Seeking Alpha
Seeking Alpha Portfolio App for iPad
Finance
(1)
Market Currents

Forget next quarter - David Rosenberg figures GDP could go negative this quarter, planning for a...

  • Saturday, August 21, 2010, 8:55 AM ET
    Forget next quarter - David Rosenberg figures GDP could go negative this quarter, planning for a -1.5% rate vs. others' 2.5-3.5%. It's not about a double-dip, he says; the recession never ended.
Track new comments on this story

This news story has 75 comments:

  • To go negative we will need Net Exports to continue or get even worse....in other words American companies will increase their
    consumer goods imports....more than they are doing now....you
    believe that then we will go negative....
    21 Aug 2010, 09:20 AM Reply Like
  • People get GDP on the brain.

    GDP is a highly inaccurate estimate, to begin with, and is influenced by factors, like net trade balance, that don't necessarily indicate failing economic strength, even when it's declining, i.e., imports growing faster than exports.

    Just keep a close eye on aggregate corporate revenues. They were up 5.5% YOY in the latest quarter, with more companies (about 70%) reporting increased revenues than in Q1 (about 60%). If and until this number goes flat or negative, the economy is gradually strengthening.
    21 Aug 2010, 09:29 AM Reply Like
  • yea, ummm...the other way for that to happen would be if we exported less genius. Keep an eye on Europe and particularly Asia to see if that's the trend. Hint: when we sneeze, the world 'still' gets a cold, at least for a few more years or perhaps even another decade
    21 Aug 2010, 09:37 AM Reply Like
  • Mann:

    Disregarding your feeble insult:

    It doesn't matter whether we export more or less, as long as aggregate coporate revenues continue to advance. That's the whole point.

    The fact that trade balance can yo-yo the GDP numbers all oer the place is why aggregate corporate revenues are a superior and far more accurate indicator of economic performance. They can't be jiggered; they aren't estimates; they aren't perpetually "revised;" and they aren't subject to "political windage." They're just hard, cold, accounting data.
    21 Aug 2010, 09:46 AM Reply Like
  • Tack, I was responding to BBRObama's 'feeble' claim that only looked at one side of the trade balance equation. Meant no insult to you....
    21 Aug 2010, 09:47 AM Reply Like
  • Mann:

    Thanks for clarification. Think we should all avoid the "personal commentary."

    P.S. SA needs to make it so that when somebdy hits "reply," it automatically inserts to whom the reply is directed. Think I'll recommend that to them.
    21 Aug 2010, 09:52 AM Reply Like
  • Manny......"Trading frequency: Daily "???.....
    21 Aug 2010, 09:59 AM Reply Like
  • BBRObama: ummm....yea, sure. Whatever. Are you ready to admit how wrong you were/are with regard to unemployment yet? The first step towards healing is admitting you have a problem, ya know...
    21 Aug 2010, 10:35 AM Reply Like
  • "GDP is a highly inaccurate estimate"

    Agree tack. GDP is a highy "flexible" (see: manupulated) data source. When/if the 70% consumer based GDP model is used, that's when we'll have a better idea of when we'll come out of recession. (yes, I'm in the camp of "we never left it").
    21 Aug 2010, 10:47 AM Reply Like
  • Yes unfortunately the employment situation hasn't materialized....
    I personally want to see people employed....and I hope you do too...
    we can disagree about the methods to get there....
    21 Aug 2010, 11:34 AM Reply Like
  • I do want to see the employment picture improve...very much so. Where you and I diverge (about 180 degrees I would imagine) is what is needed on both a fiscal and monetary policy basis to get us there...
    21 Aug 2010, 12:16 PM Reply Like
  • Actually most of my energy is devoted to the data...right or wrong....
    political discussions are generally a waste of time in my book...in
    my many years of bond trading I found when people let their politics
    get in the way they eventually lost money....
    21 Aug 2010, 12:33 PM Reply Like
  • Minus stimulus and what do you have in corporate profits? Would they be so rosy and superior?
    21 Aug 2010, 12:43 PM Reply Like
  • Bingo - and what I can't understand is for all the computer models, business intelligence, aggregated historical data we still to this day don't understand something comparatively simple as an economy.

