Bulls, Bears & Bucks #55: Lloyds voor 65% genationaliseerd

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 15:34 schreef pberends het volgende:
Amerikaanse economie krimpt 6,3%

[ afbeelding ]

De overheid is de motor van de economie .

quote:

Geldhoeveelheid eurozone sneller gestegen dan verwacht
AMSTERDAM (Dow Jones)--De aangepaste geldhoeveelheid M3 in de eurozone is in februari met 5,9% gestegen ten opzichte van dezelfde maand een jaar eerder. Dit heeft de Europese Centrale Bank (ECB) donderdag bekendgemaakt.

Vooraf geraadpleegde economen gingen uit van een stijging van de geldhoeveelheid met 5,5%.

In de drie maanden tot en met februari 2009 bedroeg de groei gemiddeld 6,5%, tegen een groei van 7,0% in de voorgaande driemaandsperiode.

Als de geldhoeveelheid te hard groeit kan dat duiden op toenemend inflatiegevaar wat van invloed kan zijn op de rentepolitiek van de Europese Centrale Bank (ECB). De referentiewaarde voor de geldgroei is 4,5%.

Bron

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 15:50 schreef capricia het volgende:

[..]

De staatsschuld is straks niets meer waard...

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 15:52 schreef Lemmeb het volgende:

[..]

Zolang er nog geen inflatie ontstaat niet. Voorlopig vind ik deflatie nog steeds het meest waarschijnlijk.

Meer geld betekent namelijk niet automatisch meer inflatie. Al dat gecreëerde geld komt namelijk nog steeds helemaal niet bij burgers en bedrijven terecht.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 16:07 schreef Perrin het volgende:

[..]

Hoe zit dat dan met werkloosheidsuitkeringen en allerlei subsidies?

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 15:34 schreef pberends het volgende:
Amerikaanse economie krimpt 6,3%

[ afbeelding ]

De overheid is de motor van de economie .

quote:

Congress approved landmark legislation today that opens the door for a new era on Wall Street in which commercial banks, securities houses and insurers will find it easier and cheaper to enter one another's businesses.

''Today Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system for the 21st century,'' Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers said. ''This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy.''

The decision to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 provoked dire warnings from a handful of dissenters that the deregulation of Wall Street would someday wreak havoc on the nation's financial system. The original idea behind Glass-Steagall was that separation between bankers and brokers would reduce the potential conflicts of interest that were thought to have contributed to the speculative stock frenzy before the Depression.

The opponents of the measure gloomily predicted that by unshackling banks and enabling them to move more freely into new kinds of financial activities, the new law could lead to an economic crisis down the road when the marketplace is no longer growing briskly.

''I think we will look back in 10 years' time and say we should not have done this but we did because we forgot the lessons of the past, and that that which is true in the 1930's is true in 2010,'' said Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota. ''I wasn't around during the 1930's or the debate over Glass-Steagall. But I was here in the early 1980's when it was decided to allow the expansion of savings and loans. We have now decided in the name of modernization to forget the lessons of the past, of safety and of soundness.''

Senator Paul Wellstone, Democrat of Minnesota, said that Congress had ''seemed determined to unlearn the lessons from our past mistakes.'

''Scores of banks failed in the Great Depression as a result of unsound banking practices, and their failure only deepened the crisis,'' Mr. Wellstone said. ''Glass-Steagall was intended to protect our financial system by insulating commercial banking from other forms of risk. It was one of several stabilizers designed to keep a similar tragedy from recurring. Now Congress is about to repeal that economic stabilizer without putting any comparable safeguard in its place.''

Supporters of the legislation rejected those arguments. They responded that historians and economists have concluded that the Glass-Steagall Act was not the correct response to the banking crisis because it was the failure of the Federal Reserve in carrying out monetary policy, not speculation in the stock market, that caused the collapse of 11,000 banks. If anything, the supporters said, the new law will give financial companies the ability to diversify and therefore reduce their risks. The new law, they said, will also give regulators new tools to supervise shaky institutions.

''The concerns that we will have a meltdown like 1929 are dramatically overblown,'' said Senator Bob Kerrey, Democrat of Nebraska.

quote:

Roubini Says Stocks Will Drop as Banks Go ‘Belly Up’ (Update2)

By Michael Patterson and Maithreyi Seetharaman

March 26 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. stocks will fall and the government will nationalize more banks as the economy contracts through the end of 2009, said Nouriel Roubini, the New York University professor who predicted last year’s economic crisis.

