Seeking Alpha

Chris Ridder

View as an RSS Feed
View Chris Ridder's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Trouble For 'Bridgewater Risk Parity' Model [View article]
    "When Risk Is Not In Parity: Bridgewater's Massive "All Weather" Fund Ends 2013 Down 3.9%" here is the link
    http://bit.ly/1fhJpCh
    Jan 9 09:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Trouble For 'Bridgewater Risk Parity' Model [View article]
    "When Risk Is Not In Parity: Bridgewater's Massive "All Weather" Fund Ends 2013 Down 3.9%" here is the link
    http://bit.ly/1fhJpCh
    Jan 9 09:35 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Inflation And The Money Base [View article]
    I would refer you to Dr. Murry Rothbard's book "The Mystery of Banking" and his other works with regards to the measurement of money and process of inflation.
    Oct 25 02:46 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Inflation And The Money Base [View article]
    This regression tested CPI and the money base - the excess reserves. You could just do the CPI and money base but now banks are holding huge excess reserves. This was done to attempt to have the closest, but not perfect, apples to apples regression of CPI vs money in circulation. So to be clear the test is not on reserves theoretically.
    Oct 24 08:12 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Inflation And The Money Base [View article]
    "There's some noise in the numbers. " - This "noise" should theoretically be "picked up" by the error term in the regression
    Oct 24 11:30 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Inflation And The Money Base [View article]
    The data used was annual time series and not monthly
    Oct 20 06:57 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 4 Reasons Why Gold Will Continue To Decline [View article]
    Were you using gold price levels or price changes? If levels then you have a unit root in the linear regression and unfortunately the statistics are invalid.
    Here is a brief overview from wikipedia http://bit.ly/13HyJm0

    A time series needs to be stationary for statistical inferences to be valid using ordinary least squares regression techniques.
    Jun 13 12:24 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • 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.
    May 22 07:05 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Japanese Rates Influencing Gold [View article]
    Usually in a carry trade you buy a higher yielding currency but gold does not pay a coupon if you hold it.
    May 17 12:16 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple-nomics And Gross Margins 101 [View article]
    As I wrote to another commenter (see above):

    "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. "
    Mar 12 03:30 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple-nomics And Gross Margins 101 [View article]
    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.

    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.
    Mar 11 11:03 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple-nomics And Gross Margins 101 [View article]
    David,

    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
    Mar 11 10:38 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple-nomics And Gross Margins 101 [View article]
    Sir or Madam:

    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.
    Mar 11 10:31 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Inflation And The Money Base [View article]
    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.
    Mar 9 02:58 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Inflation And The Money Base [View article]
    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
    Mar 9 12:40 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
160 Comments
75 Likes