DIAMONDS Trust, Series 1 (DIA)

All Comments on DIA

  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    May 05 08:33 AM
    Economic Slowdown: Employment Holding Up Well [view article]
    OH NO! The superficial, useless and absolutely dumb articles continue to grow at an alarming rate at SA.
    first, it#s obviously just another author who is believing the Bullsh!t's department's (BLS) "statistics and doesn't bother to even look into them beyond the surface.
    so, even when we accept these strange numbers for a moment: each and every item that is important for signalling the state of the domestic economy, i.e. recession or boom was down - considerably: manufacturing, construction, retail. all in all, another 110.000 stuff-producing-jobs were lost. on the other hand, 90.000 non-producing "service" jobs (whatever these services are) were added. services jobs, btw, are usually much lower paid and add much less value than the "producing" jobs. which makes a huge difference over the longer run. worse, they provide the basis for the services in most cases. with (imagined) zero production jobs there is finally nothing left to support the services pyramid atop of it.
    a positive exception was, lo and behold, financial services. of course finance does not end at wallstreet - but a lot of financial services deliver to wallstreet nonetheless. and mortgage and finance companies trying desperately to survive certainly do not add jobs either. so who are we made to believe is hiring the supposedly large amounts of "financial services" people?
    the bulk though, came from the absolutely nonsensical birth-death-model that is used by the bls basically to make up the num,bers to whatever level they wish. so 72.000 business services jobs were added by way of new firms. helloo?? didn#t the author dare to ask himself what strange businesses these might be and whether they will add anything to the economy - or rather be a burden?
    no he didn't because he didn't care.
    what a crap.
    but alas, there is no recession, no weak dollar, no deteriorating economy until the govt. confirms it, right?
    unbelievable.     Reply
  • commenter
    dectra
    May 05 08:24 AM
    Employment Report Fictions and Fed Actions [view article]
    Well, what exactly did you expect from our current 'leader'? Everyone with an ounce of self respect admits bush is a lightweight, and his incompetent and criminal disregard for oversight of the nation's economy has landed us squarely where we are. Now the question is how to stop them from digging the hole any deeper....

    1. Reinstate the prohibitions that a bank holding company can own other financial companies. (which was repealed in 1999 by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. )

    2. Have a write down deadline for financial institutions, such as the end of 2008. After that, tell the superbanks and Citigroup boys "you eat your losses.

    Only after we've actually cleared the books and ensured that it can't happen again will we move out of this mess.     Reply
  • commenter
    fatcat
    May 05 07:54 AM
    Why Did the Mortgage Market Go Out of Control? [view article]
    If everyone in the financial world had read this post 8 yrs. ago,I wonder if it would have changed things?

    I knew things were terribly wrong when I saw some of the people getting loans they could not swing.I just didn't understand the derivitives and nobody ever wanted to explain...they didn't want anyone to know.     Reply
  • commenter
    syndicat
    May 05 07:34 AM
    Why Did the Mortgage Market Go Out of Control? [view article]
    Great explanation.

    I think that something similar is going on with all the Master Limited Partnerships that are being created. Wall Street has figured out a way to restructure these assets and sell the pieces at a higher price in the new structure.

    Most of these assets have been around for years as parts of pipeline companies like Texas Gas Transmission and Northern Natural Gas. Now they are being sliced and diced into new companies to be
    sold, mostly to retail investors.

    The outcome is very predictable.

    Reply
  • commenter
    veeblefetzer
    May 05 07:18 AM
    My Website
    Buffett's Advice to the Berkshire Faithful: Buy Index Funds [view article]
    R. Blaine - Well said! Many people persist in thinking they are smarter than the "average masses" and can therefore choose investments that outperform the market averages. No matter how smart you are or how much you know, there are just too many variables and unexpected events to make picking investments more than a guessing game in the long run. Reply
  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    May 05 07:15 AM
    Buffett's Advice to the Berkshire Faithful: Buy Index Funds [view article]
    a useless article that misses the point - which is why I regard it as useless.
    The question "what's the single best investment idea you recommend?" says it all. People asking for stock-recommendations are usually people who have no clues - and who will NOT recognize when a stock they invest in starts to deteriorate fundamentally. That's because they do not operate on an investment thesis but instead based on a authority who shows them the way. Since buffet cannot continue to show them the way - he would never recommend a single stock (company). He is not a Jim Cramer - quite the opposite! So the single best investment of course would be an investment where you can make the least amount of mistakes - that is: little extra costs, no timing, no extra costs/mistakes by actiove manegers who do a poor job. and no risk of bankruptcy. or simply: maxmimum diversification at little cost and if possible, not to be bought at the peak of a bull run.
    I wonder, where the author has been before. These insights and advices from Buffet are neither new nor do they contradict his overall views on investing. rather, he states once again what he has kept stating for years.
    So, where is the news here?     Reply
  • commenter
    R. Blaine
    May 05 02:50 AM
    Buffett's Advice to the Berkshire Faithful: Buy Index Funds [view article]
    This blatantly absurd statement is repeated ad nauseum regarding Buffet's take on index funds:

    "But when the man who most personifies the exception to the rule reinforces those views, it's always nice to note."

    Warren Buffet is not a stock-picker (like bearfund apparently is, for instance). He chooses companies, yes, but then he proceeds to buy enough of that company to direct its fate. His 9% ownership of Coca-Cola belies the idea that he is like you and me -- unless the readers of this column can elect members of the BOD--and therefore help control the direction--of the companies they buy.

    Fifty years of empirical evidence proves that bearfund is a convincing and either an ignorant or deceitful salesman. No-one can accurately predict on an on-going, year-after-year basis the trend of the world market, let alone a sector, let alone a single company.

    The future is random. A little bonds, a little gold, a little real estate, a little equity, a little China, India, Canada, oil, copper, soybean... Collectively, we simply have no clue of what will happen next.

    Good luck.

    Reply
  • commenter
    Silver-Bulle
    t
    May 05 12:57 AM
    It's a Rally and It Feels So Good [view article]
    I've got good news and bad news:

    First the good - yes, the stock market will be going higher, in fact it will be making new highs!

    The bad news - The reason for this is because Mr. Ben B. in collusion with our government is printing lots and lots of money (eg - Investment Banks bail outs, stimulus checks to you and me etc.). Some of this excess cash will find its way into the stock market.

    I lament that our stock market is starting to look like that of Zimbabwe. The rise in stock market is not always equal to wealth creation - especially when there is inflation and the currency is continually and deliberately debased by people we put in office.
     Reply
  • commenter
    Skjellifetti
    May 04 11:49 PM
    Buffett's Advice to the Berkshire Faithful: Buy Index Funds [view article]
    I'll bet bearfund has never beaten the indexes over, say, any given 10 year period in the past 50 years, especially after paying for all the expenses he has incured trying to figure out what might be likely (but is just as likely not to) outperform.

    Bogleheads rule!     Reply
  • commenter
    michaelserve
    t
    May 04 11:38 PM
    Buffett's Advice to the Berkshire Faithful: Buy Index Funds [view article]
    Actually, Buffet said that diversified funds - using Vanguard as an example - were the best approach for amateur investors (he didn't imply that amateurs were ignorant), however, there was no good reason for professional investors to diversify.

    One exception he noted - through a different question - was that with pharmaceuticals you may as well buy the basket rather than try to figure out the relative values of individual pipelines (for example, trying to guess whether J&J vs. Pfizer vs. Sanofi would be the company to have the breakthrough drug)     Reply
  • commenter
    scottp
    May 04 11:15 PM
    Buffett's Advice to the Berkshire Faithful: Buy Index Funds [view article]
    Well put Bearfund Reply
  • commenter
    bearfund
    May 04 10:36 PM
    Buffett's Advice to the Berkshire Faithful: Buy Index Funds [view article]
    Skjellifetti, you may or may not "do fine" - each of us has his own goals and horizon when trading or investing, and those index funds may or may not generate the returns we need or want. More to the point, however, they are not going to "outperform" the market; in fact, they are going to underperform it by margins I would expect to be virtually identical to their expense ratios.

