Příspěvky nebo odpovědi uživatele 12HonzaDe neprihl.

Tohle jsem placnul na chat telecomu, i kdyz sem by se to hodilo daleko vic..

Cetl jsem hezky porovnani poklesu popularity Nixona a Bushe, porovnani toho, jak za jejich vlady se zvysovaly urokove sazby a jak sla burza s kopce dolu... Prikladam puvodni verzi jako namet k zamysleni a podporu opatrneho investovani v casech pred moznou bouri...

KB ted nedrzim, ale pristi rok muze byt celkem turbulentni, tim nemyslim jen u nas, ale nase burza je na tlousticich dost zavisla... Uvidime, potesilo me, ze i dole zmineni investori, postupuji jako ja... Radsi pockat.. Pokud bude bulish i po Novem roce, fajn, pripojim se a jsem pripraven rychle vyskocit, pokud ne, radsi drzim chvilku cash..

No nebudu to prekladat, poctete si sami, pokud chcete...

Nixon's Second Term Stock Market (1973-4) vs. Bush's Second Term Stock Market (2005-6)
December 1, 2005

Bloomberg Radio’s Tom Keene asked what worries me about the stock market.  There is some historical parallel that adds to sleeplessness.  

Let’s be clear, lest all my Republican friends lop off my head.  President Richard M. Nixon’s Watergate troubles were criminal and impeachable.  They led to his resignation.  George W. Bush’s poor popularity stems from sources other than a reelection campaign violation.  Regardless of cause, Nixon and Bush have similar deterioration tracks in popularity for the first year of a second term.  Nixon’s polling numbers were worse than Bush’s present results but Bush has reached a negative extreme by historical standards. 

In this commentary we focus on the U.S. stock market.  We compare two periods: Nixon’s first two years of his second term, 1973-4 vs. Dubya’s first two years of his second term 2005-6.  Consider:  

1. Nixon’s unpopular war was Viet Nam.  He didn’t start it.  He did inherit it from the Kennedy-Johnson regime.  In the end Viet Nam became Nixon’s war once he bombed Hanoi.  Americans then saw Nixon’s policy as bogged down and going nowhere.  Bush is held singularly responsible for the Iraq war.  While Bush has succeeded in keeping the photos of flag-draped coffins off TV, he cannot suppress the daily casualty reports.  They gnaw now as they did then.  The majority of Americans believe they have not received an acceptable explanation for these continuing hostilities.  Bush has not tied Iraq to 9/11.  No WMD were found.  Bush’s war has no smoking gun to vindicate his policy.  Like Nixon, Bush presides over an unpopular war that appears to have no exit. 2. In the Nixon period, the Fed was raising interest rates under then Fed Chairman Arthur Burns.  It worried about inflation induced by higher energy prices.   In Bush’s time the personalities of the Fed Chairs are different but the trend underway is the same.  The passage of higher energy prices to a broadening inflation was the concern then and is now.  In 2006, watch the intermediate goods portion of the Producer Price Index for clues. 3. The Nixon-era oil shock came in 1973.  Egypt’s President Nasser closed shipping zones and massed troops on Israel’s southern border.  Syria massed on the northern border.  A coordinated attack on Israel commenced on Yom Kippur.  In a fight for its survival, Israel’s army held the Golan Heights by a thread and turned the war from near defeat to victory.  In retaliation, a Saudi led, Arab-dominated OPEC imposed a supply shock by cutting production.  The oil price jumped from $3 to about $12.  Bush’s era is marked by an energy demand shock; it is exacerbated by the hurricanes.  Oil has tripled to $60 in three years.  Natural gas price peaks may still be seen this winter as colder weather and Gulf shut-ins take their toll.  Asian demand is driving prices instead of OPEC.  A Middle East supply shock from Basra or Iran could come at any time. 4. Inflation fears caused President Nixon to impose wage and price controls when inflation was 3%.  The oil shock triggered rationing systems.  Some of us remember the odd-even rule for filling up your car at the gas station.  Some of us sat in the gasoline lines.  Under Bush, market forces have mostly been permitted to work their magic on supply and demand.  Shortages and outages were minimized.  The federal government did suspend shipping restrictions and environmental rules and sell oil from the strategic reserve.  Only one state has imposed a price control (Hawaii on wholesale gasoline).  Other rationing attempts, like New Jersey, have failed to achieve political success.  But the political game is not over.  Witness the Congressional initiative to impose an excess profits tax on oil companies at the very time we want then to explore for more oil and build more refineries.  This anti-oil movement has become bipartisan and is growing.  Watch out if it succeeds.  Many younger politicians don’t remember the gas lines because they were still in diapers.  Therein lies a danger. 5. Nixon staffers got into legal trouble.  His vice-president resigned in disgrace.  Will Cheney become Agnewized?  Are there more indictments coming?  All we know at this writing is that a grand jury remains active. There are parallels when you compare these two periods of stock market history.  Markets don’t like political uncertainty.  They fear changes in Congressional composition.   Will a low approval rating for Bush cause a Congressional mid-term election to shift Republican seats to Democrats?  Is there a chance one or both houses of Congress can lose Republican control?  It happened in the Nixon era. 

In 1973, the stock market declined gradually all year.  The high on the Dow was 1051 on January 11, 1973.  A tepid rally in the autumn of 1973 brought the Dow back to near 1000 but it lasted only a few weeks.   As 1974 unfolded, the trends referenced above extended and worsened.  In ’74, the market entered its serious bear phase.  The Dow bottomed at 577 on December 6, 1974.  

So far, 2005 has been a flat year in the stock market except for the energy stocks.  The Dow opened this year at 10729.  The August-September-October traditional seasonal selling was mild in 2005.  It was also mild in 1973.  So far, the yearend rally is up 7% from the October low.  As this is written, the Dow is flirting a break above the March 4^th closing high of 10940.

Dissecting the Dow and the S&P 500 demonstrates the influence of the energy sector.  XOM is the only energy stock in the Dow and comprises about 4.2% of the index weight.  XOM is up from 49+ to 59+ on a year-to-date basis.  The Dow would be down yr-to-date without XOM’s 20% gain.  In the S&P500, the 24 energy stocks are about 9% of the weight.  That is more than double the Dow.  The S&P 500 performance has been over twice as good as the Dow on a yr-to-date basis because of this higher energy weight.

We will know if the yearend stock market rally extends and becomes robust in only a few weeks.  If it does, a new bull market move may commence and we will participate.  If not, and if the market weakens after this yearend period, then there is a real and serious reason to worry.  The similarities with the Nixon era market will have intensified greatly if the market fails.

One final observation.  In the Nixon era, 1973 started with a Federal Funds interest rate of 6%.  It rose to 10% under Burns.  The serious damage was done in 1974 when Federal Funds hit 13% in July 1974. Stocks sold off sharply; the Dow lost 30% of its value during the last five months of 1974.   Bond yields peaked in September 1974.  By yearend 1974, Fed Funds were down to 8-½%, bond yields were falling and stocks had started a new bull market.  Under Bush, the Greenspan Fed has raised Fed Funds ¼ pt at each of twelve successive meetings.  Fed Funds futures are forecasting another ¼ pt in December and a second ¼ pt at Greenspan’s final meeting on January 31^st.  During this period the yield on the 10-year Treasury note has gone from a 3.10% low on June 13, 2003 to about 4.5% today.  Our outlook is for the 10-yr yield to reach 5-to-5 1/2% and Fed Funds 4.75% by summer 2006.

Will history repeat itself?  It never does so with precision.  But George Santayana’s guidance is worth heeding.  “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Our bond portfolios remain shorter duration; our U.S. stock portfolios remain very diversified using exchange-traded funds (ETFs).  We are still holding a cash reserve (10-12% target) because we perceive risks to be high and we believe there is too much complacency in the stock market.  We remain over weighted in energy.  Our international ETF portfolios favor Asia and include over weight for Japan.

David R. Kotok, Chairman and Chief Investment Officer; email: david.kotok@cumber.com

Cetl jsem hezky porovnani poklesu popularity Nixona a Bushe, porovnani toho, jak za jejich vlady se zvysovaly urokove sazby a jak sla burza s kopce dolu... Prikladam puvodni verzi jako namet k zamysleni a podporu opatrneho investovani v casech pred moznou bouri...

Nerikam to proto, ze bych vyzival k prodeji CT, sam ho drzim, ale pristi rok muze byt celkem turbulentni.. Poctete se...

Nixon's Second Term Stock Market (1973-4) vs. Bush's Second Term Stock Market (2005-6)
December 1, 2005

Bloomberg Radio’s Tom Keene asked what worries me about the stock market.  There is some historical parallel that adds to sleeplessness. 

Let’s be clear, lest all my Republican friends lop off my head.  President Richard M. Nixon’s Watergate troubles were criminal and impeachable.  They led to his resignation.  George W. Bush’s poor popularity stems from sources other than a reelection campaign violation.  Regardless of cause, Nixon and Bush have similar deterioration tracks in popularity for the first year of a second term.  Nixon’s polling numbers were worse than Bush’s present results but Bush has reached a negative extreme by historical standards. 

In this commentary we focus on the U.S. stock market.  We compare two periods: Nixon’s first two years of his second term, 1973-4 vs. Dubya’s first two years of his second term 2005-6.  Consider: