Are we broken?

[Moneygrubber]

Remember when you had to wait for the newspaper the following day to get a stock price, call your broker, or type in some characters into your phone to get a quote.? Is the market so news driven that it only reflects the news? Are we like our parents, so skiiddish after the depression we are always looking for the next disaster around the corner? So what is my question? Is the market still a stick market or has it morphed into something else, something that runs on headlines and makes no sense?


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[Theseus]

I think it is subject to exaggerated short-term volatility driven by short-term traders playing on the hopes and fears respresneted by today's instant media. But it will always play out in favor of the long-term, driven by the basic stuff, like businesses producing widgets that consumers want, and can afford.

 

[Moneygrubber]

I hope you are right, I feel like we are more in a news market than a stock market.





Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[audreyh1]

The news driving the market has been the case as long as I was an investor - or at least paying attention. Which has all been in the electronic age. I remember people going to the Fidelity office if they wanted to watch the stock tickers. Late 80s, CNBC launched, and then you just had to turn on financial news to watch the stock ticker in your home.

 

[meierlde]

Interestingly I first saw financial TV when going to college in LA in 1972 There was a UHF station that ran a show during market open hours (and was off the air at other times).
But I do wish the crystal ball readers that mostly populate CNBC would be squelched. It seems you can find a "expert" who is willing to say almost anything on financial prediction.

 

[youbet]

But I do wish the crystal ball readers that mostly populate CNBC would be squelched. It seems you can find a "expert" who is willing to say almost anything on financial prediction.

Outlets such as CNBC serve two functions.

1. Distribution of actual financial news/data such as earnings reports, market performance in aggregatge, by segment, etc.

2. Discussion of ideas and opinions even if many are contradictory or unsubstantiated minority viewpoints.

The actual financial news could be covered in 10 - 15 mins per hour or less IMHO. The rest is filler you listen to if you wish. If the crystal ball readers annoy you, don't listen. I listen to them from time to time just to pick up ideas or thoughts beyond my normal realm. When I just want to know what the main indexes are doing and the price of oil, I don't go to CNBC but rather to our local all-news radio station which gives a quick synopsis every hour.

There are a LOT of cable channels to fill with programming. Think of some of the crap such as reality shows and 24 X 7 infomercials you see while surfing. CNBC actually seems worthwhile compared to them.......

 

[NYEXPAT]

This 95% correlation to WTI is what is controlling the market these days. The sooner we can break that (oil stabilizes in the low 30's) we should be able to get back to trading. I loved CNBC and listened to a lot of great CEO's back in the day, John Chambers, the guy from KLA-Tencor, etc. I agree with some other posters in that the Financial new's networks can spark new investment idea's or themes for those of us that do not use mutual funds or other "off the shelf" investments.

 

[DrRoy]

There is certainly a larger and faster information stream than decades ago. On top of that, so much trading is now done directly by computers.

 

[haha]

So many here know so much.

I read here what is causing every problem that companies or industries have. Then I listen to the webcasts of the involved companies, and I learn that their officers realize that they not only don't know, they suspect that it is not even possible to know.

Such a puzzle!

Ha

 

[Running_Man]

So many here know so much.

I read here what is causing every problem that companies or industries have. Then I listen to the webcasts of the involved companies, and I learn that their officers realize that they not only don't know, they suspect that it is not even possible to know.

Such a puzzle!

Ha

This is actually somewhat true, because most decisions at companies are based on how to maximize executive compensation not run a business. Most executives believe the Napoleon Hill philosophy of if you repeat your desire for something often enough it will be yours, they interpret that to mean they state what they want the business to do, which happens to be the max for their bonuses and are confused when it doesn't work.

That is why it is actually easier for me to sit back and analyze issues for instance -- COP raising dividend and share buyback last year was going to result in disaster while they were sure oil had to go to $70 (because that would maximize their bonus) and so the plan made sense.

How often do you hear executives state "you have to ignore the naysayers" while you cannot focus too much on that it is rare to have a really good CEO, so when you find one in an area of business they actually can exceed beyond expectations. For instance Charlie Munger

 

[heeyy_joe]

With so many low information 401K investors, when the market goes down a bit they sell, sell. sell. The rich fleece the poor, its always been that way!