    A healthy economy needs to be "operated" like any other system - ours is stumbling around like its being manipulated by fools. Personally I enjoy watching China - so far they seem to be successfully growing their economy and raising the standard of living in that country.
    21 Aug 2010, 09:20 AM Reply Like
  • When the average person earns $1/day...it doesn't take much to raise the standard of living.

    The poorest people in American, on the other hand, already live higher quality lives than most people in the history of human kind. So it's tough to make it much better from that point.
    21 Aug 2010, 02:41 PM Reply Like
  • the same things I told people when they criticized G. W. B
    21 Aug 2010, 11:54 PM Reply Like
  • Paul - at least you're not disagreeing with the premise that our economic system is being operated poorly.... which is my point.

    The fact that China went from $1/day to a thriving / growing middle class while ours has shrunk is kind of telling for me, as far as who is managing their economy better.

    I am not making the point that we should operate our economy like China. Each economic system is different, that is consistent with the culture. One question: Does the economic system drive the culture or does the culture drive the economy ?
    22 Aug 2010, 09:57 AM Reply Like
  • David's comments are validated by the CMI which went negative in 2Q and are starting to plumb the depths of the 2008 contraction. The CMI gained even more credibility when the BEA last month revised the 4Q '08 numbers to verify the CMI index bottom in November '08. CMI measures consumer durables on a daily basis.The CMI has been mentioned on SA by Erik McCurdy and John Mauldin.

    www.consumerindexes.co...
    21 Aug 2010, 09:24 AM Reply Like
  • Not a recession at all for the privately employed productive middle class.....but a depression in employment, income, after tax purchasing power, real net worth and near term prospects. It was, is and will continue to be a depression as long as the Regime rules.
    A recession would be a great improvement.

    Not a recession at all for the ruling Troika of Big Govt, Big Money and Big Media but a boom that only grows better and better every day and every way. It was and is and in the absence of a middle class rebellion the best of times for the Bosses.

    Not a recession for the lower class...but merely a stagnation in real income transfers from the middle class...even the stagnation is obscured by money illusion.
    21 Aug 2010, 09:31 AM Reply Like
  • So US companies are importing more consumer goods,,,,Americans
    raised their savings rate to 6.2% and disposable income went up
    4.4% in the second quarter and 3.75% in first quarter....sub par growth due to buying too many foreign goods and saving more....
    21 Aug 2010, 09:34 AM Reply Like
  • Disposable income went up, in large part, due to free money for houses they still can't afford, an increased tax return and the billions and billions (probably trillion) from the census.

    SUCCESS!

    So, now what?
    21 Aug 2010, 11:46 AM Reply Like
  • record 401k withdraws and loans don't really agree with you...
    "
    The number of workers making hardship withdrawals from their retirement accounts reached a record high in the second quarter as the sagging economy drains household wealth."

    See full article from DailyFinance: srph.it/dlU13G
    21 Aug 2010, 01:06 PM Reply Like
  • bbro, you've used the increased savings argument in other SA articles, and I will cut-and-paste my past reply:

    Over 75% of individuals with income earn less than $50k per year; only 6% earn more than $100k. While the cost of living (i.e. cost of survival) is rising, real incomes are falling. 75% of "consumers" are struggling to make ends meet. I have a hard time believing that the people who make up the majority of "average consumers" are saving more while their disposable incomes are falling. Is it really fair to say that American consumers are saving more without differentiating between high-income versus low-income earners? I'd be curious to see these same statistics broken-down by income levels.

    stop spreading half-truths and misinformation... b(ig)bro(ther) has done enough damage
    23 Aug 2010, 12:59 PM Reply Like
  • Fiat flooding into top select "banks" and pet projects do NOT make for recovery. period. True recessionary easing will come in the manner of GDP recovery.
    Now, I speak of the traditional sense of "GDP" where the consumer (70% of "real" GDP) is contributing at a healthy clip.
    The current GDP (see: Govt Driven Ponzi), is not a recovery, nor a legitimate definition and benchmark of domestic health.