    "Ordinary people" with no knowledge of finance or economics and no desire or ability to do even basic research should not be "investing" at all. 99.9% of such people would benefit far more from paying off their credit cards, learning to budget, and not spending more than they earn than they would by putting a few dollars here or there into index funds. If they have money left over, it should be put into an insured savings account or - depending on tax advice - a muni money market account. Any investment more complicated than those, including index funds, simply requires more knowledge and effort than most people will muster.

    The S&P 500 is not just some number that goes up and down, mostly up, and over a long time goes up more than other equally mysterious numbers. It's shares in 500 separate companies. Some of those companies are good, most are garbage. Some are undervalued by the market relative to their value creation potential, most are overvalued. Except for spike tops at the height of manias like we had in 2000, it's likely that this is more true right now than at any time in living memory. Regardless of current economic conditions, though, if you're contemplating an index fund, you should be asking yourself whether you want to own each of that index's components. Do I want to own C? FNM? MBIA? Do I feel BNI is fairly valued right now? What about USB? GOOG? X? Am I comfortable with ADM's near-total reliance on a dubious subsidy regime? Do I believe in MOT's ability to turn things around? Does S have any future at all? Can I in good conscience own XOM (almost 4% of the index!)? When you buy an S&P 500 index fund, you're buying all of those and 489 other companies. Are you so sure that you can't pick at least one winner and one loser out of those? Really?

    Index investors are supporting a lot of losers and damaging their portfolios in the process. As even Buffett admits under duress, broad diversification of this type is really useful only to help people who don't have a clue avoid being manipulated by "advisors" with agendas, following bogus tips, chasing hot money, or picking obvious losers out of sheer ignorance. It necessarily entails diluting the gains from your winners with losses from obvious stinkers, securities you knew or certainly would have known in advance had you done even cursory research that you did not want to own. If you simply must index, you should at least hedge some of the junk to avoid unwanted risk. But frankly, most investors with less than a million dollars don't need more than a couple dozen positions open at any one time. It's hard enough to find that many winners and wait for the right entry points, and I see little reason to buy anything that's not a sure winner. If you just want to gamble, visit a casino. But please, don't just blindly buy broad indexes. The tide does not always rise, and while it may float all boats when it does, it will surely ground some when it inevitably goes out. Avoid buying those and you really will outperform.     Reply
  • commenter
    Amit Chokshi
    May 04 09:37 PM
    My Website
    Here We Go Again - Sowood Manager Launching New Fund [view article]
    Why rip on guys that get a second chance? Didn't the great Bill Ackman blow up when he ran Gotham yet now he's idolized by all of these value investors. Reply
  • commenter
    whidbey
    May 04 09:29 PM
    Employment Numbers and New Fed Liquidity [view article]
    It is the liquidity that will drive the market up and the dollar down, we can NOT be sure whether this is good or bad on a general basis, only individuals can evaluate that. But what matters is the cooperation by Central banks. This may avoid the destruction of the dollar and world commerce. Small matters, but progress towards working things out. Reply
  • commenter
    Skjellifetti
    May 04 09:25 PM
    Buffett's Advice to the Berkshire Faithful: Buy Index Funds [view article]
    Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund -- https://personal.vangu...

    Vanguard Total Market Index Fund -- https://personal.vangu...

    Vanguard Total International Stock Index -- https://personal.vangu...

    And maybe a bit of

    Vanguard REIT Index Fund -- https://personal.vangu...

    You'll do fine.     Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: