Seeking Alpha

aschaff

aschaff
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View aschaff's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Moo... Agribusiness Dividend Stocks [View article]
    I bought MOO when the press was covering wold population first exceeding 7 billion. That means if you are a one-in-a-million, there are 7,000 just like you.

    Geometric progression.
    Jun 14 08:49 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Deflation Is A No-Show Thanks To Easy Money And Rising Wealth [View article]
    It is engaging, cites relevant data and evidence, and had me deliberating the proposition that deflation is "a no show" as the title asserts. My difference in interpretation does not detract from the article for me. If his main point is that deflation is less of a concern from 2013 forward than it was before, I largely agree. I don't share his same concern about inflation in the near future, but I admit I might be wrong and appreciate him engaging me in his perspective.
    Jun 2 08:50 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Deflation Is A No-Show Thanks To Easy Money And Rising Wealth [View article]
    "Why do they have the pedal to the metal when inflation is running comfortably in the middle to upper half of their target range?"

    "The Fed wouldn't mind seeing inflation rise above 2%, and they probably wouldn't take corrective action until it got to 3%."

    Doesn't this answer the question?

    In your chart, the core PCE deflator approached 2% in 2012, and then dropped to closer to 1%.

    "...as Milton Friedman taught us, the lags between monetary policy and the economy are long and variable."

    Does this not apply equally to disinflation as it does to inflation?

    Thanks for a great article. However, I think your evidence and references support the Fed's actions. I might think differently if the core PCE deflator were running above 2%, but the Fed might think differently then as well.

    I also tend to agree with the commenters that speak to the greater potential of fiscal stimulus over extraordinary and continued monetary stimulus. But, given that has not happened, the Fed's approach seems reasonable.
    Jun 1 02:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Deflation Is A No-Show Thanks To Easy Money And Rising Wealth [View article]
    Rising gas prices may not have a big effect on people's spending on gas itself, but it affects people's spending on other goods because they have less disposable income left.
    Jun 1 01:28 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Russia: The Cheapest Emerging Market You're Overlooking [View article]
    Russia and Canada might be worth a look as a pair. If sanctions choke Russian natural commodities sales, I would guess that Canada produces many of the same commodities and those would fetch a higher price with Russia out of those markets.
    May 29 09:49 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Russia: The Cheapest Emerging Market You're Overlooking [View article]
    I bought RSXJ on April 15. My rational is the same as the author discusses for RSX, but I see the small cap RSXJ as a potentially better opportunity to

    1) Ride future Russian domestic economic growth

    2) Avoid the kind of targeted sanctions that the EU and US seem to favor

    3) Buy even higher value with a price-to-earnings multiple of 5, versus 6 for RSX, and a dividend yield of 4, versus 3.28 for RSX. (PE and divided per Yahoo Finance as of 4/30)
    May 18 03:15 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Only 20 Companies That Matter [View article]
    ". . . we may have heading our way a recession caused by falling stock prices."

    Perhaps it is a chicken V. egg thing, but I think the author is starting from, what would cause falling stock prices?

    Paul, How would you answer that question?
    Mar 30 04:34 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Should You Invest In Emerging Markets? [View article]
    By CPI, it is $1.67 today. YMMV
    Mar 7 09:37 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Who's To Blame For The Emerging-Market Crisis? [View article]
    Regarding emerging markets, does anyone recall the global currency war issue less than a year ago? The concern was that stimulative monetary policy in the developed economies, particularly the QE of the US and Japan, would make EM currencies relatively higher valued. This in turn would hurt EM exports and slow EM growth.

    It appears that this analysis was not applicable the situation at that time. But, the more interesting question is, what about now? Will devalued EM currencies cause export-driven growth? And, would this growth translate into appreciation of EM equities?
    Feb 2 10:04 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Weighing The Week Ahead: Is The Economic Recovery Stalling Out? [View article]
    Regarding emerging markets, does anyone recall the global currency war issue less than a year ago? The concern was that stimulative monetary policy in the developed economies, particularly the QE of the US and Japan, would make EM currencies relatively higher valued. This in turn would hurt EM exports and slow EM growth.

    It appears that this analysis was not applicable the situation at that time. But, the more interesting question is, what about now? Will devalued EM currencies cause export-driven growth? And, would this growth translate into appreciation of EM equities?
    Perhaps the market is signaling this, as the consumer focused ETF ECON has dropped more than VWO or DGS.http://yhoo.it/1afvudJ
    Feb 2 12:08 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is Holding Cash A Good Idea? Will It Pay Off? [View article]
    I like your article very much. It prompts me to the conclusion that the difficulty in judging "the probability of IBM, or any one company, or even the market itself, going up or going down" is but one part of the problem of deciding whether or not it is a good idea to hold cash. Financial advisors would say that if you need your money back tomorrow, hold cash. But, if you don't need your money back for 30 years, buy. They don't discuss probabilities with clients, but in essence they are advising based on expected return. In 30-year periods, companies like IBM are likely to be worth more than they were 30 years ago, and most are worth much more. Then they go on to say you have a much greater expected return if you diversitfy and rebalance.

    The stock market has an upward bias, so most agree that the probability of stocks going up over time is higher than the probability of decline. Of course, this is less probable over shorter time periods, which is why diversification and a cash reserve is considered good practice. (Note that I am not speaking to DGI versus other strategies. The DGI strategy also addresses diversification benefits and the need to not have to sell when the markets are down.)

    There is also the issue of the psychological bias that is an issue for (most) humans; "losses hurt twice as much as gains." Advisers try to address this with a "risk tolorance" assessment.

    So, I agree with your conclusion that "I believe it is not possible to know ahead of time if holding cash is a good idea, or if it will pay off." However, I would argue that the decision to hold cash and how much has more to do with time horizon and risk tolorance than with probability and expected return. The probability of stocks going up in value is greater than 50% given past performance. By analogy, the past "climate" of stocks is known to have more sun than rain. So, if we were imortal, had adequate reliable income independent of our investments, and did not feel the psychological pain of loss, why would we hold cash? We would not mind getting wet from time to time, and would have amble time to dry off.

    I judge the probability of stocks going up as greater than 50% given history. I would say that the greater determining issues are the consequenses for one's income needs and the psychological pain of loss. These issues can make holding cash the right chioce for many. And, that may be true even if one were to judge there is a probability greater than 50% of a gain.

    Suppose we leave time horizon, risk and psychological pain out of the picture. If you judged the probability less than 50% for your time horizon, you would not buy. But, if you judged the probability greater than 50%, you still might not buy, even if you did not need the money and did not feel pain of loss. That is because you might judge that there is a better expected return to invest at a later time.

    So even if you do make a judgement on "the probability of IBM, or any one company, or even the market itself, going up or going down" almost everyone still has to consider risk and pain of loss, and almost everyone needs to consider the other opportunities for expected return. I'm holding some cash.
    Jan 17 09:20 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Why It's Time To Pay Attention To Europe Again [View article]
    I'd like to hear more about why you view Japan as a better near-term investment.
    Jul 13 01:21 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • 3 ETF Categories Correct 10% Or More [View article]
    I bought GNAT today as a long term investment. It seems cheap to me with an average P/E of its holdings at 6ish and a 3.6% yield (as of March 30). I agree that QE won't help it, and I don't recommend it for a short-term trade. But, in a few years . . . .
    Jun 11 10:58 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Dividend Stocks: Lose-Lose-Lose Proposition In Intermediate Term [View article]
    I wonder what, if any, comments the DGI folks would have if the author warned against adding growth equity positions in the next two years. Perhaps his statement that, "Some investors may not care about stock price volatility or total-returns during this time span" would have resonated, and a lot fewer comments more focused on the scenarios themselves would have been given. I am glad for the opportunity to read all of the comments.

    I am very much intrigued by DGI and might adopt it if I had the time and knowledge to. Perhaps when I retire I'll educate myself and roll over my 401k to an account where I can implement it. But, I don't know that I will ever feel that total return is of no interest to me or that I would not rather buy at a lower price than a higher price. What appeals to me is the security to face a big downturn and say I am not bothered because I still have the income I need. It is like having an annuity in that regard, but still a much better investment. But, in a big downturn I think I would still want to have some cash and bonds (and maybe REITS and commodity holdings) to rebalance into equities, perhaps 20%-40% combined that I rebalance. (Right now it would not be much in bonds). To me anyway, there seem to be advantages of diversification and timing (even if only to rebalance). But this exchange sure has me thinking. . . .
    Jun 9 05:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Are International Utilities Attractive Relative To Their U.S. Peers? [View article]
    DBU and JXI are some alternatives to compare. JXI has a much larger asset base and slightly lower expenses. DBU still has a significantly larger asset base than IPU, but I don't think IPU's small asset base is a big downside. IPU has the highest divident yield of the 3.
    Jun 5 07:53 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
25 Comments
13 Likes