“The stock market is a bit ahead of the real macroeconomic and financial news,” Roubini, a professor at NYU’s Stern School of Business and the chairman of consulting firm Roubini Global Economics, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television in London today. “We’ll have some major banks going belly up that will need to be taken over.”

The global equity rebound in March that sent the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index to its best monthly advance in 17 years is a “bear-market rally” and U.S. Treasury yields will “remain relatively low” as investors flock to the safest assets, Roubini said. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s new plan to remove toxic debt from financial companies won’t be enough for insolvent banks, he said.

Roubini’s outlook contrasts with predictions this week from Templeton Asset Management Ltd.’s Mark Mobius and Traxis Partners LLC’s Barton Biggs, who said that equities are poised to rally as government efforts to revive the economy and banking system begin to work. Investors are “way too optimistic” about the prospects for a recovery in the economy and earnings, Roubini said.

Stress Tests

The S&P 500 surged 7.1 percent on March 23 after Geithner unveiled a plan to finance as much as $1 trillion in purchases of illiquid real-estate assets, using $75 billion to $100 billion of the Treasury’s remaining bank-rescue funds. The government is conducting stress tests of banks to determine how much more capital each will need.

Roubini, who predicts loan and securities losses in the U.S. will reach $3.6 trillion, said the stress tests will reveal that some banks need to be taken over and have their good and bad assets separated before being sold to the private sector. He didn’t name which companies he thought would need to be rescued.

Futures on the S&P 500 expiring in June advanced 1.2 percent to 818 as of 8:30 a.m. in New York.

Critics of Geithner’s plan including Nobel laureate Paul Krugman, a professor at Princeton University, say the government should take over banks loaded with devalued assets, remove their top management, and dispose of the toxic securities. Sweden adopted the temporary nationalization approach in the 1990s.

‘Deflationary Forces’

“Some banks are going to have to be nationalized,” said Roubini. “It’s going to be bumpy ahead of us.”

Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke this week called for new powers to take over and wind down failing financial companies. They said the U.S. also needs stronger regulation to constrain the risks taken by firms that could endanger the financial system.

With “deflationary forces” lingering for as long as three years, Roubini said U.S. government bond yields will remain low and American house prices will fall as much as 20 percent in the next 18 months. While the dollar will initially benefit as investors seek a safe haven in the U.S., the currency will ultimately drop as the nation’s trade deficit shrinks, he said.

Roubini dismissed China’s call for the creation of a new international reserve currency as a “pie in the sky idea” that’s unlikely to gain traction any time soon.

Mobius, Biggs

China’s central bank Governor Zhou Xiaochuan this week urged the International Monetary Fund to expand the use of so- called Special Drawing Rights and move toward a “super- sovereign reserve currency.” Geithner sent the dollar tumbling yesterday by saying he would consider China’s idea, only to drive it back up by affirming that the greenback should remain the world’s reserve currency.

“This was a political call and in a nut shell - it ain’t going to happen any time soon,” Roubini said.

Mobius, who helps oversee about $20 billion of emerging- market assets as executive chairman at San Mateo, California- based Templeton, said March 23 the next “bull-market” rally has begun. Biggs, the former chief global strategist for Morgan Stanley who now runs New York-based hedge fund Traxis Partners, predicted the same day the S&P 500 may jump between 30 percent and 50 percent.

The benchmark index for U.S. equities has surged 11 percent in March, poised for its biggest monthly gain since 1991. The MSCI Emerging Markets Index of equities in 23 developing nations is headed for the steepest monthly advance on record after rising 20 percent in March.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 17:06 schreef pberends het volgende:

[..]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aUzSQ01UhV6s&refer=home

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 17:43 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:
Technisch gezien zal die Roubini best gelijk hebben. Maar het is verrekkes lastig om aan de kant te blijven staan als je de Dow iedere dag met 1 a 2 procent omhoog ziet kruipen.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 17:43 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:
Technisch gezien zal die Roubini best gelijk hebben. Maar het is verrekkes lastig om aan de kant te blijven staan als je de Dow iedere dag met 1 a 2 procent omhoog ziet kruipen.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 16:24 schreef Perrin het volgende:
Nouja, om even in het extreme te trekken, als 50% werkt en 50% heeft een uitkering (waarvoor de overheid dan neem ik aan zal moeten lenen of geld bijdrukken omdat de 50% werkenden nooit via belasting de uitkering voor de 50% anderen kunnen ophoesten) dan neem ik aan dat elke euro minder koopt dan wanneer 95% werkt en 5% een uitkering heeft.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 19:23 schreef SeLang het volgende:

[..]

