Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Miles Hoffman  

View Miles Hoffman's Comments BY TICKER:

Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Sector Rotation Watch: The Economy And Earnings [View article]
    The link below implies buybacks are not a big factor in stock movements and it appears a valid argument. My read of Factset and SPDJI earnings analysis/data implied that buybacks were a contributing factor to EPS growth, and I still believe they are, just perhaps not as important as I thought. And just to clarify, while I don't think buybacks are a great use of capital when you can invest in R&D to grow your business, perhaps I should have been a bit more specific = when the FED has rates at zero, and we're in a deflationary environment that means returns on capital are very low (like interest rates), there really is NO WHERE to "smart" to invest your profits, so buybacks make some sense.
    Nov 21, 2015. 01:50 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Negative Swap Spreads Not Necessarily A Sign Of A Crisis [View article]
    I'm 98% sure I know what you mean, perhaps even 99%, but that is NOT what you said, to wit: Use of the double negative translates to removing both negatives, as they cancel each other out, does it not?

    So it reads "I am convinced that this development is a big deal."

    Or put another way, let's reverse what you said but removing the first not:

    "I am convinced that this development is not that big a deal." And since this is the "reverse" (opposite) of what you said, again it leads to the conclusion that you believe this is a big deal.

    So, I am 98+% convinced you actually meant it's not a big deal, especially given your reply, but the way you say it, it reads that you think it is a big deal.

    I'd like to be 100%, so please clarify your English: You think this is NOT a big deal, right?
    Nov 20, 2015. 12:11 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • XLK, XLF And AAPL... What About XLY? [View instapost]
    update 11/13:
    BRK.B- takes ~$840 in margin/capital. At $131, the ROC is almost 50% (PL~$400) so I have an exit around there.

    AXP - never bounced, GTC entry cancelled.

    XLF names - gaps have all filled but don't look like they'll bounce. Watching but not interested.

    XLY - when 3 of top 10 names are "internet" related (AMZN, CMCSA, PCLN), discretionary is not as retail as I thought. Nonetheless, M's poor announcement indicates (real) retailers are suffering(?).
    Nov 13, 2015. 09:31 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Sector Rotation Watch: Surging Tech (GOOG, MSFT, AMZN) "Cloud" The Signals [View instapost]
    Since edit prolong the publishing processes, here is something I will add to the article re poor earnings...
    Oct 26, 2015. 01:46 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Results Of Negative Interest Rates: Short-Term Euphoria, Long-Term Problems [View article]
    You apparently have disdain for the FED's attempt to manipulate the economy while at the same time wanting Washington to force the states to spend on infrastructure, including a monorail system, despite reports that show government prefers to speed transportation dollars on mass transit whereas Americans simply prefer to drive their cars, so mass transit spending is among the most wasteful.

    Does this mean you're not "an economic Keynesian" but you're "a political Keynesian"? In other words, it should not be the FED that pushes on the gas and steps on the brakes to control the economic "car" but it should be Washington?

    I have concerns about the FED but this is in sharp contrast to my feeling on Washington, which is not concern but conviction. I know that Washington only understands one thing about driving, and that is, it only knows about the gas petal. Washington almost never uses the brakes, and only does so when forced to by economic/political conditions. Speeding under any circumstances is dangerous and Washington thinks the solution is to also have regulations. Why not just apply the brakes?
    Sep 27, 2015. 01:39 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Good News Trumps Bad News [View article]
    CPB , most of your analysis is solid, and you are obviously in the know, which makes me wonder why you advocate positions that are so misleading at times. Househouse net worth is an almost worthless figure, is it not?

    If Bill Gates and Warren Buffet moved to my home state of Georgia, we'd likely jump significantly in household net worth, but it really would not mean anything since this figure is so skewed by the truly wealthy.

    Real median household income has been trending down for 15 years (FRED: MEHOINUSA672N ... you can look it up Iron Hamster). Most people in the US don't have any savings, and beyond this, in the middle class, the bulk of net worth is tied to home equity.

    So the FED pumping money in has helped housing recover (in theory?), but that is only after the fact that they pumped so hard in the first place that people spent wealth by borrowing against their homes, wealth they came to discover was artificial. Simply put, the FED is only trying to solve the problem it created in the first place, thank you Ben, and that you Janet for keeping up the insanity.

    I'm sorry, but to me this article is worse than misleading, which it is, and it is worse than that because you obviously have the knowledge to know better. Please correct me if I am wrong.
    Sep 20, 2015. 07:27 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Fed Rate Hikes Are Truly Laughable...But The World Isn't Laughing [View article]
    It's an interesting theory but I believe the limited data you have makes the argument weak. There are very long term secular moves in interest rates, which could be tied to population growth, but academia has found no significant relationships other than "eyeball" correlations (as far as I know). The large "echo boom" of 1990-2000 does not seem to have much impact on rates in your chart (you still show "a big up arrow"). I don't doubt that demographics have a big impact, but your theory needs a lot more data and further investigation. Have you searched SSRN for any academic studies on this topic?
    Sep 18, 2015. 09:34 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Secular Movements In Interest Rates [View article]
    I consider my first 3 articles "primers" for investing. Future articles should be shorter as I will simply reference the relevant "primer". Thank you.
    Sep 15, 2015. 03:07 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Equity Markets: Secular Bulls And Secular Bears [View article]
    Whoops Robert. I meant the comments for koay in that I want to look at credit cycles next. This relates to CrestmontResearch's "Y-curve" which you can find on their website or in my "What's Your Decade, Man?" blog (the post at my blog; SA has "broken" charts).

    I appears that you already have, right? Would you please provide the original article of the chart you link to as well as any articles you might think relevant. I am debating if I like your post because I already am not getting enough sleep and I think you just gave me "a ton of homework". ;-)
    Sep 4, 2015. 12:50 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Equity Markets: Secular Bulls And Secular Bears [View article]
    Congratulations on your foresight. You must do well in the market because you have revealed my next article.
    Sep 4, 2015. 08:11 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Equity Markets: Secular Bulls And Secular Bears [View article]
    thx, i guess I had yellow on my mind (it was also early in the morning after an all-nighter.
    Sep 3, 2015. 11:59 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is A Bear Market Starting? Prepare To Be Mauled, Down And Up [View article]
    Perhaps I came across as "too bearish in the short term". I am speaking more about the volatility and risk that a secular bear market exhibits, that is, I'm addressing the long term. I admitted I'm not a greater trader. I'm not certain the end is in, nor that we'll see a 20% correction now. I'm just saying the weight of the evidence had me short and I wish I still was. The market should bounce, and may retest resistance levels(if it does, I will re-enter "my shorts" again). I am trying to get a companion piece published that would show you, if we have embarked on a new secular bull as of 2009, as some contend, then corrections typically "squeak" just under 20%, enough to fool people into thinking a new bear move has started, only to turn around and run higher. I truly don't know (wish I did) and unfortunately SA won't publish "technical analysis" pieces, so even if I had some additional insight there, it will not be published. I'll try to put it on my instablog, but right now my focus is on figuring out what this market will do in the short term as well as getting some additional pieces published. Wish us both good luck!
    Sep 2, 2015. 09:10 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is A Bear Market Starting? Prepare To Be Mauled, Down And Up [View article]
    I assume you're talking about the charts with all 9 sectors in them. You probably can't "read them cause they're busy", but you're suppose to focus on my comments about them. For example, in the first "busy" chart 3rd from top), I'm highlighting the tech sector ETF. Similarly, in the others, I'm highlighting and making comments about housing, China, Emerging Markets, etc. I made these lines slightly larger and I think I always mentioned the color. If you're color blind, or still can not see them, I'm sorry. Please focus on my comments.
    Sep 2, 2015. 08:58 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Stocks Sell Off Again - What You Need To Know [View article]
    Excellent short-term advice.
    Sep 2, 2015. 12:46 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is A Bear Market Starting? Prepare To Be Mauled, Down And Up [View article]
    Jonas,we just don't see eye to eye. I have a different view.

    “But I don't see any great bubbles occurring in 'regular' life. Not houses, cars, student loans what have you.”

    Heck, I see 2 bubbles right there. There is a debt bubble in sub-prime auto loans.

    And don’t we all know that students loans is a bubble just waiting to pop.

    Technological change. Automation…jobs obsolete.


    I’ve been a technology analyst a long time. I’ve seen all the predictions of TECHnology causing our demise, in one form or another. I remember the cover story of “PCs destroying education”.

    And what you are describing “switching from horses to cars…”, you are using the perfect example of the concept of “Creative Destruction”.

    Joseph Schumpeter, a student of Hayak and Mises (?), studied business cycles, exactly what you are describing. Automobiles did destroy the house and buggy trade, but the focus should be on the creation. It is immense.

    The auto didn’t just destroy the horse trade, it changed out lives.

    Same with the internet.

    A dramatic revolution, not evolution, that causes the world to change. You might be surprised to find, Schumpeter thought these were good things. He was right.

    And academic studies have looked at where the returns go in the technology industry. They accrue to the people. Think of how things around the house have changed:

    Major innovations, like Cars, RR, Ships, Planes, radio, phones, TV, PCs, cells .
    And the bubbles I see are in bonds, where interest rates are un-naturally surpressed. And in financial assets, the original target, to keep the big guys solvent.

    The real problems we have, and there are a few. The FED has suppressed short-term interest rates. The demographics are pure do. And Boomers have not saved for retirement, having been fooled by the politicians, for Social Security is one big pyramid scheme. The government never invested Soc Sec, they wrote paper script )promise to pay, and spent the money right away.

    LBJ designed it that way. He wanted to be sure it could not be killed.
    Aug 27, 2015. 11:25 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment