k_denninger

21 Comments

    • ON: Sun Jul 29th 17:20 PM
      Commented on:
      Is This the Start of a Bear Market?
      I believe there is a significant chance we are about to see "down a lot."

      The 200DMA, as mentioned, is a good marker.

      Take a look at the Russell 2000. That would be the definition of "down a lot" starting, and when one major index rolls over like this, the others <b>usually</b... (but not always) follow.

      Therefore, I believe it is prudent to take protective steps. But then again, I thought that was true a while ago. Now it appears that we may be facing exactly the scenario that I believed was coming.

      Valuations are actually quite expensive, if you take out the radical underperformers since January. Remove the financials from the S&amp;P and you'll find that the overall P/E is quite high. On the Nasdaq its even worse.

      Reality is that there has been a big LBO "PUT" on the market for the last year or two. This is disappearing. Therefore, you must now go back and re-evaluate what is a rational valuation for the market <b>without</b... that PUT.

      When I do that, I find myself staring at a 20-30% downward adjustment from where we are now.
      View article »
    • ON: Thu Jul 5th 13:56 PM
      Commented on:
      Homes vs. Offices
      Yep.

      In every housing-led downturn on record, commercial R/E lags. What happens is that the "deep pocket" landlords (so they claim) push and push and push. But they're really not deep pockets - they're levered to the gills - and they're pushing because they <b>have to.</b>

      Unfortunately when you do that it hits a businesses P&amp;L directly (higher rent goes right to the bottom line in the red way) and that ultimately causes margin - and then market multiple - <b>contraction.&...

      We know what comes next, right?

      Why would anyone believe that the pattern will be different this time?

      tickerforum.org
      View article »
    • ON: Mon Jun 25th 09:20 AM
      Commented on:
      John Hussman: What Happens When No One Is Left to Hold the Bag?
      P/Es when the "E" is based on one-time FX gains is fanciful at best.

      When its based on inflated margins that historically are likely to regress to the mean, its even worse.

      Rhetorical question: What purpose does a P/E ratio serve when the "E" is cooked?

      I suspect the author knows the answer... as do I.....
      View article »
    • ON: Sun Jun 17th 17:23 PM
      Commented on:
      Riding the Bull by Writing Puts on Large-Caps - Barron's
      Quality stocks for which you overpaid, perhaps dramatically, if things don't go your way.

      Somehow that doesn't sound so great.
      View article »
    • ON: Sun Jun 10th 14:02 PM
      Commented on:
      Four Picks in a Retail Slowdown
      I don't think any of the retailers are a good long play right now.

      I agree with you on AMZN; the surge has been absolutely out-of-this-world and totally unsupportable based on growth estimates or fundamentals. I got burned on an option play on it a month back but am looking to go after it when the trend up breaks - and it may be in the process of doing so.
      View article »
    • ON: Sat Jun 9th 17:21 PM
      Commented on:
      Another Perfect Storm Brewing: Government Underwritten Contingent Liabilities
      The problem with property insurers is that they don't actually <b>underwrite<... their policies - they just say "yes" or "no" without regard to the actual risk they're taking!

      For example, no homeowner policy covers flood. You want flood, you buy it through the FEMA-administered program, even though a regular company handles the transaction.

      During Andrew most structures that failed did not meet code. Many were built after codes were toughened <b>but the builders did not actually meet the new codes anyway.</b> The insurers didn't know this because they didn't bother to come out and look!

      They also take no notice of loss history in a given storm profile.

      For example, my home (on the coast) has been through two major hurricanes - Opal and Ivan. It took zero structural damage from either. These were solid Cat 3 hits. Yet I am offered no different rates than someone who lost their roof during either of these storms due to THAT house not being built as well.

      When I buy auto insurance my actual crash history is taken into account in setting rates. How come the loss history of my <b>specific</... home, when it has weathered similar events in the past without damage, isn't taken into account when I am offered homeowners?

      This sort of "zero-underwritin... effort" problem is a big part of the mess and why it can't be fixed easily. To solve this you have to actually do the work, and nobody wants to.

      Insurance is inherently about spreading the risk of <b>unlikely</... events across large populations so as to make everyone's premium affordable. If an event is likely, then insurance will cost almost as much as what you're insuring!

      The practice of creating "pup companies" that are state (or even area!) specific so as to allow them to be cut off if they take a loss violates this precept and leads to states assuming the burden. While not all areas have hurricanes, they do have other hazards - we get few if any tornadoes here that do significant damage, as the tornadoes that form around here tend to be very weak (F0) and at worst rip up some trees and tear off shingles. Go inland a bit and you find F3-F5 tornadoes that level entire villages.

      We don't have earthquakes - but California does, and the New Madrid fault (near St. Louis) historically HAS. The next one there is going to be ruinous.

      In short, national companies should be forced to write nationally or not at all. Is it fair to spread the risk of a hurricane among those who are inland? Absolutely, just like it is fair to spread the risk of a TORNADO or EARTHQUAKE among those who do not live in areas particularly prone to those hazards.

      To those who say "oh they'll just leave", are you now trying to tell me that Allstate and State Farm will just go out of business? This needs to be a <b>national</... thing, not a state thing. These firms are inherently engaged in Interstate Commerce - regulation ought to come from the federal side - and while we're at it, let's get rid of their anti-trust exemption too.

      That assumes anyone is actually interested in seeing the problem fixed.
      View article »
    • ON: Thu Jun 7th 12:00 PM
      Commented on:
      What? Inflation?
      Milk is nearly $4/gal here now. Almost a buck rise <b>in the last month.</b>

      Beef (not ground, steak) is also up significantly, as is chicken, again, both in the last month. The culprit on all of these is corn prices which is being driven by the ethanol craze.

      That Ethanol "mandate" is screwing you twice - your car goes fewer miles per gallon on ethanol-laced gas, raising your fuel costs, AND your grocery bill is going parabolic.

      Say thanks to Washington for REAL inflation.
      View article »
    • ON: Wed Jun 6th 23:36 PM
      Commented on:
      UN Report: The Dollar's Imminent Collapse is Being Caused by U.S. Debt
      We do not <b>need</b>... to be dependent on foreign oil. We have more than enough for the next 50 years right here offshore our coasts, and another 50 in shale out west on FEDERAL lands.

      We just refuse to go get it. That's all.

      It is a choice; nothing more or less.
      View article »
    • ON: Tue Jun 5th 21:53 PM
      Commented on:
      UN Report: The Dollar's Imminent Collapse is Being Caused by U.S. Debt
      I believe we could see a break below 80 this year, as do they, and the low 70s is not beyond the realm of reason at all.
      View article »
    • ON: Mon Jun 4th 00:24 AM
      Commented on:
      Insanity Reigns in Commercial Real Estate
      I was playing the SRS (ultra-short) a bit ago but saw some technical indicators I didn't like and dumped the position. Good thing, as it has since sold off by 12% from where I exited! Aieee!

      Anyway, I'll be back on that one, but not yet. The deal breaker, by the way, may well be the 10y bond yield. Watch that sucker - REAL interest rates are what will eventually kill the liquidity party, as all that debt that gets issued to fund the game has to go SOMEWHERE, and SOMEONE has to pay interest on the money.

      The game is getting long in the tooth both here and in the general equity markets.

      Check out market-ticker.denninge... if you'd like - another blog analyzing the broader markets on this stuff (mine)
      View article »
    • ON: Mon Jun 4th 00:13 AM
      Commented on:
      GM's Balance Sheet: A Sign of Impending Doom
      Ford looks like a good short play, other than being too cheap. But their just-in-the-money PUTs a week or so ago were selling in the front month with NO PREMIUM! Gee, that was nice - I jumped all over that one. A break below the $8.10 level on Ford (pretty much where all the MAs cluster right now) would be incredible, with the next real support in the $7.50 range and then at $7.

      Below that the chasm yawns.... and their recent sales numbers have been nasty.

      GM on a technical basis looks like dogmeat. They had their Death Cross, the stock has pretty much flatlined, it has taken several runs at getting over the MAs and yet has been unable to hold. Stochastics Friday suggest perhaps another run at the MA level, perhaps up as far as to the 100 and 200 (which are nearly at the same place), but that looks like an EXCELLENT short entry to me if it gets there and can't break it. Of course a big break downward would be a good entry too; you get below $29, which is very strong support and you've got a pretty clear path down into the ~$25 range.

      There's nothing to like about the US Automakers when it comes to "the big picture". Labor is still out of control, health care costs are stratospheric and there's no sign that either of these issues can be dealt with. The companies bought off labor action with unsustainable and unaffordable concessions years ago and frankly I don't see how they can get out of the box now, other than Chap 11 the mess, repudiate the obligations and tell the UAW to go screw.
      View article »
    • ON: Wed May 16th 08:27 AM
      Commented on:
      Is the Market Due for a Pullback?
      One thing to pay attention to here is the pattern on the breakdown in 2000 and correlation - or not - here.

      In 2000 the SPX peaked in early 1999. It then made a stab at those highs in September, failed, and we know what happened from there.

      This time it is the Nasdaq and the Russell that are leading the turndown. The S&amp;P is technically damaged although to a lesser degree while the Dow continues to try to push out of its wedge to the upside.

      Something has to give; the S&amp;P and OEX are not "along for the ride" here - the last few days this rally has been powered almost entirely on the backs of 30 stocks.

      You tell me how that ends.....
      View article »
    • ON: Thu May 10th 19:02 PM
      Commented on:
      Ben Bernanke's Fed Offers Investors False Reassurance
      I agree entirely.

      I've been following this on my blog at market-ticker.denninge... for quite some time.

      The same-store sales picture is not unexpected. All you had to do is read the credit card issuer's financials during earnings season, then the credit report.

      Duh. The home ATM machine is closed, so now we're charging up the credit cards.

      That ends badly - very badly - when the consumer bangs up against his credit limit and can't refi it into the house any more!
      View article »
    • ON: Sun May 6th 12:36 PM
      Commented on:
      Strong Earnings Season (So Far) Has Pushed Markets Higher
      Its rather clever to have a market that has had its "G" cut by half, doubling the PEG ratio, but it still goes up.

      Howzat? Well, earnings were growing 16% last year. Now they're growing 8%. If you believe in efficient markets, the indices should be <i>declining<... not advancing.

      The problem here is that our wonderful government schools teach people only to read headlines - not the actual data. For example, the jobs number this Friday. Looked somewhat-good, right? Wrong. The household survey showed we <b>lost</b>... a quarter-million jobs! But you have to read beyond the headline to know that......
      View article »
    • ON: Sat May 5th 20:37 PM
      Commented on:
      Executive Options Abuses Say Short Sell Yahoo
      Just buy some PUTs and forget about it.

      If you're wrong, you lose a bit, but you don't get crushed by this sort of blatent BS that happened this last week.
      View article »
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor