Trouble For 'Bridgewater Risk Parity' Model [View article]
I wrote, " is attempting to replicate an asset allocation strategy, used by the hedge fund Bridgewater Associates, with mutual funds and ETFs open to all investors." I was commenting on this attempted replication of Bridgewater's strategy which the the referenced article spoke of.
"If you take the sales for account for the number of weeks you do indeed get a 26.7% increase. $4193.231 mm in 2012 vs $3309.5 mm in 2011.
However, the same adjustment must then be made to purchases. $2502.154 mm per week in 2012 vs $1812.071 in 2011 for a 38.1% increase. This is a spread difference of 11.4%. The spread difference, in the article was 28.2% vs. 17.7%, or 10.5%; so if you do adjust for weeks, as you suggest, the numbers are even less favorable for Apple when comparing sales vs. costs. "
I have seen some companies put depreciation under SG&A. The problem is there is no set standard. It would be nice if GAAP would just make companies state depreciation as a line item on the income statement.
It shows operating expenses. I don't see how depreciation is an operating expense, when it is writing down long term capital assets; and not a selling expense, general expense, or an administrative expense. Hence, why it can be considered part of COGS. But as stated above some companies actually do include it with SG&A. If you are still concerned, I would contact Apple's investor relations with this question.
You will find both "cost of sales" and "cost of sales with depreciation". The line item "cost of sales with depreciation" matches Apples SEC filing for line item cost of sales.
So Apple finds its COGS and then also adds depreciation to get a final COGS, which it reports in its financial statements. To double check this, check the depreciation amount in the statement of cash flows. Also, notice depreciation expense is not mentioned anywhere else on the income statement.
If you take the sales for account for the number of weeks you do indeed get a 26.7% increase. $4193.231 mm in 2012 vs $3309.5 mm in 2011.
However, the same adjustment must then be made to purchases. $2502.154 mm per week in 2012 vs $1812.071 in 2011 for a 38.1% increase. This is a spread difference of 11.4%. The spread difference, in the article was 28.2% vs. 17.7%, or 10.5%; so if you do adjust for weeks, as you suggest, the numbers are even less favorable for Apple when comparing sales vs. costs.
The reference I used was to describe a cross-correlogram. The SA editor did not like the original Wikipedia link and asked me to use other. I picked the link you describe above; however, it was only meant to educate people unfamiliar with the concept of a cross-correlogram.
To be very clear it was in no way an endorsement or adherence to an empirical methodology / ideology.
For the theoretical underpinning of why the money base is linked to inflation the text "The Mystery of Banking" by Dr. Murray Rothbard was used. http://amzn.to/13NteWz
This text does not use any empirical methods to prove its hypothesis, but rather a prior, deductive reasoning. The above empirical research shows an outcome consistent with pure theory. The text also explains why only 14.9% of the movement was explained; it is very difficult to model consumer expectations about future inflation.
I did not publish the research in the article, since it is beyond Statistics 101, but I did perform Granger Causality analysis. http://bit.ly/15EmdFz
It showed, with a lag period of 2, that the null hypothesis "money base does not Granger Cause cpi" was rejected at the 10% level with a p-value of .09927. The null hypothesis "cpi does not Granger Cause money base" was NOT rejected with a p-value of .53714
Where Are GM's Cars Disappearing To? [View article]
If you look at the GM's web page link in the article you will find a PDF labeled "Production by Plant" and find that from Dec 2012 - Feb 2013 all production was for the 2013 model year.
I have looked over these from Oct. 2010- Feb. 2012 and I have only see the production switching around the summer months.
Where Are GM's Cars Disappearing To? [View article]
I have not been able to find the information prior to November 2009 for dealer inventory. The ratio of inventories to deliveries (actual customer sales) climbed in February, to 3.31, from 3.19 a year ago, 2.50 two years ago, and 3.02 three years ago.
Gold Producers Least Bearish/Money Managers Most Since 2008 [View article]
I like your reply. However, one time I saw the Commercials very net short and speculators very net long, in Coffee in the 1990's, and on the charts it looked like the scenario you described would occur again.
Then, over the weekend a freeze occurred in Brazil and Coffee raced up towards $3 a pound. The Commercials were the big losers in this case.
Just goes to show that Investing/Trading is never a "Slam Dunk".
Railfax agrees that intermodal is more important. Look under the analysis tab on the website. However, I am more agnostic about this premise currently.
