Join Early Retirement Today
View Poll Results: The stock market has been super volatile and has been steadily declining in recent months. What's y
It's a chance to buy low... it'll bounce back. 27 38.57%
It's a sign of things to come long term. We're at the start of a long crash. 9 12.86%
It's just a normal correction. It was way too high. 22 31.43%
The market's down? I didn't notice. 8 11.43%
It doesn't matter... I converted everything to gold and cash and hid it under my bed. 4 5.71%
Voters: 70. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-21-2006, 05:26 PM   #1
Recycles dryer sheets
Sisyphus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 52
Buying low or sign of things to come?

Share your thoughts!
__________________

__________________
Persistence and determination are omnipotent.
Sisyphus is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-21-2006, 06:12 PM   #2
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
grumpy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,321
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

None of the poll choices appeal to me. If you have a diversified portfolio and you intend to maintain a significant allocation to equities, then short term fluctuations are of no consequence.

Grumpy
__________________

__________________
...you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave...
grumpy is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-21-2006, 06:49 PM   #3
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,570
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Just like everybody else, I'm no authority on this, ad the next time can be different but.... herky-jerky, up/down, can't guess what it's gonna do from one day to the next, good news/bad news makes no difference-type of volitility is usually associated with an impending major flouncing. 10%-20% 30%.....?

Might not be another 3 years heading down. Might just be what some toss off cavalierly as "a correction, ho hum" but you can't tell till after the fact. High volitility usually doesn't mean nothing.
__________________
razztazz is online now   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-21-2006, 09:11 PM   #4
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mesa
Posts: 3,588
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumpy
None of the poll choices appeal to me.* If you have a diversified portfolio and you intend to maintain a significant allocation to equities, then short term fluctuations are of no consequence.

* Grumpy
I agree with Grumpy. There were no reasonable poll choices for a hardcore asset allocator. :P
__________________
sgeeeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-21-2006, 10:43 PM   #5
Dryer sheet aficionado
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

I voted c)

Its nothing to concern a diversified portfolio, unless that person has some cash that they mught like to use to pick up a few bargains, or use to rebalance their holdings.
__________________
The Canadian Entrepreneur<br />http://canadian-entrepreneur.com
canent is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-21-2006, 11:30 PM   #6
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 287
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

I sold out of the market in January of 2000. The market is still not at the price at which I sold. That means, that for almost seven years, it hasn't gained. It has fallen and come back up significantly, but it hasn't regained its highs.

A couple of years ago I think it was, Buffett said he saw no prospects in the equities markets. I continue to agree.

If you have been placing money in the market over these last seven years you have made some profits on those investments but not on your equity as of 2000.

In my opinion that equity should have been re-allocated. This is the fatal flaw in "buy and hold."

boont
__________________
boont is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-22-2006, 09:12 AM   #7
Dryer sheet aficionado
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
Originally Posted by boont

If you have been placing money in the market over these last seven years you have made some profits on those investments but not on your equity as of 2000.

In my opinion that equity should have been re-allocated. This is the fatal flaw in "buy and hold."
But does this assume that the equities were purchased in 2000? If someone had bought the same equities long before then they would still have made money.
__________________
The Canadian Entrepreneur<br />http://canadian-entrepreneur.com
canent is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-22-2006, 12:48 PM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,386
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
Originally Posted by canent
But does this assume that the equities were purchased in 2000? If someone had bought the same equities long before then they would still have made money.
Of course, depending on when you bought them and how much you paid. But isn't that somewhat beside the point? The point is that several large indexes topped out in the year 2000, and this is 2006 and they aren't back to their tops yet.

So if you retired or close to retiring, you do not want this to happen to you. * Many believe that diversification is protection against this sort of thing. It was last time; but last time was very peculiar in that while the techs, NAZ and the very large blue chips were quite high, many smaller company stocks, oils, reits, etc, were very low. "Emerging Markets" were in fact emerging from the huge meltdown of 1998. Korea Fund, KF, was selling below 6. I remember because I bought some. Even my Korean friends thought I was nuts.

