It's an omen for financial engineering and the reality that eventually you have to produce results. You can't just add massive amounts of debt to do buybacks and under-invest in the underlying business and just hope everything works out fine. People like IBM because Buffett does. Wouldn't surprise me if Buffett dumped it like he did Tesco.

FYI:Was that the bottom? Nearly everyone is trying to time the market, so the financial media will focus on remaining risk versus signals of a bottom.
We have a little economic news next week, but plenty of earnings reports. Despite the news flow, the market reaction itself will be the main theme.
I expect the question of the week to be: Is the stock market correction over
Regards,
Ted
http://dashofinsight.com/weighing-week-ahead-correction/

I gave up on Mr Winters after the Financial Crisis. He states the amount he charges is for the benefit of having a Hedge fund in the form of a Mutual fund. As he states '2 without the 20'. During the downturn of 2007-2008 this so call hedge fund provided little protection, for the price it charges. I moved on to FMIJX and have never regretted the move.

FYI: From New York to California, Wisconsin to Texas, hundreds of thousands of teachers, firefighters, police officers and other public employees are relying on their pensions for financial security.
Private equity firms are relying on their pensions, too. Over the last 10 years, pension funds have piled into private equity buyout funds. But in exchange for what they hope will be hefty returns, many pension funds have signed onto a kind of omerta, or code of silence, about the terms of the funds’ investments.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/business/retirement/behind-private-equitys-curtain.html?ref=business
I hold a position in KKR: M* Snapshot Of KKR:http://quotes.morningstar.com/stock/kkr/s?t=kkr

Honestly, do you know how long it's been since equities have been worth their volatility?
A lot longer than most financial writers and talking heads choose to recognize.
Drives me crazy.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/809593/000080959314000116/ieisoftclose.htm
497 1 ieisoftclose.htm
American Beacon International Equity Index Fund
Supplement dated October 15, 2014
To the Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated April 30, 2014
The information below supplements the Prospectus dated April 30, 2014 and is in addition to any other supplement(s):
The following information is inserted at the end of the section titled "Purchase and Sale of Fund Shares" on page 9 of the Prospectus and page 4 of the Summary Prospectus is deleted and replaced with the following:
The American Beacon International Equity Index Fund (the "Fund") will close to new investors as of the close of business on December 31, 2014. Existing shareholders as of that date may continue to purchase, redeem or exchange shares of the Fund on any business day, which is any day the New York Stock Exchange is open for business.
The following information is inserted as the final paragraph to the section titled "Purchase and Redemption of Fund Shares – Eligibility" on page 18 of the Prospectus:
Effective as of the close of business on December 31, 2014, the Fund will close to new investors. The Fund will continue to accept additional investments (including reinvestments of dividends and capital gain distributions) from: (1) existing shareholders of the Fund who had open accounts as of December 31, 2014; or (2) participants in most qualified retirement plans if the Fund was designated as an investment option as of December 31, 2014. Investors through financial intermediaries who did not have a funded position through the intermediary by December 31, 2014 may not invest in the Fund after that date.

Two "Sea Change" usages today :-)
I think this becomes the new buzz word in financial media for a while.

Neutral "risk profile" years ( 2014 being one) have tended to be flat to slightly positive in aggregate. http://stockmarketmap.wordpress.com/2013/10/10/market-map-model-1-risk-profiles/
The statistical strength of a 4th qtr. rally unfolding would seem probable. http://stockmarketmap.wordpress.com/2014/09/15/market-map-update-09152014/
As for the "curators of financial content", we have a hard time believing that, from the tri weekly appearances on CNBC (representing expert views on everything from the Palestine conflict to bank bailouts ) to writing content about Ferraris and the music business, that they would be able to put in the time needed for deep quant research and advisory.

A lot of these guys that become famous, usually via financial media, are letting that fame go to their heads. We have seen some implosions as of late. (Gross anyone?)

Ritholtz is no different than any of the other financial advisors looking to market their name and business to increase assets under management (AUM). AUM is the name of the game.

I'm hoping he is different, but you may be right.
I tend to read him as a higher priority, thinking he is more honest and trustworthy. I think Josh Brown works with him, and I'm thinking Josh Brown is also one of the more honest and trustworthy guys out there.

Same here.

Ritholtz is no different than any of the other financial advisors looking to market their name and business to increase assets under management (AUM). AUM is the name of the game.

I'm hoping he is different, but you may be right.
I tend to read him as a higher priority, thinking he is more honest and trustworthy. I think Josh Brown works with him, and I'm think Josh Brown is also one of the more honest and trustworthy guys out there.

Same difference, is what it is. They rely on "good calls" getting press and "bad calls" getting forgotten. What a game!

Ritholtz is no different than any of the other financial advisors looking to market their name and business to increase assets under management (AUM). AUM is the name of the game.

I'm hoping he is different, but you may be right.
I tend to read him as a higher priority, thinking he is more honest and trustworthy. I think Josh Brown works with him, and I'm thinking Josh Brown is also one of the more honest and trustworthy guys out there.

Ritholtz is no different than any of the other financial advisors looking to market their name and business to increase assets under management (AUM). AUM is the name of the game.

"Here we are, 10-plus months into the year, and we have nothing to show for it. "
I count 9 ½ months. I guess if we are trying to be accurate at least get the calendar right.
As for the corrections, maybe so but a reference would be nice.

I agree John, I'd love to see more references.
A lot of "data" is thrown around the financial media by authors of all sorts, and usually the source is not given.

FYI: Fixed income gurus, financial media talking heads and asset managers have been forecasting rising interest rates for at least two years. They were (and still are) wrong.
Even as recently as one week ago, bond prices took a hit on news of a jobs report that showed a pickup in hiring last month, but prices picked back up this week after Fed minutes revealed that some participants wanted to err on the side of patience to keep supporting the world’s largest economy for longer than expected.
This type of mixed news and uncertainty is likely to continue as the fear of a weaker economy outweighs the fear of inflation. But even if rates start rising in 2015, as is currently expected, it doesn’t mean panic and mass exodus from bonds.
Needless to say, investors in bond funds have been challenged to do a good job of managing the fixed income portion of their portfolios. With that in mind, here are 3 bond funds to buy now for uncertain economic and market conditions.
Regards,
Ted
http://investorplace.com/2014/10/3-bond-funds-unpredictable-market/print

WBMIX up again today, strong at 0.88%.
As was HCP. again...very strong at 1.87%.
Surprised that OAK has not held up better last couple days, given its financial strength and very strong dividend.

Companies and countries, even shaky ones, seem to be able to get loans (eg,. Radio Shack).

And I think that's an example of malinvestment due to tons of money flowing around. I think it's very unfortunate what has happened to Radio Shack, but I question if you didn't not have the monetary environment that you do, would Radio Shack have been gone 1-2 years ago and is throwing money at the problem simply delaying the inevitable? Easy money doesn't fix Radio Shack.
Dave and Buster's IPO'd today. I think that's tried and failed twice.
"And, HELOCs are back again."
There's a joke radio ad in the new "Grand Theft Auto" game about how people are being idiots for having any equity in their house and how they should pull that out to buy new devices that will briefly improve their life.
I say get much tighter in regards to HELOC's and have people who can advise as to the realities and risks of HELOCs. It's not, lets take out HELOCs and go on vacation and buy toys.
I suppose the idea becomes the mortgage officer and underwriters become somewhat less focused on stats and formulas and more on the people who they're dealing with. Effectively, a mortgage officer becomes more of a financial adviser and takes things into consideration rather than the idea that you enter in a bunch of numbers and it says x or y. Obviously, that's not scientific, but I do think the broad idea is if you have someone whose costs could be considerably lessened by buying, how do you make it work?
When you have someone who is the former head of the Federal Reserve not be able to refi, it really would seem more a focus on particular statistics and formulas that say X or Y versus actually looking at the person's situation.

I don't know about a summer break, maybe in the eyes of some journalists?
As for bonds, for every story we see about the bond market ready to explode, there is another story about the amount of money going into bonds. This is what makes financial news reading hard these days.
If the Fed starts to raise rates, investors will go where the yields are best. This is a reason why investors are buying Unconstrained bond funds for example. On the other end of the scale, MM funds could benefit from higher rates.

"Can you imagine the bloat of natural gas if these two egos actually merged efforts? The egos alone would fill the LA Coliseum to overflowing."
The financial media would have gone bonkers. No more dull news days.