I did not want to relegate this sentiment to the 'comments' section.
I began this blog in 10.01.06. It was my attempt to sort of publicly hash out my private machinations of becoming a more savvy investor. I wrote for more than 6 mos before I linked my blog to my name in any of the public areas that I posted. My dear Anon--I'm not a financial services executive, but rather a Executive Financial (CFO) person. So, I bring no depth of experience as you have to investing and markets.
For the most part, there were only three places that I posted: Barry Ritholtz's, Bill Cara's and Roger Nusbaum's blog. I consider thoughtful, honest communication important--both in person and most particularly on-line. I've tried to model that value in my posts both here and in those places. I'd be lying if I said that I don't get pi$$y from time to time, but I've never written a regrettable post. I have Bill Cara to thank for two things:
While a blog is a public place, it is also a place where the host sets the parameters. It is his or her right to do so. I've only deleted a couple of comments in my blog--I think that they were spam--hawking products under an alias. My comments section is generally a quiet place, so I've not had to set any real parameters. And when there are comments that make me uncomfortable (I was called a recessionista in a very derogatory way), I say so. I'm uncomfortable with spillover from another blog entering here--even when they are made with good/supportive intentions--when such comments are critical of another's blog, another's policies or another blogger. There are times for private correspondence (which is why I have an accessible e-mail) and time for public comments. One blogger mentioned in one of the comments is one of my valued readers and commenters and one with whom I've enjoyed participating on Bill's blog.
Though a blog is not a business, there is a similarity. The blog host is the CEO. I was CFO for a long time. I guess, I still am; I'm just dormant. As a CFO you have to have a very clear understanding of one's role. Specifically, I feel that one's role is to not be a cheerleader for the business, but to be an advocate for the business. That means that every business decision should be evaluated on the merits of what is best for the business--not what is going to ingratiate one in the eyes of the CEO or stockholders or whomever. Rarely are any decisions in life or business black or white. While I always gave my counsel and my reasonings for such, it was always the CEO's decision to accept it or not. I never was unclear about that. Further, I am no any less unclear about Bill's or any other blog host's rights for shaping participation. If one finds that such shaping is not to his/her sensibilities, then the decision to opt out of the discussion would be a reasonable path to consider.
Bill has inspired many investors--myself included. He has both my
respect and admiration. However, that doesn't mean that have to agree
with his decisions or his policies. Those are decisions that are his
and his alone to make.
So I'm declaring MY blog backyard "Little Switzerland" and am raising the flag of neutrality!
I began this blog in 10.01.06. It was my attempt to sort of publicly hash out my private machinations of becoming a more savvy investor. I wrote for more than 6 mos before I linked my blog to my name in any of the public areas that I posted. My dear Anon--I'm not a financial services executive, but rather a Executive Financial (CFO) person. So, I bring no depth of experience as you have to investing and markets.
For the most part, there were only three places that I posted: Barry Ritholtz's, Bill Cara's and Roger Nusbaum's blog. I consider thoughtful, honest communication important--both in person and most particularly on-line. I've tried to model that value in my posts both here and in those places. I'd be lying if I said that I don't get pi$$y from time to time, but I've never written a regrettable post. I have Bill Cara to thank for two things:
- Thing One:for his introducing me to 'his way' of investing--which for average investors like myself is both approachable and executable. It is his passion.
- Thing Two: In his being supportive of my own blogging efforts. It meant so much to me. It still does.
While a blog is a public place, it is also a place where the host sets the parameters. It is his or her right to do so. I've only deleted a couple of comments in my blog--I think that they were spam--hawking products under an alias. My comments section is generally a quiet place, so I've not had to set any real parameters. And when there are comments that make me uncomfortable (I was called a recessionista in a very derogatory way), I say so. I'm uncomfortable with spillover from another blog entering here--even when they are made with good/supportive intentions--when such comments are critical of another's blog, another's policies or another blogger. There are times for private correspondence (which is why I have an accessible e-mail) and time for public comments. One blogger mentioned in one of the comments is one of my valued readers and commenters and one with whom I've enjoyed participating on Bill's blog.
Though a blog is not a business, there is a similarity. The blog host is the CEO. I was CFO for a long time. I guess, I still am; I'm just dormant. As a CFO you have to have a very clear understanding of one's role. Specifically, I feel that one's role is to not be a cheerleader for the business, but to be an advocate for the business. That means that every business decision should be evaluated on the merits of what is best for the business--not what is going to ingratiate one in the eyes of the CEO or stockholders or whomever. Rarely are any decisions in life or business black or white. While I always gave my counsel and my reasonings for such, it was always the CEO's decision to accept it or not. I never was unclear about that. Further, I am no any less unclear about Bill's or any other blog host's rights for shaping participation. If one finds that such shaping is not to his/her sensibilities, then the decision to opt out of the discussion would be a reasonable path to consider.
Bill has inspired many investors--myself included. He has both my
respect and admiration. However, that doesn't mean that have to agree
with his decisions or his policies. Those are decisions that are his
and his alone to make.
So I'm declaring MY blog backyard "Little Switzerland" and am raising the flag of neutrality!
5 comments:
LOL
Leisa... don't remain "dormant" too long - I've been looking through some of your previous work - and it is some pretty good "fundy" work.
You had a good grasp of what was ultimately to come with the US financial stocks...
btw - I'm sorry about the anon - posting that stuff - I may be "quirky", a bit "off the wall" sometimes, and challenge other people's ideas - trying to get to think and question there own biases - but name calling and such really serves no purpose.
--
Anyways on to the markets...
Leisa, what do you think about the election cycle this year?
Many are calling for a little rally over summer ahead into the election.
Do you think fundamentals will permit this?
Also, as I tried to mention on Bill Cara's blog- there is a long term Economic cycle - the K-wave - which is going to exert downward pressure on all assets - probably in 2009...
What kind of valuation P/E etc... do you see the US markets falling to during this period of deflation?
Of interest: A savvy money manager last week was saying that even at the current depressed prices for financial stocks - they are still historically 50% overpriced relative to the overal S&P index ratios.
'nice
NG. No need to feel apologetic on the comments of others. The comment was not meant to be mean-spirited, and I understand that.
Regarding politics. I never discuss them. I've had a very conservative career without the attendant conservative political beliefs that some feel like you must automatically have. So, I try to be a-political!
Regarding the rally: I think that the markets have hypnotized themselves into believing we have a double bottom. Tim Wood on FSO (see post over weekend) mentioned that he thought that it was an engineered bottom. He's not expecting it to stick. But the market is so desperate for some good news and the upcoming quarter end, so there's some rocket fuel!
Regarding K-wave--Armstrong did some work on economic cycles. I don't know if he did the K-wave. IF you search my blog for Armstrong, you'll about 4 posts. One shows the economic cycle bottoming now, increasing and then bottoming later. I also posted on his study on the 1929 crash and the relation to debt that was not on the indices. I found it remarkably similarly. You'll see that post too if you search.
Regarding P/E ratios: I don't look so much at valuation of markets. And, if I were to have an opinion on the matter, it would be worthless!
My focus is mainly on macro stuff: economic fundamentals and determining which sectors would would be beneficiaries and then individual stocks. I try to marry that with technical analysis so that I can understand price action and important price points.
The financial stocks valuations--whose to know? I'm waiting not for shoes to drop but some anvils! Perhaps the worst is passed, but I cannot for a moment believe that is true. I'm still waiting for someone to say what the heck is going to happen in 28 days. PErhaps this chatter about the Fed buying mortgages is in response to the feeling that in 28 days, nothing will have change so.....ask the Fed to buy the damn thing. I will be quit irritated if that were to happen!
Anvils... Ouch!
Armstrong was uncanny wasn't he?
Is he out of jail yet?
Regarding the K-wave - it will probably trough sometime after the euphoria surrounding the 1st year of the election wears off - maybe in the 2nd year of the next presidential term.
At that point the next leg of the commodity supercycle (as some are calling it) should kick off with a vengence.
We will probably need a another Volcker after the end of the next decade to do the 'dirty work' and clean up the mess from all the previous decades excesses.
Regarding the financials...
If you compare the earnings ratios of the financials to the earnings ratios of the total S&P - and see what these ratios were like during past "financial crises" - one could readily conclude that --> anvils will indeed be dropping agina at some point between now and 2010.
..
That's it for me today - leaving the rest of todays trades on stops...
...the bears got it wrong the past week obviously...
... futures premiums and transports were pointing higher... clear tells...
Let's see what tomorrow brings...
'enjoy the rest of the day..
'nice
Occasionally, I will let something slip in a comment (or two!) that should be reserved for a personal note. Sometimes I am just too damn busy to think properly. And no one has ever accused me of softpedaling my opinions! ;)
Cat
Cat- Oh I'm not so demur about my own opinions. Sometimes the finer art is not the positing of an opinion but the zipping of one's lips! I've not mastered that skill. It's not on my Davincian Principles list or my to do list, so it ain't going to make it to the skill building table this year.
Post a Comment