Intermodal means using rail and trucks to deliver the freight. With high gas prices, I hypothesize that freight that at one time might have moved solely by truck is now being moved by truck and rail to its final destination. Hence, my reasoning, possibly wrong, not to give this category as much weight currently.
Trouble For 'Bridgewater Risk Parity' Model [View article]
Japanese Rates Influencing Gold [View article]
Apple-nomics And Gross Margins 101 [View article]
"If you take the sales for account for the number of weeks you do indeed get a 26.7% increase. $4193.231 mm in 2012 vs $3309.5 mm in 2011.
However, the same adjustment must then be made to purchases. $2502.154 mm per week in 2012 vs $1812.071 in 2011 for a 38.1% increase. This is a spread difference of 11.4%. The spread difference, in the article was 28.2% vs. 17.7%, or 10.5%; so if you do adjust for weeks, as you suggest, the numbers are even less favorable for Apple when comparing sales vs. costs. "
Apple-nomics And Gross Margins 101 [View article]
Look on page 30 of Apple's last quarter's financials:
http://1.usa.gov/Vo2ngT
It shows operating expenses. I don't see how depreciation is an operating expense, when it is writing down long term capital assets; and not a selling expense, general expense, or an administrative expense. Hence, why it can be considered part of COGS. But as stated above some companies actually do include it with SG&A. If you are still concerned, I would contact Apple's investor relations with this question.
Apple-nomics And Gross Margins 101 [View article]
Look at Apple's financials with the website ADVFN:
http://bit.ly/Yoyd89
You will find both "cost of sales" and "cost of sales with depreciation". The line item "cost of sales with depreciation" matches Apples SEC filing for line item cost of sales.
So Apple finds its COGS and then also adds depreciation to get a final COGS, which it reports in its financial statements. To double check this, check the depreciation amount in the statement of cash flows. Also, notice depreciation expense is not mentioned anywhere else on the income statement.
I am glad you enjoyed the article
Apple-nomics And Gross Margins 101 [View article]
If you take the sales for account for the number of weeks you do indeed get a 26.7% increase. $4193.231 mm in 2012 vs $3309.5 mm in 2011.
However, the same adjustment must then be made to purchases. $2502.154 mm per week in 2012 vs $1812.071 in 2011 for a 38.1% increase. This is a spread difference of 11.4%. The spread difference, in the article was 28.2% vs. 17.7%, or 10.5%; so if you do adjust for weeks, as you suggest, the numbers are even less favorable for Apple when comparing sales vs. costs.
Inflation And The Money Base [View article]
To be very clear it was in no way an endorsement or adherence to an empirical methodology / ideology.
Inflation And The Money Base [View article]
This text does not use any empirical methods to prove its hypothesis, but rather a prior, deductive reasoning. The above empirical research shows an outcome consistent with pure theory. The text also explains why only 14.9% of the movement was explained; it is very difficult to model consumer expectations about future inflation.
I did not publish the research in the article, since it is beyond Statistics 101, but I did perform Granger Causality analysis. http://bit.ly/15EmdFz
It showed, with a lag period of 2, that the null hypothesis "money base does not Granger Cause cpi" was rejected at the 10% level with a p-value of .09927. The null hypothesis "cpi does not Granger Cause money base" was NOT rejected with a p-value of .53714
Where Are GM's Cars Disappearing To? [View article]
Where Are GM's Cars Disappearing To? [View article]
Where Are GM's Cars Disappearing To? [View article]
From the table it would appear that these were exported to Europe (GME) and South America (GMSA). However, there is still a remainder.
Where Are GM's Cars Disappearing To? [View article]
I have looked over these from Oct. 2010- Feb. 2012 and I have only see the production switching around the summer months.
Where Are GM's Cars Disappearing To? [View article]
Gold Producers Least Bearish/Money Managers Most Since 2008 [View article]
Then, over the weekend a freeze occurred in Brazil and Coffee raced up towards $3 a pound. The Commercials were the big losers in this case.
Just goes to show that Investing/Trading is never a "Slam Dunk".
Economic Derailment [View article]
Intermodal means using rail and trucks to deliver the freight. With high gas prices, I hypothesize that freight that at one time might have moved solely by truck is now being moved by truck and rail to its final destination. Hence, my reasoning, possibly wrong, not to give this category as much weight currently.