Het wordt juist elke dag makkelijker.

quote:

Soros Says Commercial Property Values Will Fall 30% (Update1)

By Michael Forsythe

March 26 (Bloomberg) -- Billionaire investor George Soros said U.S. commercial real estate will probably drop at least 30 percent in value, causing further strains on banks.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 19:23 schreef SeLang het volgende:

[..]

Het wordt juist elke dag makkelijker.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 22:47 schreef SeLang het volgende:

[..]

2,3% erbij betekent dat aandelen 2,3% minder aantrekkelijk zijn geworden.
Mij ontgaat de logica waarom je aandelen die je op 666 niet wilt op 833 opeens wel aantrekkelijk vindt. Sowieso zitten we met de huidige koersen alweer bijna op bubble waarderingen, althans boven het historisch gemiddelde.

Volgens mij zijn de huidige hoge waarderingen nog nooit voorgekomen tijdens een recessie van deze omvang. Hmm... misschien een leuk onderwerp voor een onderzoekje

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 22:47 schreef SeLang het volgende:

[..]

2,3% erbij betekent dat aandelen 2,3% minder aantrekkelijk zijn geworden.
Mij ontgaat de logica waarom je aandelen die je op 666 niet wilt op 833 opeens wel aantrekkelijk vindt. Sowieso zitten we met de huidige koersen alweer bijna op bubble waarderingen, althans boven het historisch gemiddelde.

Volgens mij zijn de huidige hoge waarderingen nog nooit voorgekomen tijdens een recessie van deze omvang. Hmm... misschien een leuk onderwerp voor een onderzoekje

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 23:09 schreef pberends het volgende:
http://nl.wikipedia.org/w(...)lderbergconferenties

Harold Goddijn, CEO TomTom

Hoe kan ik Bilderberg nu eigenlijk nog serieus nemen ?

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 23:03 schreef henkway het volgende:

[..]

ja ik stap ook weer uit morgen

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 22:47 schreef SeLang het volgende:

Mij ontgaat de logica waarom je aandelen die je op 666 niet wilt op 833 opeens wel aantrekkelijk vindt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 27 maart 2009 04:19 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:
Iets anders. D'r staat een huis bij ons in de buurt te koop. Ik woon in het Mid-Westen van de VS, waar de huizenprijzen 'slechts' 10% gedaald zijn sinds het begin van de crisis, omdat er geen echte bubble onder de huizenmarkt zat.

Van de regering Obama krijg ik als koper van een eerste huis $4000 kado (als ik getrouwd was, $8000). De hypotheekrente staat historisch laag, onder de 5%. Het stadje waar ik woon, barst van de studenten, die maar al te graag een kamer in dat huis zouden willen huren.

Doen?

quote:

Op vrijdag 27 maart 2009 08:27 schreef pberends het volgende:
Huizenprijzen in de VS kunnen nog met 15 tot 20% omlaag volgens Roubini, dus geen idee waarom je een huis in de VS zou willen kopen.

quote:

Bears Are Wary as Bull Returns
Dow Up 21% in 13 Days in Quickest Rally Since 1938, but Doubts of Strength Persist

Stocks continued their rally Thursday, pushing the Dow Jones Industrial Average up 21% from its recent bottom -- a new bull market by a common Wall Street definition.

To many skeptical investors, it seems to be a Cinderella bull market, however: one that will turn out to be an illusion when the clock strikes midnight.

For the moment, the rally looks powerful, a great relief to those investors who are hoping the worst pain is over.

The Dow finished up 174.75 points, or 2.25%, at 7924.56. This marked its first gain of 20% or more since the bear market began in October 2007. The advance required a mere 13 trading days from March 9's 12-year low, making it the fastest 20% rebound from a bear-market low since 1938, according to Birinyi Associates in Westport, Conn. Broader indexes, including the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index, have had similar gains. In midday trading Friday in Tokyo, stocks were up 1%.

Still, the Dow remains down 44% from the high of 14164.53 it reached in 2007.

Some economic data have inspired cautious optimism, especially for the housing market. The 30-year mortgage averaged 4.85% in the week ended March 26, the lowest point since Freddie Mac's weekly survey began in 1971.

Many money managers and analysts worry this could turn out to be a temporary rally in a longer-running bear market. They see signs the gains are fueled largely by short-term investors who want to ride the rally but are poised to jump out at the first sign of trouble.

Richard Steinberg, who oversees about $380 million at Steinberg Global Asset Management in Boca Raton, Fla., began buying stocks in late February and early March, figuring the market was near a temporary bottom. He was right. But this week, with stocks on a rampage, Mr. Steinberg put on some bets against the market in a belief that the rally had come too far, too fast, and was running its course.

The Dow closed near 8000 on Thursday, a level it hasn't seen in some time, Dave Kansas says. Tech stocks and a successful Treasury debt auction contributed to investor confidence.

Mr. Steinberg says he doesn't normally make such short-term bets, called market timing. It is a risky way to invest because it's so easy to be whipsawed by unexpected lurches. Research shows it is difficult even for professionals to time the market's swings.

But at a time when he figures the beleaguered economy and profit outlook leave little room for lasting gains, he feels obliged to make such bets to try to provide some return for clients. "We don't want to be short-term in our thought process, but right now we don't feel we have a choice. We have to just manage our clients' risk," he says.

Many money managers appear to be trying to time the market these days, which marks a big shift from the "buy and hold" strategy popular in the 1990s, when stocks steadily rose. That makes the market more volatile, and stock investing even riskier than in the past. "Anecdotally, many hedge funds have become more like day traders," says Mary Ann Bartels, chief U.S. market analyst at Banc of America Securities-Merrill Lynch.

Global markets have joined in the euphoria. Both Japan's Nikkei Stock Average of 225 companies and India's Sensex are up over 20% from their early-March lows. Brazil's Bovespa is up 45% since its nadir in late October. One laggard: the U.K.'s FTSE 100, which has gained just 12% from its low touched on March 3.
[markets]

Many investors think the current U.S. rally could last longer than previous ones because buying demand has been so strong and stocks were beaten down so far. Truly bullish investors -- and there are a growing number -- think the bear market is ending. In a contrarian way, they believe that all the skepticism could actually be a good thing. The bulls think the doubters gradually will be won over and move money out of their cash reserves and into stocks.

Even if it isn't long-term, the rally could last several weeks, says Phil Roth, chief technical market analyst at New York brokerage firm Miller Tabak + Co. "I don't think you can have a new bull market without longer-term investors, but you can have a heck of a rally," he says.

Investors commonly believe a 20% rise in the Dow or S&P 500 signals a new bull market, and a 20% decline marks a bear market. There have been exceptions: one such rally during the bear market of 2000-02 and several during the long bear market of 1929-32. The latter included a surge of 48% from November 1929 through April 1930, which simply led to more declines.

Many investors hoped the bear market was over late last year as the S&P 500 surged 24% from Nov. 20 through Jan. 6 and the Dow rose 19.6% from Nov. 20 through Jan. 2. But both indexes then fell to new 12-year lows, with the Dow at its worst down 54% from its record and the S&P off 57%. Just as investors feared massive additional declines, stocks turned up on March 10, with banks such as Citigroup and Bank of America doubling.

With lending markets hobbled and the corporate-profit outlook miserable, many experienced investors believe the thrills and chills aren't over. Henry Herrmann, chief executive officer at money-management firm Waddell & Reed Financial, in Overland Park, Kan., doesn't have a lot of faith in the current rally. He thinks the stock market is going through a series of sharp ups and downs, with lasting progress hard to record.

Because his firm oversees about $45 billion of investments, most of his portfolio managers can't easily jump in and out of the market. And he's skeptical of trying to time it. But his flagship fund, the $15 billion Asset Strategy Fund, does try to benefit from market swings and, despite an overall defensive position toward stocks, is using options and exchange-traded mutual funds, or ETFs, to get some short-term pop from this rally.

"Our defensive position is largely intact," he says. When the fund's managers think this rally is running out of steam, they will shift to more bearish option and ETF bets. But for now, the fund is supporting the rally.

One indication that short-term traders are driving this rally: Many investors have been cutting back on defensive options called puts, which give them the right to sell at a pre-agreed price. Options markets report weakening put demand, an indicator of bullishness by short-term traders.

"At this juncture, you would have to say it is mostly short-term traders causing the rally," says Mr. Roth of Miller Tabak.

Doug Cliggott, chief investment officer at Dover Investment Management in Greenwich, Conn., bought ETFs in an effort to profit from the upturn. But he, too, has begun selling those short-term investments, worried the rally could be peaking. In the longer term, he fears stocks could have farther to fall.

He tries to predict future market moves by looking at things that have been advance indicators of past bull markets, such as growth in corporate profit margins and in available credit. "Even though we believe in the viability of a little rally here, we believe we are still firmly entrenched in a bear market because profit margins are in free fall," Mr. Cliggott says.

quote:

Bear Market Rally Heading into Danger Zone

Thursday, March 26, 2009 - Vol. 11, No. 77

"Since stocks hit an all-time high in October 2007 investors have been massacred buying into bear market rallies disguised as a bottom; over the last 18 months equities have staged three false rallies, including the current up-crash. The S&P 500 Index is now 20% above its March low," says Investment Director Eric Roseman.

