Econ Teacher

Corning: LCD TV Sales Up, Confirms Guidance for Q2

My understanding is yes. Perhaps the article stressed LCD sales because they are gaining/the largest share as % of all display type sales.

Deere Results: Why I Don't Own Equipment Stocks

"I don't own the equipment stocks anymore; at some point the rising cost of steel, petrol products and the like will be hurting the bottom line unless they can pass all the costs along to farmers "

Ho!!! Who stands to benefit the most from rising food prices? Anyone? How about farmers? Is it possible farmers will decide it makes sense to pay higher prices for inputs in order to produce commodities whose prices are rising? Next step: Where's the dollar in relation to the Euro (lots of farmers in Europe)? Real cheap. What does the price of a John Deere or Cat tractor look like to a European farmer? Cheap.
Sorry, I think you got it backwards here. Deere's slide is a golden opportunity to grab their stock and profit from the ongoing US export boom and global rise in food prices.

Industries to Avoid, Industries to Buy

Well, you're a bit touchy for someone who hopes to make their way in the public eye, but OK - it's a free country (unless there's something you're not telling us).

I'll limit this to two items - trade and cars. First, trade is good. Period. Even the msot dyed-in-the-wool 'managed trade' economists now accept their reduced role of advocating for more, vice less, assistance to the very few who suffer from trade, such as workers (and capital) employed in dying industries. Even they acknowledge that countries that trade benefit the vast majority of their citizens. The freer the trade, the greater the benefit. Think about this: If trade is so bad, then "un-trade" must be good, right? We shouldn't just ban international trade, we should outlaw interstate trade! That way, EVERY state would have a thriving aerospace industry, car industry, textile industry, black and white tv industry and buggy-whip industry, with jobs galore for all. No?

Cars: US carmakers in the 80s made a lousy product, not because they spent all their time fighting labor - quite the opposite; because they appeased labor's wage and benefit demands too readily. Why did they do this? Well, they figured they could pass on the costs to consumers because...car makers had no competition, especially no FOREIGN competition (see 'trade' above). So the industry went to the brink. When they returned they began to make a slightly better product and eventually turned all their attention to large-margin vehicles (when you have a lot of overhead, you need to increase your unit margins). Cheap gas helped. Their mistake was believing that gas would remain cheap, and that's hurting them now. But their competitive position is drastically better today than it was 30 years ago. They make a much better product. It costs too much, true, but they're working on that as well. In your vitriol you neglected to mention the health-care benefit swaps the car-makers have been negotiatiing with their unions. It's innovative and makes a lot of sense - not at all the sort of thing car executives of 30 years ago would have imagined, seeing as they were protected so effectively from foreign competition, i.e. trade.

A last point, you can fault Detroit for making (some) bad cars; but it's laughable to criticize them for going into the financing business. I ask you, investment guru, if you owned a company that identified a fast-growing, highly-profitable business that complimented your core business perfectly and put your retained earnings to work at an above-market rate of return, would YOU be angry at management? I don't think I would, but then again, I'm not an investment advisor.

Industries to Avoid, Industries to Buy

For someone who dispenses investment advice for a living, the author exhibits little understanding of economics, business practices, government policy, international trade and foreign affairs. Remarkable.