Abby Joseph Cohen's Bullish Calls

I thought we had seen enough of Cohen after her disastrous calls in 1999-2000, but here we are again looking at her predictions. If there was ever a reason to short the market I think this is it.

Cohen is one of those analysts who has a bad track record, but everyone forgets about it and praises her with being correct more often than she usually is. Now, forecasting the markets is tough and if your success rate is 55% then you are on top of the game, but I think her track record is worse than that.

I am not saying she is not smart or that I have a better track record, but I am saying she has a history, like Cramer, of cherry picking her previous picks. Not to mention, she gained notoriety in the 1990’s by always calling the market higher. Now, I am not sure if you remember the 1990’s, but it had a few really good years and, frankly, you could have put your money under the mattress and it would have doubled. Ah, those wonderful magical times when I trusted my government and we actually had a decent economy, kind of.

Goldman must be short the markets, based on some of the absurdities she's said:

"We do think that the new bull market has begun—it may prove that it started in March of this year,” Cohen said in a live interview. “We’ve talked about the staircase pattern of recovery in an equity market. Even if this is a new bull market, don’t expect it to look like a V—expect it to look like a series of upward steps.”

She went on to say:

“Over the last year or two with all the difficult problems in the financial services sector, many of us have lost track of the fact that most of these stocks do follow economic growth. So when GDP is doing well, financial services tend to do well at the same time,” she said.

The third quarter is looking stable for companies, said Cohen as most firms have held profit margins up well even during the difficult portion of the recession. She said the cost containment and improvement in margin would be beneficial for companies in the second half of the year.

Additionally, because companies and investors tend to look at profits on a year-over-year basis, “the third and fourth quarters of last year were dreadful so the third and fourth quarters of 2009 will not only good, but fabulous by comparison,” she said.

This really blew my mind:

In terms of the unemployment situation, Cohen said there are slow, but steady signs of improvement in the labor market.

“Whether the [employment] number comes in light or unpleasant tomorrow, we’re seeing improvement even in the labor market—it appears the job losses are slowing and there is some job creation going on,” she said.

I am not sure what data she is looking at, but man I need to get some of what she is smoking.

So, she said that even though things stink, they stink less than last year and we should just get over the whole top line revenue growth thing. Either way her bullish call makes me cringe, on top of all the data I am currently looking at. Anyone else remember her bullish call on technology in 2000? Yup, enough said.

Comments

[Donkey Kong:]

When I think of Abby Joseph Cohen, I think of the phrase..."even a broken clock is right twice a day".

Aug 07 08:45 AM

[lucky lenny:]

Enig, why does an 18% drop in fed’l tax revenues matter? Please note that i’m a CPA & former economics adjunct professor. It just means home builders & others who used to send tons of $$’s to Washington are sending 18% less. I don’t see the big deal. Does it really impact IBM’s profits? Or the amount of Pepsi sold?

As unbelievable as this sounds, the federal gov’t may be able to rack up $100 trillion in debt; and it still wouldn’t tank the US$ or the US economy. Why? Because our Federal Reserve Bank can just increase their purchase of US T-bills. Like they’re doing now. In this manner, interest rates stay very low. And paying interest to the Federal Reserve Bank is like paying ourselves the money. Seriously, as long as the Federal Reserve Bank can own trillions of $$’s of debt, which they can do; then I don’t necessarily see high inflation or massive unemployment. If I’m wrong about this, then I’d like to know how. Specifically, we’re at $11 trill of debt; with Obama tacking another $1 or $2 trillion annually. Why can’t Obama tack on $3 or $4 trillion annually? As long as the Fed’l Resv Bank is soaking up slack demand for the T-bills, I just see this game going on for a very long time. Actually, there is one thing that could derail this ponzi-like scheme. That would be if foreign countries stopped accepting & worshipping the US dollar. Given that’s probably not going to happen, I can see the US debt going to $100 trillion and then some without any major repurcussions whatsoever. And then when the Ponzi scheme ends; which they always do, we’ll work on Plan B; which hopefully won’t be needed for several hundred years.

Aug 07 09:06 AM

[SivBum:]

Unemployment rate dropped unexpectedly...but market hasn't gone up the roof as futures had predicted before the opening bell. Time to load up.

Aug 07 10:27 AM

[enigmaman:]

Lenny as an account I find it hard to believe you do not think this drop in tax revenue matters, 22% in income tax, 57% in corp tax and I forgot the other tax, but if less is coming in to the gov how then does the fed gov pay for everything, maybe a hike in taxes across the board, the sun set of the Bush tax plan in 2010 is already baked into the cake, so where will the rest come from. I always thought higher taxes hurt business, hurt individuals and hurt the economy, reduces revenue,even W Buffet, P Volker big Obama supporters believes this is not the time to raise taxes, I wonder why they would say this? I kow of several very well to do business men who are rearranging their affairs so they will pay very little taxes, just like W Buffet did, takes no income just dividends so he pays less taxes. But your seriously telling me it just doesnt matter, so your buying into the theory that as long as the fed can print money everything will be all right, you must be some accountant!

On Aug 07 09:06 AM lucky lenny wrote:

> Enig, why does an 18% drop in fed’l tax revenues matter? Please note
> that i’m a CPA & former economics adjunct professor. It just
> means home builders & others who used to send tons of $$’s to
> Washington are sending 18% less. I don’t see the big deal. Does it
> really impact IBM’s profits? Or the amount of Pepsi sold?
>
> As unbelievable as this sounds, the federal gov’t may be able to
> rack up $100 trillion in debt; and it still wouldn’t tank the US$
> or the US economy. Why? Because our Federal Reserve Bank can just
> increase their purchase of US T-bills. Like they’re doing now. In
> this manner, interest rates stay very low. And paying interest to
> the Federal Reserve Bank is like paying ourselves the money. Seriously,
> as long as the Federal Reserve Bank can own trillions of $$’s of
> debt, which they can do; then I don’t necessarily see high inflation
> or massive unemployment. If I’m wrong about this, then I’d like to
> know how. Specifically, we’re at $11 trill of debt; with Obama tacking
> another $1 or $2 trillion annually. Why can’t Obama tack on $3 or
> $4 trillion annually? As long as the Fed’l Resv Bank is soaking up
> slack demand for the T-bills, I just see this game going on for a
> very long time. Actually, there is one thing that could derail this
> ponzi-like scheme. That would be if foreign countries stopped accepting
> & worshipping the US dollar. Given that’s probably not going
> to happen, I can see the US debt going to $100 trillion and then
> some without any major repurcussions whatsoever. And then when the
> Ponzi scheme ends; which they always do, we’ll work on Plan B; which
> hopefully won’t be needed for several hundred years.

Aug 07 10:36 AM

[Miamah Boy:]

She is quite a sight at an event as not too many Wall Streeters show up with a BookBag as a briefcase[No, not a leather embroidered one-plain cloth and not pink].
I wonder how many of her pundits can even carry her bookbag or come close to matching her bank account.
Where we are headed nobody really knows but we should all be very happy that we have an intelligent leader at the White House who is thinking outside the broken box of "free markets/no regulation". By definition all people are greedy[look at the Vatican complex], so we need some method of maintaining reasonableness in the economy so that the very smart/clever/dubious do not do so well that they exhaust the air from the tires of the less fortunate.

Aug 07 10:43 AM

[lucky lenny:]

Enig, Barack Hussein Obama’s plan is to run trillion $$ annual deficits. If Barack Hussein Obama & the Democrats decided to raise taxes on business to balance the deficit, then i might be singing a different tune. Also, please note that this thread is talking about Ms. Cohen’s views & whether stocks can head higher. By all indications, including today’s 129 point run up, it looks like we’re headed to 10k category. Dow currently at 9,385.

Aug 07 10:48 AM

[T.Stamps:]

This women is usually bullish on the markets. Remember she
works for the company that's an extension of this administration.
She's always so monotone.

Aug 07 10:54 AM

[HunterGVL:]

Before I even opened up this page, I was ready to comment negatively about anyone listening to Abby Cohen. I have a long memory and have subscribed to Barrons for a long time. I noted her wrong calls all the way up to the dot.com crash and then noted her wrong calls leading up to beginning of this depression. The truth is she is all hype and has done well just like so many investors by being over bullish during bullish market conditions. But her perfomance numbers get crushed everytime there is a market disruption. She has nothing significant to offer with her opinions and to match her record all you need do is invest in popular companies during bull markets and ignore your losses when your picks, pan badly during inevitable declines. I like the comments above that note she disappears from the media for awhile after she swallows these huge losses. Then she trots out when the coast has cleared and starts her 'wise' analysis all over again on CNBC and similar venues. I for one, have not forgotten her lack of expertise. But truly, it is not for individual investors that she dispenses advice, but rather to manipulate buys and sells so she and her firm can take advantage. Nothing new here, but only a fool would consider her recommendations.