"The reason why most investors, including professionals, continue to incorrectly call a bear market bottom is because this crisis is unlike anything we've experienced in more than 75 years. A credit-induced bear market attacks financial assets leaving investors with very few legitimate safe-havens to safeguard their wealth."

"It's much easier to make money in an inflationary environment as non-financial assets surge and the dollar typically tanks."

"Earlier this month I suggested it was a good time to start buying stocks again following a peak-to-trough crash exceeding 60% for the S&P 500 Index and the MSCI World Index on March 9. My reasoning was that if you can handle volatility over the next five years then equities represented good value when they were 20% lower almost three weeks ago."

"Yet I also warned that investors should not lunge after stocks even at those depressed levels because the case for domestic consumption, more bank failures and soaring unemployment did not bode well for a new bull market. I still feel that way."

"I bought stocks after March 9 and plan to ease my way back into the stock market over the next 6-12 months as the market does eventually hit a secular bottom. But I've got a big problem accepting this as a new bull market because credit spreads have largely refused to narrow since March 9, gold prices remain elevated and the banking system is still a long way from stabilizing. Also, commercial real estate loans are now heading sour adding to more credit troubles on already battered bank balance sheets."

"In short, you can't underestimate a credit bear market. This is not a regular bear market. Global governments have injected trillions of dollars into the financial system since August 2007, and yet the world economy is still contracting sharply. Policy makers have thus far failed."

"To be sure, stocks are also rallying because the scope of bad economic news has moderated this month with manufacturing data, housing sales and durable goods all showing surprising strength. However, I view this series of data as a blip and nothing more."

"Meanwhile, in the 1930s the Dow did manage to post five counter-trend rallies in the context of a bear market before collapsing again. This occurred in 1930 (+48%), three times in 1931 (+23.4%, +27.6% and +35%) and finally in 1932 (+24.6%). By June 1932, the Dow had finally bottomed and thereafter gained a cumulative 350% until crashing again in 1937. But June 1932 did mark the bear market low. That historical low was achieved after 32 months; this credit bear market is thus far into its 20th month and, judging by its severity and the mind-blowing destruction of credit, it will also last just as long, if not longer, than the 1929-1932 bear market."

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 15:12 schreef pberends het volgende:
'Crisisaanpak VS leidt naar de hel'

Topolánek: "De Amerikaanse regering heeft het over permanente actie, iets waar wij tijdens onze bijeenkomst (EU-top over de crisis op 1 maart jongstleden) van geschrokken zijn. Amerika maakt dezelfde fouten als in 1930 tijdens de Grote Depressie, zoals grootschalige stimuleringsmaatregelen en protectionisme. De combinatie van deze maatregelen en het permanente karakter ervan zijn de weg naar de hel. De financiering van regeringssteun aan Amerikaanse banken zal de stabiliteit ondermijnen van de wereldwijde financiële markt."

Grappig dat dit keer niet Peter Schiff, maar iemand uit de gevestigde politiek het durft te zeggen.

quote:

Op vrijdag 27 maart 2009 14:50 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:

[..]

Daar zat ik dus ook aan te denken. Het is niet voor niets dat we nu subsidie krijgen om een huis te kopen. Maar je moet er rekening mee houden dat die 20% een landelijk getal is. Aan de oost- en westkust zijn de prijzen de afgelopen tien jaar ~verviervoudigd, en daar zat een behoorlijke bubble onder de huizenmarkt. Hier is het allemaal wat minder, omdat huizen nu al goedkoop zijn. Je betaalt hier de helft tot een derde voor wat je in Nederland voor een huis neer moet leggen, bijvoorbeeld.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 maart 2009 16:29 schreef Basp1 het volgende:

[..]

Ah het BBP is meer gezakt als de consumenten bestedingen dus wanneer we het vanaf die kant benaderen kunnen we wel zeggen dat de consumenten bestedingen gestegen zijn.

quote:

Op vrijdag 27 maart 2009 20:16 schreef SeLang het volgende:
Het wordt al een stuk beter. De spaarquote is alweer positief en hypotheken worden nu per saldo afgelost, voor het eerst sinds heel lang....

[ afbeelding ]

Check even die getallen : de laatste paar jaar werd er per kwartaal zo'n $120 mijard equity aan het huis onttrokken. Nu is dat nul. Wat voor invloed heeft dat op het uitgave patroon van de mensen?