    21 Aug 2010, 09:34 AM Reply Like
  • Why not use Gross Domestic Income???
    21 Aug 2010, 09:36 AM Reply Like
  • Because it would be negative?
    21 Aug 2010, 03:10 PM Reply Like
  • First China: Sure everyone loves the Chinese economy with central control. All those managers of the economy are doing just dim-sum, but let's see how they react when the skies are not clear and going gets rough. You just can't order a recovery in a free market nor a semi-free market like China. The test of the greatness of the miracle China economy is yet to come. As far as the industrial output I say it is above water. We are not in a double dip nor a depression nor in a continuing stagnation or any of the other doom and gloom scenarios. We are in for a slow recovery. To the dismay of many we will make it out and gold will not hit $5000 an oz nor will we have run away inflation nor will we end up like Japan, nor any of the other (how Americans love disaster) end of world scenarios.
    21 Aug 2010, 09:35 AM Reply Like
  • In recessions past we could always eventually bank on simple GDP comparisons. If the first or second quarter went negative, the next year would have a relatively easier comparisons thus producing a positive result. But more importantly as a recession comes on businesses in the US are much more adept than ever before at cutting costs by reducing the workforce and scaling back the production of inventory in anticipation of a drop in demand. Usually, they pull back enough that inventories become so lean that a restocking is in order. It is that restocking of inventories that ramps up the economy until things start to snowball. This recession carries a lot more baggage. The 90% that are still gainfully employed had been on a spending binge fueled by the real estate market. They used their homes as an ATM. This debt needs to be reduced down to levels that provide enough financial comfort to encourage these consumers to spend a little again. We will also need to wait out the foreclosure process for the millions that can't make their payments. Eventually, new foreclosures will draw down and a bottom in the real estate market will be on the horizon. All of this extra baggage is slowing the pick up in our economy. Government action isn't the cure. Patience with the process is what is needed.
    21 Aug 2010, 09:46 AM Reply Like
  • Personal Savings was 1.56% of GDP in the 4th qtr 2007....today
    it is 4.84% of GDP....highest level since 1992....
    21 Aug 2010, 09:54 AM Reply Like
  • How much has credit dissolved? How many people are unemployed? Savings rates doesn't matter much when they are surviving, not living.
    21 Aug 2010, 12:50 PM Reply Like
  • 40 year Personal Savings to GDP average ....5.0%
    21 Aug 2010, 10:10 AM Reply Like
  • It doesn't matter when the savings are earning a paltry one tenth of one percent!
    21 Aug 2010, 01:00 PM Reply Like
  • Missing a key point of the data..,,,,
    21 Aug 2010, 01:25 PM Reply Like
  • I think Rosie will be seen to have been one of the most accurate forecasters of the economy, but it will give him no more pleasure than it gives me. I think we need to focus on three numbers - the first is GDP, even though it is a far from perfect measure, the second is the level of deficit spending and the third is employment. Revenue growths of multnational corporations don't help us with the big problem - the government is spending the country into bankruptcy and risking the status of the Dollar as the global reserve currency.

    What is the purpose of the deficit spending? The government is spending around twice what it collects, more than 10% of GDP in order to boost the economy, and yet Q2 growth is around 1%, the jobless rate is showing no signs of coming down and the balance of trade is getting worse. So, we are living on credit and getting further in debt, failing to boost domestic industry and sticking our head in the sands about the future The big problem is we are heading to an outcome that could be so ugly that it is beyond the comprehension of those who have spent their lives being brainwashed in the concept of USA supremacy; the biggest, richest most powerful etc etc. When the Chinese are dumping Treasuries and buying Spanish government bonds, along with JGBs and Korean debt, you need to ask what are they worried about.

    There is combination of arrogance and ignorance in American society that could lead to disastrous consequences.
    21 Aug 2010, 11:09 AM Reply Like
  • nobby:

    Some excellent commentary.

    Yes, government, where it presents itself almost anywhere, is a leech on society and wealth creation. Deficit spending, even if not ruinous, merely escalates inflation, eventually, making it necessary for investors to run ever faster to keep up with changes in nominal pricing. And, despite all the infatuation with government bonds, for the moment, all the worldwide monetary creation will ultimately be inflationary, as it always has been and must be. The laws of economics are ultimately immutable: if you increase significantly the supply of one thing (money) far faster than the supply of what it buys (goods & services), then, you get inflation.

    At the same time --and, this is speaking especially as an investor, not a "citizen" -- it's important to separate nationalistic desires and patriotism from investment strategy required for each individual and family to prosper in the world, as it's presented, not as they wish it to be. Investors will benefit if they think just like multinational corporations, i.e., don't think of oneself as American; think globally and deploy capital n a manner to maximize gains, regardless of what happens, specifically, to the U.S. standard of living. This is all one can do; try to stay ahead of the game. All the rest is hand-waving.

    The present situation reminds me of real-life stories (books/movies) where a group of people find themselves in a crisis (shipwreck, airline crash, avalanche, forest fire, etc.). Some of the people panic and scream, "we're all gonna die," and, often, they do; others, usually a minority, stay cool and calm and figure out how to escape the peril, and they survive and prosper.

    Now, is a time for careful thought, analysis and capital allocation, rather than lots of harangues and emotionalism, at least if one's goal is to make money.
    21 Aug 2010, 11:30 AM Reply Like
  • Purpose? Transfer private debt to public debt.
    21 Aug 2010, 12:51 PM Reply Like
  • The unemployment numbers do not reflect that many people are working "under the table", meaning they are getting paid cash, which they do not report (so they don't have to pay taxes).

    So real unemployment may not be nearly as bad as the numbers indicate.

    Retails are continuing to sell goods, so people are making money somehow.
    21 Aug 2010, 02:45 PM Reply Like
  • Yes, who needs roads, water, electricity. Those do not help economic growth right?

    Yes, get rid of the government and everything will be okay. Just look at Somalia. They have almost no government, and look how great everybody is doing over there!
    21 Aug 2010, 02:46 PM Reply Like
  • "So real unemployment may not be nearly as bad as the numbers indicate."


    Paul H.M., your comments are so blatantly ignorant, I'll just have to assume they're sarcasm...and hilarious sarcasm at that.
    21 Aug 2010, 10:44 PM Reply Like
  • Paul H. M.

    Nobody in here said 'we don't need Government'
    So, your are arguing within yourself
    21 Aug 2010, 11:20 PM Reply Like
  • if you right on that we had negative unemployment during G.W.B regime
    21 Aug 2010, 11:56 PM Reply Like
  • SA recently had an article in which it was stated that about 90% of the last 20 economic reports were "less than expected" based upon economic consensus - reminds me of 2007 "when sub-prime was contained".

    Anyway, it seems that the contrarian approach would be to take the under on the economic consensus since the expectation is stil for the 2.5-3% growth range - the over seems very unlikely.

    Existing home sales will be "weaker than expected" next week and so if you know this is about to happen but it is still "surprising" to the vast majority of economists and financial touts, how would you trade on that data?
    21 Aug 2010, 11:32 AM Reply Like
  • We don't need to quibble about GDP number accuracy to know intuitively that the recession never ended.

    For Wall Street it ended because they were bailed out by Washington and the markets went up. For Washington the recession ended because they spend other people's money (ours) and get their palms greased by corporations, unions, banks, etc.

    For high income individuals and families whose income is generated from parasitic non-productive activities (e.g. - lawyers, CEO's, hedge fund managers) the recession never ended because their income stream was never truly affected, only the perception.

    For the rest of us, THE RECESSION NEVER ENDED whatever the GDP or CPI says. The majority of families and individuals are out of work or out of money or toiling more in order to pay increased taxes, premiums, fees, non-discretionary costs, and ultimately pay for the sins and crimes of the spineless greedy gutless narcissistic weasels in Washington and Wall Street who don't give a damn about anyone else.
    21 Aug 2010, 11:38 AM Reply Like
  • ebworthen - Right on! You are correct.
    There has been NO recovery. How can there have been one if the numbers of food stamp (SNAP program) users keeps growing MoM? Unemployment with no improvement? Just the number of withdrawal by people from their 401Ks to live, tells a story of ongoing struggle.

    All this conjecture of what constitutes GDP, CPI, etc. Just masks the bottom line - this is a depression for the vast majority of citizens. The only difference between now and the 'Dirty Thirties' is the number of safety nets that hide the problem. eg. Food stamps now - back then, bread lines and soup kitchens. Unemployment benefits now - back then, relief work at work camps. People trapped in place by underwater mortgages and high debt loads - back then, massive unemployed population migrations.

    Make no mistake. For the majority this is a depression.
    21 Aug 2010, 12:00 PM Reply Like
  • I live in S.F., and all my friends and family have jobs.

    My wife just rejoined the workforce (since our son is old enough to daycare), and it only took her a couple of weeks to find a job.

    I guess things are much worse in other parts of the nation.

    And in my neighborhood, houses rarely stay on the market for more than a couple of weeks.

    So I'm not seeing any signs of "recession" here. Hopefully the rest of the country can catch up to us.
    21 Aug 2010, 02:50 PM Reply Like
  • If things are so bad, why do you have time to post here?

    If you don't have a job, shouldn't you be looking for work rather than posting on an investment website?

    And if you do have work, what are you complaining about?
    21 Aug 2010, 02:51 PM Reply Like
  • Thank you Donald for making a truthful statement "for the majority, this is a Depression". My timeline:

    June 2009 - lost $20/hr job
    Oct 2009 - took first job that would have me (part time at 7.50/hr, augmented unemployment 'insurance')
    Dec 2009 - made full time project (12.50/hr)
    March 2010 - made full time permanent (13.75/hr)

    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that means I'm making 68% of what I used to make.

    I confess, I'm working for a local government entity, so yes, I am one of those overpaid/underworked people taxpayers are complaining about. I won't get a raise this year, but I also (hopefully) won't lose my job this year (fingers crossed). I have the fed taxes, the social security tax, mandatory retirement savings (yes, I am not allowed to opt out of retirement savings), and mandatory health insurance (this was even before the healthcare 'plan' passed).

    Next year, my share for mandatory health insurance will go up (thanks for 'fixing' me over). Additionally, the Evil Bush/Republican tax cuts will expire, meaning more of my bi-weekly take home pay will not be taken home by me (yes, I know, I'll get a refund, when I file my 2011 taxes in 2012, but what do I do in 2011 to make up for that).

    I would love to get a part-time job to help with the bills. However, because I had to file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in January 2010, I'm not even considered (people with good credit are much better employees don't you know). So now, I make just enough to cover bills, no eating out, no savings, and no credit line. I'm not even a paycheck away from disaster, I'm literally a refrigerator, washing machine, or car engine repair away from disaster.

    Don't tell me this is a recession. This is what my grand-parents told me the depression was like, only you had the opportunity to better yourself back then.
    21 Aug 2010, 03:01 PM Reply Like
  • A large segment of jobs in the SF Bay area are government work.

    Look at a holiday like Columbus Day (or is Indigenous People day?) when government workers generally get off but normal workers don't. The traffic here drops by 50% on a day like this.
    21 Aug 2010, 03:15 PM Reply Like
  • why don't cross Bay Bridge to see other side of the coin.
    21 Aug 2010, 11:51 PM Reply Like
  • ahh yes...the 'ol, "can't see it from my house" mantra. Now I understand the way off base thoughts you've posted Paul. I live in the greater D.C. area and could say the same thing. However, I tend to take a much broader macro investigative peek at conditions in order to draw conclusions. If the day comes where "San Francisco" is contributing 70% of national GDP, I will then develop my trading and investing strategies around your comments.
    22 Aug 2010, 11:31 AM Reply Like
  • This is because you live in part of the Fantasy Island bubble.

    Your state is broke, insolvent, or do the figures not matter when they are in your backyard?

    Get a grip.
    22 Aug 2010, 11:30 PM Reply Like
  • All analysis, and rosy-optimists clubs, continue to ignore reality and history.

    Think of our society as a pyramid with the "elite" at the very top, the political/ruling class underneath, then the "well off" next - the three making a really small wedge, then the huge slice of middle class and poverty on the bottom.

    There is much movement between the top three tiers, with very little, to no statistical probability of movement from the bottom of the pyramid to the very top two tiers. You might hit the third tier if really lucky/smart.

    Here is the problem folks. All the people at the top of the pyramid got/get there due to money produced by the American working middle class (non-union, golden parachute) and now, the world's future middle class.

    Simple math is that if you take money from one strata and gift it to another, the paying strata shrinks - it has too.

    That former growing middle section had ENORMOUS purchasing power when we had real jobs, then liar loans and cheap interest credit cards. We no longer have either.

    Now we can pretend that as long as the money is "still in the system," be it in government/government worker hands, or the elite, that everything is going to be ok, even as we see more and more of the middle fall into poverty.

    Here is realty, it is working, and will continue to work, the EXACT opposite.

    Contrary to popular belief, ten guys making one-hundred million each a year (one billion a year), will NEVER equate to the purchasing power of 20,000 people sharing the same income ($50k annually). Twenty THOUSAND houses, forty THOUSAND cars, 1.2 kids and college educations, boats, motorcycles, remodels.

    So, by allowing the continued transfer of the middle class to the top, all we are doing, and have been doing is circling the gd drain.

    Now we can pretend that the scraps left on the table will be enough for the bulk of our society, or, we can prepare for the future that is coming.

    No matter the freakin' GDP numbers.
    21 Aug 2010, 12:08 PM Reply Like
  • If you have time to post these long comments, I guess you're one of the elite?

    After all, most human in history would not have the luxury of sitting in front of an internet-connected (where are you getting the money for you internet, since things are so bad?) computer and typing pages and pages of comments.

    If you have time to post here, the system must be working better for you than for most.

    The fact that so many people have time to post on this websites tell me that whatever recession we happen to be in, it's very mild by historical standards. We're living the good life...so enjoy it instead of stressing!
    21 Aug 2010, 02:53 PM Reply Like
  • I hope you are not really believing the pap that you post.

    A lot of people have given up looking for work. Remember there are still 5-6 people ON AVERAGE for every available job. Employers who advertise on places like Craigslist get 100's of resumes for a single position!

    It is also Saturday, so not a prime time to hunt for work.

    And go into any local library and see how many people are sitting at the free internet terminals. At any time of the day, the internet terminals are nearly all full and their are people waiting to get a seat. There are a lot of people who can't even afford internet service.
    21 Aug 2010, 03:26 PM Reply Like
  • Or, it could be because my business is still down by 50% from peak but I'm incredibly freakin' frugal and know how to prioritize my expenses. Like I have an "old fashioned" tv, basic cable (which if left to me would be canceled), high speed internet and a cell phone that costs $30 a month and makes phone calls, not plays games or music.

    A lot of what you say is true and I agree with it.

    What you may be neglecting, and who could blame you sitting in your fully employed, foreign and government home purchasing heaven, is that the people which are paying for your lifestyle (taxpayers/customers /whomever) are shrinking in number and shrinking in net worth and income.

    Bankrupting, or firing, your customers is NEVER a good idea for the long term health of a company, or country. Ask the auto companies how well it worked out when they decided to offshore their supplier base. A base that used to buy new cars every year and that now are located in Asia making $1.25 an hour.

    Keep in mind as so many fall below "poverty" (and yes, I see the lunacy of our poor having $100 shoes and $100 a month cell phone plans), someone will have to pay for them.

    That, would be you and your circle of influence. Mine too, after all I'm the "rich, evil, small businessman" that screws my workers and cheats the tax man. Neither of which is true, but I am made to pay for it nonetheless.

    And if we don't open our eyes and stop this disaster, so will we. Pay and pay and pay, until we find ourselves below that magical poverty line.
    21 Aug 2010, 06:20 PM Reply Like
  • I love it when REALITY gets thumbs down.

    Ivory towers don't seem to be just for professors anymore.
    21 Aug 2010, 06:21 PM Reply Like
  • I heard on radio. Don't remember who he was said that we are in worst recession after great depression
    22 Aug 2010, 12:08 AM Reply Like
  • I am not sure that the state of the economy matters that much for stock valuations at this point of time. Most investors are not that oblivious to the sorry state of the US economy (with some obvious exceptions on SA) but they simply choose to believe that the Fed will prop up the asset prices no matter what. Given our very recent history they have every right to believe this. I am not so sure though that the Fed will ride to the rescue. It is not 2008 and the mood in Washington is different. The last FOMC meeting confirmed that Bernanke understands how serious the situation is but that there are political constraints to what he can do. My guess is that the markets will break down from the current trading range not when the economic indicators show loud and clear how bad things are but when investors realize that the government will be sitting this one out.
    21 Aug 2010, 02:28 PM Reply Like
  • Three things are important for stock valuations: earnings, earnings, and earnings.

    Earnings keep going up. So no matter how the bears want to spin it, I can't see the market crashing too far as long as earnings keep going up.
    21 Aug 2010, 02:56 PM Reply Like
  • Earnings are not up due to organic growth. They are up because companies continue to cut back on workers and squeeze more work out of existing workforces.

    Did you miss the latest statistic that claims for unemployment benefits hit 500k? That is form people who have lost their jobs.
    21 Aug 2010, 03:30 PM Reply Like
  • All the pessimists continue to ignore the corporate revenue numbers because it does not fit their model of calamity. Cost cutting is the repeated mantra for explaining anything positive at the bottom line.

    Unfortunately, in Q1, 60% of companies reporting reported increases in top-line revenues (2.5%), and in Q2 70% of companies reported revenue gains (5.5%). These are unaffected by whatever cost cutting further down the income statement and reflect that companies are either selling more (so much for declining unit sales) or charging a lot more (so much for deflation), or both.

    Now, maybe, all those revenue gains will suddenly halt and reverse and will plunge into the abyss, but until signs appear that revenues are declining, not advancing, I wouldn't get the pallbearers all dressed up, just yet.
    21 Aug 2010, 06:20 PM Reply Like
  • Earnings are going up on the blood of American consumers, 'er workers.

    For US this is not good news. It portends our futures when "our" employers decide to locate to where their profitable divisions are located (hint, not here).
    21 Aug 2010, 06:23 PM Reply Like
  • Tack,
    Take another look at those top line #'s. The revenue 'beats' were largely measured against 'expectations'.
    If you rerun the #'s and look at t 5 quarter trend to see who's grown the top line on a sequential AND same quarter year over year basis, you'll see that it's a pretty short list.
    Even at that, when you think about how many co's are going to be able to show growth on a 3q09 vs 3q10 and a 3q10 vs 2q10 basis, you will understand some of the pessimism.
    21 Aug 2010, 06:32 PM Reply Like
  • Tack increased "top line" earnings HERE, or elsewhere.

    THAT is my point.

    Unless you really believe that a few people earning money on stocks can support our entire economy.

    The end game, throughout history, is not optimistic for what will happen when the wealth goes away. And by nearly EVERY metric, the wealth of the masses (not just the top 5%) is FLEEING and won't be coming back anytime soon.
    21 Aug 2010, 06:36 PM Reply Like
  • Teresa:

    I'm talking about "revenues," not earnings, although they're increasing even faster, of course, due to cost cuts. Did you mention "earnings" in error?

    The notion persists that the entire economy is being held aloft by a handful of scammers in the stock market and running banks, rather than the entirety of the employed population, as if a few tens of thousands of people could hold aloft a nation of 330 million. It's classic class warfare and demagoguery, nothing more.

    Of course, the wealthy always do better than everybody else; that's just the way it is. Or, we can adopt a communist model, where we're all equal in near poverty, like the old Soviet Union. Maybe, some would prefer that, as long as no neighbor has it better than they do.

    I keep a close eye on data, rather than opinions, forecasts, estimates, sentiment or any other intangible, subjective element. Maybe, other folks eschew such an approach, but for me, tuning out the "noise" has worked very, very well for fifteen years, even the last three. I'm not about to abandon my approach now.

    I expect choppy, uneven growth and a volatile, uncertain market, which is why I recommend a portfolio heavy in income and value plays, especially preferred stocks, and light or absent growth stocks. Such a portfolio will perform even in flat to down markets. As for bonds, I think high-yield corporates are extremely attractive at current spreads, but that Treasuries are a time bomb, just awaiting the right catalyst.

    My goal is to make money investing, not solve the world's problems or predict the hour of it's decline into the final hell, which has been a societal pastime through the ages, but not a very profitable one.
    21 Aug 2010, 06:52 PM Reply Like
  • Tack, my replies got shoved into the wrong pecking order, the "earnings" was in response to Jackson999's comment, "...
    Earnings are not up due to organic growth. ..."

    As for revenues, my assertion is that topline revenue growth due to increasing Asia/SAmerica/wherever and continued DECREASE in American sales is NOT any sign of the financial health of THIS country.

    Yes, McDonald's, Coke's and even John Deere's earnings were up, but they were up everywhere except the US.

    Nobody can convince me that the wealth in a the pocket of a few shareholders and taken from the American masses will EVER lead us to the promised land - the end of this damn recession/depression.

    Thanks for your thoughtful response Tack.
    21 Aug 2010, 07:43 PM Reply Like
  • Teresa:

    Thanks for clarification. I have already sent a suggestion to SA that when somebody hits reply button that the person to whom reply is addressed automatically be inserted.

    We'll just have to see where things go. As an investor, I am less concerned about source of growth than that there is some. For the moment I remain in the camp that the pessimism and forecasts of impending doom are overstated. None of this, however, should be interpreted in the slightest, as support for the Administration and its anti-capitalistic policies.
    21 Aug 2010, 08:00 PM Reply Like
  • Though I love your passion and statements Teresa, I am going to partially disagree. If you look at where many companies are pulling their profits it isn't domestic..it is overseas...most notably Asia. The question is ...is this self sustaining or government propping? I don't know. The Asian countries might be forced to ramp up pay to their workers in order to create and sustain their domestic demand. the question will be can they transition from western export demand to their own domestic demand fast enough to keep the world economy from tanking?
    Demographics are what will kill the west....the question is...can the east transition to creating domestic demand fast enough...I personally think not.
    21 Aug 2010, 10:02 PM Reply Like
  • I completely agree Papa.

    While exchanging with Tack, I stated the exact same thing.

    The West gambled on the "thinking" economy without taking into account the masses not capable of such a thing. The east worries about work for the lower IQ masses and lets their production, and then salaries, float all boats (and it does much better than "trickle down").

    We, the West, are in for a world of hurt as the Asian economy grows and drawfs all that we once were.

    I've always enjoyed your passion and clarity too. I'm working on the clarity.
    21 Aug 2010, 10:32 PM Reply Like
  • "I can't see the market crashing too far as long as earnings keep going up. "

    however market can crash way too far just few days before it officially disclosed to you that earnings don't keep going up
    the whole purpose to be in SA is to get advanced warning
    22 Aug 2010, 12:13 AM Reply Like
  • Earnings have been going higher however because of the huge job cuts still in effect. The job picture has yet to clear up, and with the recent data, it probably won't look to good next time. Consumer's are still are not confident to spend, and we need to get the unemployment rate down. Simply put, this market is not going up in the longrun until jobs start getting better...
    21 Aug 2010, 03:09 PM Reply Like
  • Some great points on this thread.
    Here's what I see for the upcoming week (I'll report back next week to see how I did here, just for kicks):
    1) existing home sales weaker than 'expectations'
    2) Initial claims better than 'expectations'
    3) GDP with a 'one' handle, even though many are 'expecting' it, it will still hurt psychologically, but will probably come in 'in line with expectations'.
    Gotta love that last one; in-line with expectations while throwing a one-handle. The talking heads are going to be spinning like crazy with that....
    21 Aug 2010, 03:19 PM Reply Like
  • I am just stunned how most people fail to check this "economist" track record beyond last few months. It's important to note that he works for an asset firm that espouses bearish view and his primary job is to get on TV and make news, not give objective financial forecast.

    Here's one of his prior gems from the genius forecaster. I am sure his firm clients are ecstatic about going in cash in April 2009. Where are your customers yachts, David?

    From April 2, 2009:

    S&P 500 will hit new lows, in our view
    We remain of the view that the risk of earnings disappointments will take the S&P 500 to new lows before the bear market runs its course. Based on the outlook for corporate profits and the typical trough P/E multiple that characterized recession bear markets, it would not surprise us to see the S&P 500 gravitate in a 475-650 range for an extended period of time.

    Read more: www.businessinsider.co...
    21 Aug 2010, 05:33 PM Reply Like
  • many, many people have been surprised by how long and to what length the current regime has gone to puff smoke into the so-called 'recovery'.
    Being off on timing, and being off on absolute direction are two different things. Market timing is a fools game. Researching fundamentals on the other hand will ultimately pay off.
    21 Aug 2010, 06:05 PM Reply Like
  • These type comments always amaze me.

    Do you carry insurance?

    Why?

    If you haven't been sick, had an accident, had your house burn down or trash your car, then what are you paying the insurance for?

    Just because something hasn't happened YET, doesn't mean you shouldn't prepare for the possibility.

    The market is rigged and corrupted, not being able to accurately forecast THAT isn't a negative thing.
    21 Aug 2010, 06:26 PM Reply Like
Other date
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)