De Beursvloer #85: Waar MT door het stof gaat!

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 13:04 schreef Mortaxx het volgende:
Citigroup Inc. may need to raise as much as $10 billion in new capital, according to people familiar with the matter, as the government continues negotiations with banks over the results of its so-called stress tests.

bron

quote:

Bolivia nationaliseert dochter BP

President Morales van Bolivia heeft
een dochterbedrijf van de Britse olie-
maatschappij BP genationaliseerd.Op een
1 mei-bijeenkomst tekende hij daarvoor
een decreet.Het bedrijf,dat brandstof
voor vliegtuigen levert,wordt door het
staatsoliebedrijf ingelijfd.Morales zei
dat hij met de eigenaren onderhandelen
zal over een schadeloosstelling.Morales
komt vaak met nationalisaties op 1 mei.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 13:40 schreef SeLang het volgende:

[..]

De wereld verlinkst

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 13:05 schreef TeringHenkie het volgende:

[..]

Als reactie op mijn mailtje of ze ooit intraday/historische optiegrafieken aan gaan bieden. Dat kan dan weer wel.

quote:

Shooting The Shoots

Posted by Tyler Durden at 2:36 PM
Friday, May 1, 2009

It’s time to set the record straight

We acknowledge that we have felt like salmon swimming upstream. And, we constantly preach that everyone should keep an open mind and about the dangers of being perma-bears at the low (not our intention!) – but it’s time to set the record straight.

Big money investors have been on the sidelines

We have talked to so many bewildered clients about the massive equity market rally from the March lows that we’ve lost count. Few, if any (especially in the hedge fund community) seem to be celebrating the fact that the S&P 500 has rallied 30%, which tells us that big-money investors have been on the sidelines through this entire move. From our lens – and you can see this clearly from the twice-monthly NYSE data – the buying power for this market has actually come from severe short-covering as the bears head for the hills.

Few market-makers share enthusiasm of most economists

We don’t really share the view that the recovery, if and when it comes, will be sustained. We understand the historical record that even in the face of monumental fiscal and monetary easing, it takes a good four years for the economy to work through the aftershocks of a collapse in credit and asset values. While most economists are now waving the pom-poms, we find very few marketmakers who share their enthusiasm.

By and large, this rally has been a clear technical event

Gaps get filled rapidly and the primary source of buying power seems to be coming from a huge short-squeeze, and perhaps some pension fund rebalancing, which always seems to happen after the market makes a new low. To be sure, there is always the chance that the dry powder (money on the sidelines) is put to work and investors chase this rally. And nothing says that the S&P 500 cannot go as high as the 200-day moving average of 970 over the near term. We have seen these kinds of rallies in the past There were four of these kinds of rallies from 1929 to 1932; a half-dozen in the 19-year-old Japanese bear phase; and no fewer than 40,000 rally points in the Nasdaq that were fun to play in the 2000-2003 bear market – but the fundamental downtrend was obviously still intact.

Stock market not good at predicting inflection points

The stock market bottomed for good in the spring of 2003 because at that time, we were on the cusp of a 4%+ real GDP growth rate over the ensuing four quarters. The reason the rally of late 2001 to early 2002 failed was because the market realized the recovery would be delayed. Let’s just say that a 21% rally in the S&P 500 from Sept 2001 to January 2002 was not a bounce that was pricing in a 1.5% GDP growth rate for the ensuing four quarters, which is what we ended up with.

We can look at the situation in reverse. Did the 20% slide in the S&P 500 in the summer accurately predict the 4-1/2% GDP growth trend we were going to see the following year? No. And even in this cycle, the equity market was peaking just as the recession started in the fourth quarter of 2007. So, this notion that the equity market is telling us anything meaningful about the economic outlook, as Larry Kudlow would have us believe, is open for debate. The stock market’s track record is just about as good as the economics community at predicting the inflection points in the business cycle – and that’s not very good.

The market, as a whole, cannot be considered cheap

While there are some good blue-chip companies trading at low multiples, the market as a whole can hardly be considered cheap. That may have been the case two months ago, but no longer. As for the earnings landscape, it has become fashionable to talk about how the vast majority of companies are beating estimates in their 1Q results, but the bar was set extremely low to begin with after that epic 4Q operating and reported loss on S&P 500 EPS. In the meantime, earnings forecasts are being trimmed steadily for the balance of the year. In fact, forward P/E multiple of 15x operating and 30x on reported EPS are not that compelling. So, we do not have a strong valuation argument. We do not have a strong earnings argument. The seasonals ("sell in May”) are about to become less compelling too.

New lows in S&P won’t happen as soon as we thought

We would, at the same time, acknowledge that if the terms of engagement have changed, the Obama economics team and the Fed have made it exceedingly difficult for the shorts to make money in this market. Tail risks, notably in terms of the banking system, have been removed. This, in turn, does mean that even if we break to new lows in the S&P 500, it probably will not happen as soon as we had thought.

Government will do whatever it takes

At the March 9 lows, there was a real feeling of possible bankruptcy in the financial system. But it is now abundantly clear the government will not allow any big financial institution to fail. The end of mark-to-market accounting rules and the super-steep yield curve have returned most of the banks to profitability. Uncle Sam can be relied on to remain the capital provider of last resort, even for those banks that do not pass the coming stress test (which has been delayed, in part because the government wants to assess how to deal with the fallout of those particular institutions). More and more taxpayer money is being thrown at the credit crisis, and now we hear that $50 billion will be allocated toward easing debt-service strains among those households that took on second mortgages during the housing bubble. And, until recently when the green shoots started to appear, there was growing talk of yet another fiscal blockbuster coming down the pike to underpin the economy.

Green shoots can turn into a dandelion or a beanstalk

We are more impressed with solid roots than we are with green shoots. The economy and the capital markets are being held together by tape and glue, in our view. Private sector activity is contracting and will continue to lose its share of GDP as the government’s influence rises on a secular basis. Tax rates will inevitably rise, as they are already doing at the state and local government level. The public sector is now involved in the mortgage market, the insurance sector, the banking industry, and of course, the automotive business.

Economy transforming into an early 1980s European model

As economists, strategists, analysts, and the media, focus on the noise – which is what green shoots really are: a blip in a fundamental downtrend – a dramatic transformation of the economy toward a 1970s/early 1980s European model is unfolding. That post-Mitterrand, pre-Thatcher model, if memory serves us correctly, was one of low-potential real GDP growth rates, low-fair-value P/E multiples, low rates of return on capital and a sclerotic economic system. Economy is not in free-fall but is hardly stabilizing.

Now let’s get to the economy and those fabled green shoots

There is no doubt that the economy is no longer in free-fall, but it is hardly stabilizing, even if the data have improved from deeply negative trends at the turn of the year. There are pundits claiming that because initial jobless claims have managed to come off their recent highs, the end of the recession is in sight. That is a fairy tale, in our opinion.

Slack still being built up in the labor market

Given the looming wave of auto sector layoffs, we expect claims to break to above 700,000 this summer, which would be a new record. So, jobless claims do not appear to have peaked yet. In fact, the relentless surge in continuing claims signals that an ever-increasing amount of slack is being built up in the labor market. There has never been a peaking out in gross claims without there being a confirmation from a similar turn in the continuing jobless claim data. Moreover, initial jobless claims have topped the 600,000 threshold now for 13 weeks in a row, and that is the real story.

To suggest that claims have stabilized above 600,000 and that this is a good thing is ridiculous. It would mean that by this time next year, the unemployment rate could potentially reach 15%. The reason is because employment losses do not end until claims actually break below 400,000. No recession ever ended until claims broke below 600,000, and on average, recessions only end once claims drop below 500,000 (when the last recession ended in November 2001, as an example, claims were 450,000).

Job losses will not end until the end of the year

Employment is one of the four critical ingredients that go into the recession call, not jobless claims, and at over 600,000 on claims, we lose payrolls at a monthly rate of around 600,000. That is hardly what we would call a stable economic backdrop. We do not see job losses ending before the end of the year. Industrial production and real manufacturing/trade sales are two other components that go into the NBER recession-determination model, and our forecast suggests that they too will not bottom conclusively until 2010.

Real organic personal income decrease is unprecedented

What really caught our eye is the fourth horseman of the recession call – real organic personal income. This metric peaked in October 2007 and was early in predicting the official onset of the recession, which began in December of that year. This measure of household income – it nets out government benefits – slipped 0.5% in March and has declined for five months in a row (and six of the past seven). Over that stretch, it declined at over a 6% annual rate, which is unprecedented (the data series go back to 1954).

Expect consumer spending to lag because of lost income

Since August of last year, the consumer sector has lost $266 billion of organic income (in nominal dollars at an annual rate) as job losses mounted, hours worked cut back, and full-time positions shifted to part-time. This lost income – not to mention $20 trillion of evaporated net worth – will likely bring long lags in dampening consumer discretionary spending. We realize that one of the bright spots in the 1Q GDP report was the +2.2% print on real consumer spending. But let’s face facts: The bounce was concentrated in January after a record 30% plunge in retail sales (at an annual rate) in the final three months of 2008. We already know that sales were down in both February and March and that the statistical handoff with respect to consumer spending is negative as we head into the second quarter.

The government does not create income; it redistributes it

We mentioned tape and glue above because the only component of household income that is rising is government transfers (mostly jobless benefits), which rose 0.9% in March and by more than 12% on a year-over-year basis. The government share of personal income at 16.3% is higher today than at any other time in the past six decades (and that covers the LBJ Great Society social benefit transfer of the 1960s). But keep in mind that the government does not create income – it distributes income by borrowing from today’s bondholders and tomorrow’s taxpayer. Not until we begin to see real incomes rise without the crutch of Uncle Sam’s checkbook will it be safe to call for the end of the recession. And again, we see this as more a 2010 story than a 2009 story, although very clearly the markets are suggesting the latter (insofar as they are signaling anything about the economic outlook).

The worst is over

In any event, the economy has certainly passed its worst point of the cycle even if we do not yet see the bottom that many others do at this time. And it may very well be that we overstayed our bearish call on the equity market and that the lows were turned in on March 9. Many pundits who have been around far longer seem to believe that, and they could be right. But there is no sense crying over spilled milk, even after a 30% run-up in the S&P 500 and a 100 basis point surge in the 10-year note yield from the lows. It just broke above its 200-day moving average, and there is nothing but empty space on the chart to 3.8% – that is an observation, not a forecast, by the way.

Lessons learned from the Great Depression

With all that in mind, we thought it would be instructive to look back to the experience of the 1930s. A credit collapse, asset deflation and massive decline in economic activity were finally stopped in their tracks by massive doses of fiscal and monetary stimulus. The S&P 500 bottomed in the summer of 1932 and the trough in GDP occurred shortly thereafter. But if history is any indication, the depression did not end for another nine years. Even after the massive relief efforts and government intervention from the New Deal, we closed the 1930s with a 15% unemployment rate and consumer prices deflating at a 2% annual rate.

Focus on SIRP — safety and yield at a reasonable price

Because the attention now has shifted to the green shoots, as was likely the case after the 1932 low as well, we highly recommend that investors focus on the big picture, which is that the aftershocks of a credit collapse and an asset deflation of this magnitude last for years, even with public sector support. Now go back to that June 1932 low in the S&P 500 (below 5) and the initial surge was breathtaking – the market roared ahead by 75% in just the first three months. But guess what? For buy-and-hold investors, by the end of 1941, the S&P 500 was at the same level as in the fall of 1932. Nine years of nothing, unless you are the most astute trader around.

Folks who chased the rally after the market broke out of the gate woefully underperformed those who stuck with their focus on generating cash flows from the fixed-income market. The yield on long Treasuries fell from 3.8% to 2.5% (Fall of 1932 to the end of 1941) while Baa corporates did even better – rallying from 7.1% to 4.4%. So from this point forward, unless you are comfortable that you have the discipline as to when to get out, the lesson of the last post-credit crunch/asset deflation/depression seven decades ago is to retain your focus on SIRP – safety and yield at a reasonable price. Passive buy-and-hold strategies are destined to fail, in our view.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 13:05 schreef TeringHenkie het volgende:

[..]

Als reactie op mijn mailtje of ze ooit intraday/historische optiegrafieken aan gaan bieden. Dat kan dan weer wel.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 13:50 schreef pberends het volgende:

[..]

Idd, bij opties wil ik ook wel eens grafieken zien, maar die zijn nergens te krijgen. Fucking tyfuszooi.

quote:

Dow 10,000 And More Irrational Exuberance

By: Marc Courtenay Friday, May 01, 2009 4:24 PM

As April 2009 comes to a close it is already appearing like the Wall Street "cheerleaders" and the business media are beginning to talk the stock market up again.

April was Wall Street's best month in nine years -- offering some questionable evidence yet that maybe, just maybe, the economy is about to begin a turnaround. Or maybe, investors will start piling into stocks and funds just as they are about to top out.

The Standard & Poor's 500 index, considered the most reliable measure of the broader market, climbed 9.4 percent in April, its best performance since March 2000, the peak of the dot-com bubble. The Dow Jones industrial average shot up 7.4 percent in April, on top of a 7.7 percent gain in March.

"That's more than a relief for investors -- it's a potential economic indicator, because the stock market tends to get back on its feet before the economy does. In downturns over the past 60 years, the S&P hit bottom an average of four months before a recession ended and about nine months before unemployment hit its peak", wrote Tim Paradis, a business writer for the Associated Press, in an article he wrote April 30th.

"The market is saying that the economy would hit its trough this summer," said Al Goldman, chief market strategist at Wachovia Securities in St. Louis who has spent 50 years monitoring Wall Street.

He's the same market strategist who is famous for saying, "It's the snake you don't see that bites you." Right now every snake and snake oil salesman wants us to believe the market is going to go higher and higher from here. Maybe they are right, but are you willing to gamble some of your net worth that they are?

After months of being fed doomsday scenarios, investors are now starting to take a look at stock market utopia. In this utopia, bad news, like Wednesday's dismal GDP numbers, don't matter.

Here, housing prices stabilize, banks are resuscitated, corporations offer positive earnings guidance, and economic data points start showing signs that things are actually improving and aren't just less horrible than before.

A total fantasy land? Maybe not, say some experts who believe the market's best-case scenario isn't too shabby.

"I'm very impressed at how strong the market has been in the past several days. We've had every opportunity to sell off," says David Twibell, president of wealth management for Colorado Capital Bank in Denver. "Objectively, you've got to be somewhat surprised by that and certainly impressed.

"Are we really seeing a bottom in the market or a substantial bear market rally?" he adds. "This looks more and more like there are some real legs to this thing."

This kind of "irrational exuberance" as the absent-minded Maestro Greenspan used to call it, can be a harbinger of a short-lived and unexpected pull-back in the stock market followed by a huge move upward like we had between 1996-1999.

"Are we going to get back to 14,000 on the Dow this year? That is highly, highly, highly unlikely," says John Buckingham, chief investment officer at value-based Al Frank Asset Management in Laguna Beach, Calif. "But you have to be realistic. If stocks doubled in the next five years, that's a phenomenal return from here."

Most experts interviewed by CNBC.com in an article Thursday indicated that the Dow's best hope would be about 10,000 by year's end. Goldman Sachs, meanwhile, is among those that have set a 1,000 target for the broader Standard & Poor's 500 index.

"Even then, such a move higher would reflect a 30 percent growth and come only under the most ideal conditions: Unemployment turning around, housing finally finding a bottom, a more positive earnings climate beyond the better-than-Armageddon results from the first quarter, and general signs of positivity from the economy in terms of production, inventory reduction and other key metrics."

Thursday's market action wasn't exactly proof that we're going to 10,000 before we retrace back to 7,500. But this market's ability to shrug off bad news and climb a wall of worry is very impressive and might last awhile longer.

All I can say is be ready to do some shopping this summer and fall if the mood on Wall Street sours for a few months. I can hardly wait to buy companies like NYX, EMC, CHK and COP when they get a bit deflated from their current levels.

quote:

In downturns over the past 60 years, the S&P hit bottom an average of four months before a recession ended

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 15:37 schreef pberends het volgende:

[..]

http://www.istockanalyst.(...)le/articleid/3214907
[..]

Deze recessie is 9 juli voorbij .

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 15:47 schreef SeLang het volgende:
Ja zo gaat dat.
15 jaar excessen, een failliet bankensysteem, een verdubbelde staatsschuld over de komende paar jaar, consumenten die tot over hun oren in de schulden zitten en een economie die sneller daalt dan in The Great Depression. Dan print je even wat geld en dan is het allemaal alweer voorbij en leefde iedereen nog lang en gelukkig.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 15:37 schreef pberends het volgende:

[..]

http://www.istockanalyst.(...)le/articleid/3214907
[..]

Deze recessie is 9 juli voorbij .

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 16:02 schreef Dinosaur_Sr het volgende:

[..]

het lullige is dat het zomaar kan

Op fd.nl stond een tijdje geleden een aardig artikel van een auteur met de strekking dat aandelenkoersen het economische sentiment aanzwengelden, meer dan omgekeerd.

Doen fundamentals er eigenlijk nog wel aan toe in deze marketingsociety?

De crisis is dood, lang leve de volgende crisis

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 16:31 schreef pberends het volgende:

[..]

Klopt wel, zo gaat de S&P op Thanksgiving ook altijd omhoog. Waarom? Om consumentenbestedingen kunstmatig te stimuleren!

Het consumentenvertrouwen lijkt ook al te stijgen door de hogere beurskoersen.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 17:46 schreef dramatiek het volgende:

[..]

Ik denk dat dat causaal verband moeilijk aan te tonen is. De meeste consumenten zal het een rotzorg zijn hoe de beurskoersen erbij staan, ze weten niet eens hoe de koersen erbij staan.Zelfs nu met een vrij grote focus op de economie weet het merendeel helemaal niet of de koersen deze week gestegen of gedaald zijn. Sommige mensen leven natuurlijk in een andere wereld dan de volgers.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 mei 2009 13:40 schreef SeLang het volgende:

[..]

De wereld verlinkst

quote:

Op zondag 3 mei 2009 09:48 schreef pberends het volgende:
http://xandernieuws.punt.nl/?id=514697&r=1&tbl_archief=&

'De ultieme Depressie-overlevingsgids' bestseller in VS
Boek 'Conquer the Crash' nog pessimistischer: 'Ergste ineenstorting in 300 jaar komt eraan' - 'Dow Jones naar minder dan 1000 punten'

Kijk, dat zien we graag .

quote:

Op zondag 3 mei 2009 09:48 schreef pberends het volgende:

Boek 'Conquer the Crash' nog pessimistischer: 'Ergste ineenstorting in 300 jaar komt eraan' - 'Dow Jones naar minder dan 1000 punten'

quote:

Op zondag 3 mei 2009 09:55 schreef dramatiek het volgende:

[..]

Als het zo slecht wordt, laat ik mijn primitieve impulsen de vrije loop.........Dan ga ik gewoon in mijn blote bast de veluwe op om te jagen

Jim Rogers you should start an agricultural business 25 mar 2009

Economic Apocalypse!!!!! Gerald Celente on Glenn Beck 02-10-09

quote:

Stanasolovich: Short Oil, Long Gold

Written by HardAssetsInvestor.com
Friday, 01 May 2009 09:27

Louis Stanasolovich, one of the top advisers in America, offers his latest views on the market. It isn't pretty.

HardAssetsInvestor.com (HAI): Given all that's transpired over the past year, and given the state of the economy, should investors have exposure to commodities in their portfolios?

Louis Stanasolovich (Stanasolovich): Looking 10 years out, the answer is an unequivocal yes. In the short run, though, it's anybody's guess. That's why we use the Direxion Commodity Trends Strategy Fund (DXCTX), which tracks the S&P Commodity Trends Indicator. It uses a long/short approach. That worked very well last year; this year it's not working so well, so far. But that could change.

HAI: There's a great debate raging right now over inflation/deflation and gold. What do you think the outlook for gold looks like, both in the short and long term?

Stanasolovich: Again, we think that long term - probably starting a couple years out - most currencies around the world will start to have problems, because so many governments have debased their currencies by taking out so many loans. And when you see currencies debased, especially on a global basis, that's a good time for gold.

We have bought gold and are buying gold on any weakness. We bought at the $880/ounce level. We'll continue to purchase a little here and there if prices continue to drop.

HAI: Do you have a target allocation for gold? Is there a point where investors have too much gold in their portfolios? Or not enough?

Stanasolovich: For us it depends on price. We believe we will soon enter an inflationary period ... but only if we don't go into deflation first, which is also a risk. But the truth is that gold has historically worked pretty well in deflationary periods as well as inflationary periods.

In the 1930s - the last deflationary period - gold had a very, very big move. The next big move was in the 1970s, when we had high inflation. And then we had a big move in the last few years as inflation picked up again.

Gold is a panic asset too, and it seems like a lot of the world's money is in a panic, so that bodes well for gold as well. The only period in which gold doesn't do well is during a period of low inflation.

So the short answer to your question is "no," we don't have a set maximum on gold exposure. If gold goes back to $400/ounce, we might have 15% of our portfolio in gold.

HAI: Do you ever take positions in commodity-producing stocks - say, gold miners - as opposed to the commodities themselves?

Stanasolovich: When gold went to $880/ounce, we bought 1% GLD [the SPDR Gold ETF, a bullion-based fund] and 1% in the First Eagle Gold Fund [SGGDX]. First Eagle has had a very, very good period. They own gold bullion in the fund, but mostly, they own gold mining stocks. Over the last 12-15 years, gold bullion has done better generally than gold mining stocks. But there are times when gold stocks have done well, so we decided to own both at this time.

HAI: What about oil? What's your outlook for oil prices, which have been, to say the least, extraordinarily volatile recently?

Stanasolovich: Long term, energy is going significantly higher. Last year's prices will look timid in 10 years. Could we have $300 oil? Yes, by 2022. Unless we as a world population start moving very quickly to alternative fuels in a very big way, we think oil could be $300/barrel easily.

In the short term, however, it all depends on the economy. Quite frankly, I'm surprised oil is as high as it is, given how inventories are stacking up. I think we'll see oil take off again at some point here, but currently, we are shorting oil in our most aggressive portfolios. We'll take those shorts off once we get down to $30/barrel.

HAI: Short oil? That's pretty bold.

Stanasolovich: We just don't see oil rising a whole lot right now. Technically, per energy unit burned, natural gas is cheaper. And we just don't see oil making a big charge upward any time soon. If anything, we see it lower. So we have a very small position in terms of oil shorts at this point, and only for our most aggressive portfolios.

HAI: Do you think that natural gas could finally get up off the floor?

Stanasolovich: It could. It depends on oil. If oil surges, I'm sure natural gas will move quickly.

HAI: What about the economy in general? Are we through the worst of it, or is there further to go?

Stanasolovich: Valuations are low on the stock market, but we're not anywhere near the worst valuations historically. The market would have to go down another 50% for that to occur. Does that mean we'll go down another level? No, it doesn't. However, the earnings that are coming out are highly suspect. Many banking institutions have earnings that are accounting-generated in a lot of cases. A good evidence of that is Citibank, which came up with a $2.4 billion accounting charge and is now trying to raise capital.

It just confirms that this severe recession still has a ways to go, particularly with the option-ARM mortgages and the Alt-A mortgages that are coming due and have to reset. That plus the existing problems of other mortgages ... well, the mountain of resets is actually bigger than it was in subprime. So we expect more difficulty for financial institutions, plus housing dropping an additional 20% in terms of price, as inventories go up. The scary part could be if the Federal Reserve has to raise interest rates because people stop buying our Treasury securities. That will cause homeowners to pay even higher rates, which they can't afford.

It doesn't look good in our opinion. We see about a 70% chance that the economy gets worse, and a 30% chance that it gets better. If the economy continues to deteriorate, we believe we'll see at least a sideways market, if not a declining market. I don't see a 50% decline, but I do see the potential for a 20-25% drop. I think there's a good chance we'll retest the March lows.

HAI: Aside from gold, where are you finding opportunity?

Stanasolovich: Managed futures, long/short commodities, long/short equities. We think there's some limited opportunity in government agency-type securities. TIPS have largely run up already, so we are not excited about them. Corporate and municipals will at some point be very attractive to us, but we think it's premature at this point. Junk bonds will be attractive, but again, not yet.

Also, other currencies, especially emerging market currencies, will look attractive over the next 3-5 years. But we're not entering into positions there yet, either. There's still a ways to go.

Really, we're not overly bullish on anything. This year, there's probably 10% upside, tops, on anything, across the board.

quote:

Op zondag 3 mei 2009 10:07 schreef henkway het volgende:

[..]

Volgens Jim Rogers is het beste een huisje met veel grond vinden en zelf je voedsel verbouwen

Jim Rogers you should start an agricultural business 25 mar 2009

Economic Apocalypse!!!!! Gerald Celente on Glenn Beck 02-10-09

quote:

Op zondag 3 mei 2009 10:13 schreef SeLang het volgende:

[..]

Alleen wordt die grond door de staat geconfisceerd als het allemaal echt zo slecht wordt.

quote:

Op zondag 3 mei 2009 10:07 schreef henkway het volgende:

[..]

Jim Rogers you should start an agricultural business 25 mar 2009