Not true today. Therefore the diversification theme may or may not work this time around- if indeed this is the beginning of another drop. Of course a large position in near cash and short duration fixed is protection, in that whatever % losses equities might experience, they will be lessened by having less at stake. (1/2$x loss is quite a bit better than $x loss!)

It is a lot easier to say what might not work than what will work, so I will just say where I have put my few paltry chips. I have already sold stocks and taken a lot of CGís this year, and taken some money out of puts by rolling down to lower strikes. I expect further falls in the averages, and possibly just about everything else. At best, I hope to stay even with it by my little strategies, but I imagine I will see portfolio losses into late fall. But at that time I should have a large amount of cash to redeploy.

If this is all wet, I give back some of my gains already realized in put operations, and pay some CG tax that I could have put off. I do not think that there is a very large chance that I will miss hefty equity gains- I donít think they are in the cards from these levels. So to me anyway, the R/R seems to favor caution.

Ha
__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-22-2006, 04:35 PM   #9
Full time employment: Posting here.
Alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 696
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumpy
None of the poll choices appeal to me. If you have a diversified portfolio and you intend to maintain a significant allocation to equities, then short term fluctuations are of no consequence.

Grumpy
I wholeheartedly agree.
__________________
Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar.--Drew Carey
Alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-22-2006, 06:09 PM   #10
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 473
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaHa
The point is that several large indexes topped out in the year 2000, and this is 2006 and they aren't back to their tops yet.
Oh, come on, folks! It's been only 6 years! Here is one example. Dow Jones:

1965 - tops 900

1982 - under 900, as low as 769 in August

Now, that was painful!*
__________________
Scrooge is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-23-2006, 12:05 PM   #11
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,386
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumpy
None of the poll choices appeal to me.* If you have a diversified portfolio and you intend to maintain a significant allocation to equities, then short term fluctuations are of no consequence.

* Grumpy
What is the "short term"? We are now at 6 years and counting on the Dow and S&P, and as Scrooge pointed out, there was the little short term of 1966 to 1982. The market went nowhere, for 16 years? And as I remember there was some pretty powerful inflation over that span, so one didnít just mark time for 16 years, his real loss was quite large.

I admit that I find the statement "...and you intend to maintain a significant allocation to equities..." more than a bit odd. What it is about equities that would make one make an a priori decision in all situations, to maintain a "significant allocation"?

Are equities a covert religion for those who are agnostic in more traditional spiritual matters?

Ha
__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-23-2006, 03:34 PM   #12
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Ed_The_Gypsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: the City of Subdued Excitement
Posts: 5,293
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Welllll...

I found this the other day:
http://bobsfiles.home.att.net/secular.html

"The Market" (PRICES!!) during this time did not go anywhere, but this did not reflect re-investing dividends. Divends reinvested, the value of the S&P 500 tripled in 17 years (~ 7%/yr, if I did my calcs right).

With dividends re-invested, small caps grew over 10 times in the same period (~ 14.8%/yr--same caveat).

Data from Ibbotson.

Lesson: diversify. Slice-and-dice anyone?

__________________
my bumpersticker:
"I am not in a hurry.
I am retired.
And I don't care how big your truck is."
Ed_The_Gypsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-23-2006, 03:45 PM   #13
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,570
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
Insert Quote
Welllll...

I found this the other day:
http://bobsfiles.home.att.net/secular.html

"The Market" (PRICES!!) during this time did not go anywhere, but this did not reflect re-investing dividends. Divends reinvested, the value of the S&P 500 tripled in 17 years (~ 7%/yr, if I did my calcs right).

With dividends re-invested, small caps grew over 10 times in the same period (~ 14.8%/yr--same caveat).

Data from Ibbotson.

Lesson: diversify. Slice-and-dice anyone?
If youre marching towards retirement , it might not matter but in retirement....?

In retirement you would never have been able to reinvest those dividends anyway. You'd have eaten those plus principle and even tho the market trippled during that span with reinvestment it still lost to inflation if I am not mistaken.

Diversify into small caps? Is there any reason to belive without any possiblity of being wrong tat the next time small caps will do the same? If enough people did that there wouldnt be enough small cap stocks around to sell anyway

To rely on histyorical diversity is like the people who say "Dont worry. The markey always goes up" It's a form of technical analysis without the analysis. Chart reading
__________________
razztazz is online now   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-23-2006, 04:13 PM   #14
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 473
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed_The_Gypsy
I found this the other day:
http://bobsfiles.home.att.net/secular.html

"The Market" (PRICES!!) during this time did not go anywhere, but this did not reflect re-investing dividends.* Divends reinvested, the value of the S&P 500 tripled in 17 years (~ 7%/yr, if I did my calcs right).
Well, the 2000-2006 vs. 1965-1982 comparison above was for nominal index numbers. With divident reinvestment (and DJIA was paying dividents in 2000-2006 and 1965-1982 as well), it would be a somewhat different story.

As far as S&P500 goes, the author writes that it went from 53 in 1965 to 162 in 1982. But if you use Westegg's inflation calculator for the same period, you discover that $53 in 1965 was equivalent to $155.66 in 1982. So even with divident reinvestment, you barely stayed ahead of inflation if you were invested in S&P500.

The author does address the issue of inflation, but he believes that it was stock-bond-cash neutral during this period:

Quote:
Unfortunately, inflation acts on bonds and cash as well as stocks. So yes, there were few places to hide with inflation so high during that period.
This assertion would imply that the real interest rate (i.e. the nominal interest rate minus the inflation rate) was negative or at least around 0%. This doesn't appear to be the case, however. See, for example, this graph -- http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/...s/042120ma.htm -- which shows only one period ca. 1977 when the real interest rate was at or below 0%.

Disclaimer: I know next to nothing about economics, I just look this stuff up
__________________
Scrooge is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-23-2006, 04:38 PM   #15
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
grumpy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,321
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaHa
What is the "short term"? We are now at 6 years and counting on the Dow and S&P, and as Scrooge pointed out, there was the little short term of 1966 to 1982. The market went nowhere, for 16 years? And as I remember there was some pretty powerful inflation over that span, so one didnít just mark time for 16 years, his real loss was quite large.

I admit that I find the statement "...and you intend to maintain a significant allocation to equities..." more than a bit odd. What it is about equities that would make one make an a priori decision in all situations, to maintain a "significant allocation"?

Are equities a covert religion for those who are agnostic in more traditional spiritual matters?

Ha
HaHa,

I freely admit that I am not smart enough to successfully time the market. It was not wisdom but good luck that I was fully invested during the roaring 90's and avoided the worst of the dot.com carnage. Similarly, I am not smart enough to know when a down market will begin to recover and to get back in. I gratefully accepted the large gains then, and I will stoically accept small gains or losses going forward. I have five years worth of living expenses in cash. I trust that with a well diversified portfolio (large cap value, small cap, mid cap, foreign, etc. etc.) some sector will be doing well if and when I need to liquidate to replenish cash. If that "faith" is a "covert religion" then I'm guilty as charged. I have been FIRE'd for two years. My net worth today is greater than it was the day I retired. I'll ignore the current market fluctuations 'cause I'm not smart enough to know what else to do. You follow your "covert religion" and I'll follow mine. Check with me in 20 years and we'll see how we are each doing.

Grumpy
__________________
...you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave...
grumpy is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-23-2006, 04:56 PM   #16
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Ed_The_Gypsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: the City of Subdued Excitement
Posts: 5,293
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
If youre marching towards retirement , it might not matter but in retirement....?
Good point, razz. Seventeen years is a long time. Could be scary if all one had was the S&P.

