Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

A 60% correction ahead?

2»

Comments

  • @VintageFreak Sam Stovall and Art Cashin (and possibly Bob Doll, as well) are fairly well known market pundits who prognostications @Ted has occasionally introduced to this board. More recently, Ted seems to have stopped introducing links to their musings.

    Although it isn't a research project that I'd be interested in taking on, I'd be interested to know how these various prognostications have worked out over time.
  • @Bitzer: I stopped linking Art Cashin because of negative comments by one individual on MFO Board about Art as being irrelivant. This individual is generally negative about almost everything that's linked to the MFO Board, especially by me. He's a know-it-all, and in my opinion adds nothing to the MFO Discussion Board. The new kinder and gentler linkster will just have to put up with him, but I'll put my contributions to MFO up against his any day. For you Birzer, here's Art.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000306580&play=1
  • Bitzer said:

    @VintageFreak Sam Stovall and Art Cashin (and possibly Bob Doll, as well) are fairly well known market pundits who prognostications @Ted has occasionally introduced to this board. More recently, Ted seems to have stopped introducing links to their musings.

    Although it isn't a research project that I'd be interested in taking on, I'd be interested to know how these various prognostications have worked out over time.

    Okay I will happily stay clueless of Art and Sam then. All the intelligence I need is on MFO.
  • Are you talking about the daily Chuck Jaffe links? He's selling his newsletter.
  • Considering how cranky he gets at others for that sort of behavior @JohnChisum I'm more than skeptical. And @VintageFreak the links that Ted, Old_Joe and others all share is part of what we find on MFO; when I first started learning here, the plethora of links was a valuable resource to sift through.
  • I agree, and the more the better when more posters are involved. These kind of outlier articles are the attention grabbers no matter which website one visits. One day mutual fund outflows are at record highs. The next day everyone is piling new money into mutual funds. Is the stock market going to collapse or is this bull market going to last ten more years?

    I think most people here stay away from the noise. They want to read informative articles. Something new, something thought provoking. Just look at the threads that gather many posts.

    So are we going to have a 60% correction? Someone is mis-using the term correction. 10% is a correction. 60% is a crash and a big one at that.
  • jlev said:

    Considering how cranky he gets at others for that sort of behavior @JohnChisum I'm more than skeptical. And @VintageFreak the links that Ted, Old_Joe and others all share is part of what we find on MFO; when I first started learning here, the plethora of links was a valuable resource to sift through.

    You missed my point. PLETHORA of links is the issue. You say Tomato I say Tuhmaatoe. You say plethora, I say SPAM.
  • @VintageFreak You've made that point before. I was responding to your statement

    All the intelligence I need is on MFO.

    To me that includes links and discussion. No need to be hostile.
  • Look what the genius, David Tice, said in March 2010:

    24 second clip

    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/federateds-david-tice-not-fan-bernanke-manufactured-free-money-driven-bear-market-bouncea-se

    had we listened to him then, we would have missed out on the bull market
  • edited August 2014
    jlev said:

    @VintageFreak You've made that point before. I was responding to your statement

    All the intelligence I need is on MFO.

    To me that includes links and discussion. No need to be hostile.
    Hostile? We can have our own opinions. We can't make up our own facts.

    If I wanted to read EVERY thing out there, I could shoot myself in the head, watch CNBC, etc. etc. I come to MFO to learn not to be kicked in the head.

    Links and Discussion. Yes. The Link has to be meaningful to have meaningful discussion. If we are going to cast aspersions on each other, we don't need either. One reason I don't do Facebook and come to MFO. There's a difference.
  • Sorry. Was just how I interpreted the all caps. No aspersions meant otherwise. Having people explain why they value some links and not others had been part of the learning experience too.
Sign In or Register to comment.