Aug 07 11:04 AM

[Swashbuckler:]

Abby Joseph Cohen---Her confidence exceeds her ability.

Aug 07 11:20 AM

[Kirk Lindstrom:]

More from Abby at "Abby Joseph Cohen Stock Market Outlook"
kirklindstrom.blogspot...

Remember... free advice is worth what you pay. GS makes some of its money managing assets. Easier to attract assets with sugar than vinegar.

Aug 07 12:17 PM

[Mad Hedge F...:]

“The Morons who are telling you to buy now are the same morons who were telling you to buy a year ago, just before the crash,” said a hedge fund friend of mine today.

Aug 07 02:56 PM

[sgt.red.blu...:]

Abby was predicting SP move to 1675 one year out from when it was 1463. Go and see when the SP was at 1463 and plot out one year, then check her predictive ability.

Aug 07 04:55 PM

[Fighting Yoda:]

Peter Schiff for Senate:
www.schiffforsenate.co...

Aug 07 07:16 PM

[DavyJ:]

What's the debate about?

Abby works for Goldman Sachs and on July 20th with the S&P 500 at 950, Goldman Sachs raised its year-end price target on the S&P 500 from 940 to 1060. So far, so good.

Don't fight the Fed, er, I mean Goldman Sachs. For-warned is for-armed.

Put options if you're holding inverse ETFs anyone? Or is it too late?

Aug 07 08:59 PM

[H. T. Love:]

Now I see why the country is in the shape it's in. If an adjunct professor is teaching this, no wonder that folks today don't realize the Fed is a privately owned institution for profit.

"Debt money" is okay? Where's my share of the interest paid by my taxes to my government to pay the interest to myself (the Fed)? I can tell you it's not in my pocket. Hmm ... maybe it's in yours.

I don't usually speak this way, but bulls**t!

HardToLove
On Aug 07 09:06 AM lucky lenny wrote:

" And paying interest to the Federal Reserve Bank is like paying ourselves the money."

Aug 08 02:02 PM

[Ernesto Gom...:]

Bull market? For whom? In what? We small-fry end-users of the financial markets have about 1/2 the $$ we had a few years ago. That being the case, it simply CAN'T be that we are bidding up the shares. Uh, then who is? It's the SLP providers - the very same crew that's doing 70% of all trade volume right now. The big iBanks and Hedge Funds are doing HST and playing a game of "keep away" by holding the ball just out of our reach. As a long as a enough fools keep reaching for it, the pro-traders will keep bidding it up. When the small fools stop, or when certain pros decide to go short, the market will crash hard. There's nothing going on in the economy to support this stock market surge and anyone who chases this will lose $$ soon enough. Daytrade this ride, but new longs here are risky - watch out below.

Aug 08 11:05 PM

[Fighting Yoda:]

Abby Josef is just a super perma bull - always trying to blow bubbles. Ignore her completely - she used to be the dot com cheer leader, never saw this crsh - has been bullish all through this crash. If she had any shame or grace she will simply shut up and retire, but wait here is more - she is from Goldman Sachs -the PPT team.

Aug 09 01:07 PM

[Donald Duck:]

Abby Cohen is the bigest market whore of all time

Aug 10 02:54 AM

[Donald Duck:]

Abby Cohen is the bioggest market whore of all time

Aug 10 02:55 AM

[Bjarne Jensen:]

Lucky Lenny:

In reference to your comment, " Because our Federal Reserve Bank can just increase their purchase of US T-bills. Like they’re doing now. In this manner, interest rates stay very low. And paying interest to the Federal Reserve Bank is like paying ourselves the money. Seriously, as long as the Federal Reserve Bank can own trillions of $$’s of debt, which they can do; then I don’t necessarily see high inflation or massive unemployment."

That only works until exporters won't accept cheapened dollars anymore then hyperinflation set in.

Aug 10 03:17 PM