However, FIREcalc scenarios have taken that period into account, and include both receiving dividends and selling equities. And there are other asset classes, too.

Of course, one could always go back to w*rk.

__________________
my bumpersticker:
"I am not in a hurry.
I am retired.
And I don't care how big your truck is."
Ed_The_Gypsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-23-2006, 08:46 PM   #17
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

Quote:
Originally Posted by razztazz

In retirement you would never have been able to reinvest those dividends anyway. You'd have eaten those plus principle and even tho the market trippled during that span with reinvestment it still lost to inflation if I am not mistaken.
If you were in retirement, yes, you'd have to spend the dividends. Just like you'd have to spend the interest from bonds/CDs, etc. Looking at inflation vs real bond rates (looks like approx 2% average over the period, with a short period of negative real return), you would have had the same issue--spending your principal, which is also being eroded by inflation. Bad. At least with equity there's considerable upside potential when the pain stops.

Quote:
Originally Posted by razztazz
Diversify into small caps? Is there any reason to belive without any possiblity of being wrong tat the next time small caps will do the same? If enough people did that there wouldnt be enough small cap stocks around to sell anyway

To rely on histyorical diversity is like the people who say "Dont worry. The markey always goes up" It's a form of technical analysis without the analysis. Chart reading
Well, reading the charts DOES tell me that the market goes up over time. It doesn't do it smoothly, but it does it.

And, there's never been a case when there weren't enough stocks of a particular type available for sale. When the price rises, there are always going to be sellers. If you own small caps beforehand (or foreign stocks, large caps, etc) then you can be a seller at the new, higher price. That's why diversification is good.

There's an interesting table on pg 10 of the pdf file at this link (warning--long download)
http://www.vanguard.com.au/library/p...al_04_2005.pdf
In a nutshell:
If we look at the individual decades from 1930 - 2000, the real return (price plus dividends adjusted for inflation) on stocks has been negative in only one case-the 1970's (average real return per year: -0.32%). Long term treasuries have had 4 negative decades (biggest losses in the 1950s, real losses of - 2.25% per year over that timeframe). Intermediate treasuries have had 3 negative decades (max losses were in the 1940s, with annual real losses of -3.35% per year over that decade). 30 day T-bills have had 3 negative decades (biggest losses in the 1940s: - 4.64% per year over the decade).


So, stocks have had fewer "negative decades" than any of these asset classes, and that negative decade for stocks was milder than the worst decades experienced by the others. Stocks had an annualized real total return from 1926-2004 of 7.19%. LT treasuries= 2.36%. IT treasuries=2.19%. T-Bills= 0.79%

If you can survive the dry spells, stocks have definitely been the place to be.

Of course, this is all just historical chart reading . . . part of the catechism of the equity covert religion
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?
Old 07-24-2006, 03:22 PM   #18
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
TromboneAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,199
Re: Buying low or sign of things to come?

I'm not sure that "steadily declining" and "super volatile" can be used to describe the same thing, but I know what you mean.

Attached Images
File Type: jpg RollerCoaster.jpg (23.8 KB, 54 views)
Attached Files
File Type: jpg_thumb RollerCoaster.jpg_thumb (14.4 KB, 0 views)
__________________

__________________
Al
TromboneAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BUYING is such an addictive behavior and is there a cure for it?? Enuff2Eat FIRE and Money 74 04-13-2007 09:14 AM
Random low P/E stocks. CCdaCE FIRE and Money 9 03-13-2007 09:41 AM
The Upside to Low Savings Rate? REWahoo FIRE and Money 0 03-29-2006 10:08 PM
Financing a car/car buying advice usc_et Young Dreamers 14 11-01-2005 11:59 AM
How Low Can We Go? Bob_Smith FIRE and Money 7 01-14-2004 12:11 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:51 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.