Seeking Alpha

Nov. Retail Sales: +1.3% vs. +0.7% expected, +1.1% previous (revised from +1.4%). Ex-auto +1.2%...

Nov. Retail Sales: +1.3% vs. +0.7% expected, +1.1% previous (revised from +1.4%). Ex-auto +1.2% vs. +0.4% expected, 0% previous (revised from +0.2%).
Comments (9)
  • Papaswamp
    , contributor
    Comments (2198) | Send Message
     
    "The August to September 2009 percent change was revised from -1.5 percent (±0.5%) to -2.3 percent (±0.3%)."
    "The September to October 2009 percent change was revised from +1.4 percent (±0.5%) to +1.1 percent (±0.2%)."

     

    yea I'm a pessimist.
    11 Dec 2009, 08:35 AM Reply Like
  • Burning Madolf
    , contributor
    Comments (200) | Send Message
     
    Here's how they did it:
    Special Notice - Beginning with the December 11, 2009 release for November 2009, estimates in the Advance Monthly Retail Trade Survey release will be based on a new sample. For further information on the 2009 MARTS sample revision, please see the following PDF.

     

    www.census.gov/retail/
    11 Dec 2009, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • mrdirt
    , contributor
    Comments (481) | Send Message
     
    Retail UP. lol. Figures dont lie, liars figure. Heck, it seemed to
    work for manipulators of climate data, why not do it when reporting
    finanical data.

     

    On Dec 11 08:37 AM Burning Madolf wrote:

     

    > Here's how they did it:
    > Special Notice - Beginning with the December 11, 2009 release for
    > November 2009, estimates in the Advance Monthly Retail Trade Survey
    > release will be based on a new sample. For further information on
    > the 2009 MARTS sample revision, please see the following PDF.
    >
    > www.census.gov/retail/
    11 Dec 2009, 08:47 AM Reply Like
  • berated
    , contributor
    Comments (389) | Send Message
     
    Great find, BM. So, after reading that blurb, it's apparent they revised their sampling methodology, but I couldn't find *how* they revised it? Does anyone else see it?

     

    On Dec 11 08:37 AM Burning Madolf wrote:

     

    > Here's how they did it:
    > Special Notice - Beginning with the December 11, 2009 release for
    > November 2009, estimates in the Advance Monthly Retail Trade Survey
    > release will be based on a new sample. For further information on
    > the 2009 MARTS sample revision, please see the following PDF.
    >
    > www.census.gov/retail/
    11 Dec 2009, 08:53 AM Reply Like
  • Burning Madolf
    , contributor
    Comments (200) | Send Message
     
    I couldn't find it either. The PDF at the end of the statement is a link to the same statement.

     

    Everyone knew these numbers would be cooked, but usually we get to see some of the "recipe."

     

    On Dec 11 08:53 AM berated wrote:

     

    > Great find, BM. So, after reading that blurb, it's apparent they
    > revised their sampling methodology, but I couldn't find *how* they
    > revised it? Does anyone else see it?
    11 Dec 2009, 08:55 AM Reply Like
  • youngman442002
    , contributor
    Comments (5131) | Send Message
     
    if its cooked..what do they gain..is it only the Joe on the street that now thinks things are ok....or are they trying to keep up the value of the dollar...t-bills.....when the baltic dry is way down...its hard to say things are back to normal....
    11 Dec 2009, 09:03 AM Reply Like
  • Papaswamp
    , contributor
    Comments (2198) | Send Message
     
    Well at the bottom of the report you can get a feel for the numbers confidence. The percentage deviations are rather high (as high as 3.3%?!).

     

    I think I'll stick with the ISM data.
    11 Dec 2009, 09:07 AM Reply Like
  • Burning Madolf
    , contributor
    Comments (200) | Send Message
     
    I guess the idea is to just kick that can down the street a little and try to make the consumer feel secure enough to buy. Otherwise, if I'm not buying and your not buying and we see others not buying, then it's ok not to buy.

     

    This is twice in 8 days somebody has screwed with consumption data. Look back at 12/3 when the CBOE closed the RLX for the day on bad retail numbers. An index closed for the whole day? And then the data just matches the previous day? Not good.
    On Dec 11 09:03 AM youngman442002 wrote:

     

    > if its cooked..what do they gain..is it only the Joe on the street
    > that now thinks things are ok....or are they trying to keep up the
    > value of the dollar...t-bills.....when the baltic dry is way down...its
    > hard to say things are back to normal....
    11 Dec 2009, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • TruthSayer
    , contributor
    Comments (85) | Send Message
     
    Why do you cook number? Answer its based on theory of consumer behavior.

     

    A theory that the downward momentum of the market is not a function of the reality/fundamentals but of a function of confidence. If you believe it will be. Lack of confidence is what causes a run on money so the opposite must be true? - just create confidence and all will be well. In the near term I agree it probably will work at least delay some of the panic but you better hope your doing something to resolve the underylying fundamentals.

     

    “I fancy that over-confidence seldom does any great harm except when, as, and if, it beguiles its victims into debt.” (Irving Fisher, 1933)
    11 Dec 2009, 10:37 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|