[Solomon]

boz, on 21 December 2011 - 07:58 PM, said:

The difference with Japan is the different currency those index are measured with. I don't see the AU$ is as good at measure the sharemarket index in long term.
These days it gets harder and harder to value things and to find a good way to measure and compare values.
the AU$ is a proven yo-yo currency, able to lose 50% of value in weeks ang gain it back few moths later. I hope won't be long before we can find a good way to measure things once again

I'm not totally sure what you're saying boz.
Are you saying that each index is governed on the currency of the country?
That shows how much I know, because I thought the index was based on the throughput of shares and the relative value of the entire bourse.
But I can see, I think, what you mean.

So comparing percentages of different indexes, also requires you to have a grasp of the relative value of the currency in the country in which the bourse exists?
This is because there is no international standard upon which each sharemarket is compared.
Is this correct?
Perhaps you could explain it a little more clearly for me, please.

[cobran20]

I suspect that all these rising wedges should be resolved by next month.

Attached File(s)

•  6.jpg (188.39K)
  Number of downloads: 6
•  1.jpg (214.4K)
  Number of downloads: 7
•  2.jpg (169.4K)
  Number of downloads: 5
•  5.jpg (164.18K)
  Number of downloads: 4

[Bernard L. Madoff]

boz, on 21 December 2011 - 07:58 PM, said:

The difference with Japan is the different currency those index are measured with. I don't see the AU$ is as good at measure the sharemarket index in long term.
These days it gets harder and harder to value things and to find a good way to measure and compare values.
the AU$ is a proven yo-yo currency, able to lose 50% of value in weeks ang gain it back few moths later. I hope won't be long before we can find a good way to measure things once again

So this never happened?...

6760 (2007)
3380 (2009) -50% (actual bottom was 3111)
5070 (2011) +50% (actual top was 5036)

[Bernard L. Madoff]

Solomon, on 22 December 2011 - 01:03 AM, said:

So comparing percentages of different indexes, also requires you to have a grasp of the relative value of the currency in the country in which the bourse exists?

No, if you are investing in ASX in AUD, its irrelevant.

When the ASX was 6070 in 2007, the AUD was around 0.94c
When the ASX was 3111 in 2009, the AUD was around 0.64c
When the ASX was 5064 in 2011, the AUD was around 1.08c

The AUD correllates nicely (0.87 correllation last time I checked with 1.00 being a perfect fit) with world equity markets. Its a Risk On/Off currency.

You can long or short equity markets via the AUD.

[boz]

Bernard L. Madoff, on 22 December 2011 - 06:00 AM, said:

No, if you are investing in ASX in AUD, its irrelevant.

When the ASX was 6070 in 2007, the AUD was around 0.94c
When the ASX was 3111 in 2009, the AUD was around 0.64c
When the ASX was 5064 in 2011, the AUD was around 1.08c

The AUD correllates nicely (0.87 correllation last time I checked with 1.00 being a perfect fit) with world equity markets. Its a Risk On/Off currency.

You can long or short equity markets via the AUD.

for 99% of the world doesn't matter what price of things is in AU$, for similar reason the 99.999999% doesn't care what is the price of things in Zimbabwen$. Not that I think that pricing things in US$ is much better but the number you give on ASX becames:
ASX in 2007= 5700 US$
ASX in 2009= 1991 US$
ASX in 2011= 5470 US$

That doesn't look like the sharemarket of a country AAA rated, it looks like a banana republic kind of country.
But in any case Japan is not much better as they manipulate their currency far more then in Australia. For example Japan central bank hold well over 1 tril$ of US$ denominated bond. What do you think their sharemarket would be if the central banks would have bought shares on Japanese market instead? And how about Japanese people? they have HEAPS of money and assets invested outside Japan. That is a imbalance that could change market pricing overnight.
I like to think differently: may be it is not that Japan market share price have performed bad for very long time. Instead can very much be that the way to measure its price have been misplaced for very long time.
May be we need the ASX200 to price everydays need in the shops and used it as a price reference instead of the AU$. Same thing for Japan and other market.
Also to give a better idea:
imagine the Nikkei prices are measured in bananas.
Every now and then you get a big Cyclone and the nikkei drop in price big time.
The ASX market (or whatever else you want to consider) is priced in oranges and its price hasn't moved as much as the Japan market.
So, could be that the Nikkei is a bad investment. Or could be that the cyclone wiped off all the banana plantations and the scarcity of banana made that price drop?
In any case cyclones are getting far more frequents, and banana are not getting any better to price things. Oranges are getting pretty bad too...

This post has been edited by boz: 22 December 2011 - 07:10 AM

[Bernard L. Madoff]

Boz, whatever mate. I appreciate your emotional ties to the EuroWreck but don't lose your cred man. I'm sure someone that had their super in 100% equities @ ASX 6700 is feeling relieved after reading your post.

The point I'm making is about tradeable rallies in a secular bear market and asset switching vis-a-vis Super etc.

Back to my point.

US rallies and declines 1930s, also a broad 90%+ wipeout...

[cobran20]

Bernard L. Madoff, on 23 December 2011 - 03:40 AM, said:

Boz, whatever mate. I appreciate your emotional ties to the EuroWreck but don't lose your cred man. I'm sure someone that had their super in 100% equities @ ASX 6700 is feeling relieved after reading your post.

The point I'm making is about tradeable rallies in a secular bear market and asset switching vis-a-vis Super etc.

Back to my point.

US rallies and declines 1930s, also a broad 90%+ wipeout...

next bull market may not start until the buy & hold mantra has been wiped from the collective mind of the herd!

[cobran20]

Could be the song for 2012!

[wulfgar]

Here's the music.

[cobran20]

cobran20, on 02 October 2011 - 01:53 AM, said:

The dome is crumbling...

Someone else has done a more thorough version of it (I found Lindsay's work too tedious for my liking)!

Copper
Gold

[Bernard L. Madoff]

Looks like AORDS will be down around 15.5% for the calendar year.

My 6% in FI/Cash in my super is looking like a lottery win*.

A win to the tune of about 25%.

*Two guys in super in Jan 2011 with $500K super balances. The guy in cash today has $530K (not accounting for contributions, just growth). The guy in equities has $422K, a measly 108K difference.

[cobran20]

Bernard L. Madoff, on 29 December 2011 - 03:42 AM, said:

Looks like AORDS will be down around 15.5% for the calendar year.

My 6% in FI/Cash in my super is looking like a lottery win*.

A win to the tune of about 25%.

*Two guys in super in Jan 2011 with $500K super balances. The guy in cash today has $530K (not accounting for contributions, just growth). The guy in equities has $422K, a measly 108K difference.

the buy&hold brigade will have its metal tested until it breaks ... probably close to the bottom!

[staringclown]

Bernard L. Madoff, on 29 December 2011 - 03:42 AM, said:

Looks like AORDS will be down around 15.5% for the calendar year.

My 6% in FI/Cash in my super is looking like a lottery win*.

A win to the tune of about 25%.

*Two guys in super in Jan 2011 with $500K super balances. The guy in cash today has $530K (not accounting for contributions, just growth). The guy in equities has $422K, a measly 108K difference.

Guy buys $500000 TLS* @2.77 Jan 2011 = 180505 shares

Dividend 180505 * .28 = $50541 franked @ 30%

Capital gain 3.34 - 2.77 = .57 * 180505 = $102887

Total $653428

*All highly theoretical. Who in their right mind would actually put a 1/2 million into TLS.

[Mr Medved]

Bernard L. Madoff, on 29 December 2011 - 03:42 AM, said:

Looks like AORDS will be down around 15.5% for the calendar year.

My 6% in FI/Cash in my super is looking like a lottery win*.

A win to the tune of about 25%.

For some reason I felt a little dumb staying in cash at the beginning of the year. Looks like it wasn't such a bad decision.

[Bernard L. Madoff]

staringclown, on 29 December 2011 - 05:53 AM, said:

Guy buys $500000 TLS* @2.77 Jan 2011 = 180505 shares

Dividend 180505 * .28 = $50541 franked @ 30%

Capital gain 3.34 - 2.77 = .57 * 180505 = $102887

Total $653428

*All highly theoretical. Who in their right mind would actually put a 1/2 million into TLS.

My Super has some choices but Red at the Casino or individual stocks isn't among them.

Nice work Mr Medved.

[tor]

staringclown, on 29 December 2011 - 05:53 AM, said:

*All highly theoretical. Who in their right mind would actually put a 1/2 million into TLS.

And also anyone involved in any of the NBN thing would have told you it is a combination political / technical / business play. No way in the world would a sane person bet on that coming out well.

At least with a half arsed startup you get to remove the political aspect

[Bernard L. Madoff]

BTW Staringclown did you buy $500K in Jan? If not whats your point? Was there a glaring buy indicator we missed?

Its all well staring up the horse's arse that passed one by

...to those that stayed in cash in 2011, well done.

I believe we were discussing protecting retirement assets and in that, its not return ON capital, but, return OF CAPITAL.

Its your retirement, it should never be be beyond cash or FI at this time.

[staringclown]

Bernard L. Madoff, on 29 December 2011 - 01:11 PM, said:

BTW Staringclown did you buy $500K in Jan? If not whats your point? Was there a glaring buy indicator we missed?

Its all well staring up the horse's arse that passed one by

...to those that stayed in cash in 2011, well done.

I believe we were discussing protecting retirement assets and in that, its not return ON capital, but, return OF CAPITAL.

Its your retirement, it should never be be beyond cash or FI at this time.

Nah I bought a bunch of TLS about mid 2010. The spread I got was closer to 2.97 rather than 2.77. Not quite 500K but substantial. As tor points out the bet included political, technical and business risk so I too kept most of my stuff in cash. I own TLS and a small bet on GDP (which hasn't done as well TBH) but the vast majority is TD's @6.1%.

I read here regularly so I knew equities in general were going down. Thank you lads! Took up a defensive position. The buy indicator was the chance to offload an ageing copper network for 11 billion that was costing more each year to maintain for the conduit value. The copper itself is worth about another half billion.

It may drop to 2.60 next week but it's the flavour of the month at the moment so I'm having a gentle poke.

[Bernard L. Madoff]

I didn't notice any of that. Nice move Maverick. How is your super?

[staringclown]

Bernard L. Madoff, on 29 December 2011 - 02:05 PM, said:

I didn't notice any of that. Nice move Maverick. How is your super?

4.9% PA over the last 10 years. But it does have some defined benefits. CPI linked pensions and the like. Dependent on wage I think rather than how the fund is doing.

My link