah, he got sidetracked as he so often does and said that he would be talking about it on his Sunday morning show. I'm going to have to listen to the broadcast again cause I didn't catch all of it.

Richard W.

12 posted on 11/21/2003 5:16:58 PM PST by arete (Merrily marching over the economic cliff for the greater good and Ken Lay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: arete
The specialist spiked it {and shorted} at the opening {255,700} and covered at the low the close {253,500} which, oh-by-the-way, happened to be near the low for the day. Those guys are beauts, heh?
13 posted on 11/21/2003 5:24:22 PM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: metalboy
When I was a beginner this is the strategy I used, It sure worked well for me.

I used to add cash into this program once a month.

$0.95 cents went into medium risk stocks. Five cents of every dollar invested in high risk, 5%. When you hit the jackpot on a high risk investment, take that money and use 50% of it in a couple of different high risk investments. The other 50% goes into low/medium risk investments.

That way you put up the initial 5%, then the rest of your life you are playing with their money. Long term the low/medium funds keep building and eventually you'll change tax brackets.

The high risk stuff did well some months and others I lost it all. I used sell orders generally around 75% of the price because they were very fluctual. The medium stocks had a sell order about 15% and the low had theirs about 5%.

More than once I found myself with 30 different stocks. When I became aware of this I would sell off all the low performers and keep 12 or 15.

Depending on what type of stock it was would determine what type it went back into. High/low or medium risk.

No promises but it worked for me. Good luck.

14 posted on 11/21/2003 5:44:57 PM PST by B4Ranch (Wave your flag, dont waive your rights!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
The specialist spiked it {and shorted} at the opening {255,700} and covered at the low the close {253,500} which, oh-by-the-way, happened to be near the low for the day. Those guys are beauts, heh?

Well, if that were true, they could just do that over and over and over. More than likely the specialist spiked it up for someone else (big seller) who wanted out at a higher price -- then after the spike, he probably shorted it knowing what was coming next. His payoff is the profit from the short.

Richard W.

15 posted on 11/21/2003 6:02:17 PM PST by arete (Merrily marching over the economic cliff for the greater good and Ken Lay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: metalboy
Just so you don't feel bad, I'll share my Amazon idiot story. I decided that the stock was overpriced at $25 so I shorted. I didn't know what a margin call was at that point, but I found out. I dumped good money after bad through at least 3 margin calls. One difference from your situation is I really had to write checks and send them in. Long story short (so to speak) I liquidated 2/3 at about $55 and am holding 1/3 of my original position. The stomach pains are gone, now I just laugh.

The bottom line is we are both holding risky positions, although the upward momentum driving the short squeezes is gone. My wild-a$$ guess is it will slowly drift down with the rest of the market.

16 posted on 11/21/2003 6:03:48 PM PST by palmer (They've reinserted my posting tube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: arete
Specialists DO perform this dastardly deed over and over! Some specialist firms have been in the same family for almost 200 years! It's like having a license to print money. No doubt someone wanted to drop a block at the opening, but the specialist only did it to provide a shorting opportunity for himself, make no mistake about that. Otherwise why would he let a huge SELLER out at a HIGHER price? it's contrary to the Law Of Supply & Demand, afterall!
17 posted on 11/21/2003 6:31:05 PM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: arete
I have been keeping an eye on Fannie. Looks like da boyz jammed it up on the open two days in a row and then let it sell off on both days. Either they wanted to catch some traction on a short covering rally, or more than likely, the insiders and traders were jamming it and then distributing to a new set of bagholders between 70 and 71. What do you think?

I assumed the intervention (which im trying not to believe in) was intended to prop the agencies up against Freddie's restatement which revealed they have overstated as well as understated earnings.

Any other ideas? Relief that Freddie, who we now know to be dishonest, claims everything is A-OK?

18 posted on 11/21/2003 6:31:26 PM PST by AdamSelene235 (I always shoot for the moon......sometimes I hit London.- Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
Otherwise why would he let a huge SELLER out at a HIGHER price?

Customer service and a promise of more business in the future. Plenty of reasons to do a little price manipulation for even more business down the road from the big guys.

Richard W.

19 posted on 11/21/2003 6:58:25 PM PST by arete (Merrily marching over the economic cliff for the greater good and Ken Lay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: metalboy
You've just paid $500 to learn something about investment and speculation. It's cheap, compared to the price others have paid.

There are various strategies you could pursue at this point:


20 posted on 11/21/2003 7:25:08 PM PST by sourcery (This is your country. This is your country under socialism. Any questions? Just say no to Socialism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson