Posted on 06/17/2010 6:46:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Wow, he’s never been wrong. (But then why does he have to hawk newsletters?)
Figures I can’t find my link to the old DJIA priced in gold ounces. It makes a pretty dramatic statement, demonstrating that the industrial average has been in a constant slump since the dot com boom era.
That is particularly bad considering the hyperinflation we will likely start to see in the not-too-distant future due to the inevitable increase in the money supply that will be needed to finance our debt. (In other words, if he’s right, we’re looking at penny stocks)
Yeah...by that time the DOW will be down to 5 companies.
I got laughed at. I'm glad to see someone agrees with me.
In inflation adjusted dollars, or in the dollar of the day?
Exactly. I never pay attention to anyone who makes his living telling people how to get rich.
Henry Blodget
Jun. 17, 2010, 7:04 AM
We've been pointing out for a while that, based on a cyclically adjusted PE ratio, the stock market is significantly overvalued--say, 20% or so.
To arrive at this view, we use a "fair value" estimate for the S&P 500 of about 900, which is close to the one used by fund manager Jeremy Grantham, fund manager John Hussman, and others. This compares to the S&P's current level of about 1100.
But now Andrew Smithers, an excellent economist based in London, is telling us that we're way too optimistic, that fair value for the S&P 500 is actually in the 700-750 range. Smithers, therefore, thinks the stock market is about 50% overvalued.
Smithers constructs his estimate in two ways: 1) the same cyclically adjusted PE ratio that we use, and 2) something called "Tobin's Q," which is a measure of replacement value. Like Yale professor Robert Shiller, Smithers charts these valuation measures for the last century, which provides some context for where we are today:
[snip]
The DJIA is down 16 as I post.
Good point.
Stocks that halve, will halve again. I’m not thinking 3200, but a visit to 6400 again could be in the cards again.
Dollar of the day.
Since I expect some inflation.... ouch!
I'm bearish, but not that bearish!
Never? My understanding is that he insisted that the 2001 “recession” marked the beginning of the Elliot Wave Grand Decline, and simply kept denying throughout the entire Bush years that the economic growth simply wasn’t really happening. Meanwhile, those years marked a boom of economic growth in the third world on such a grand scale we still can’t quite figure out what happened.
Wow, hes never been wrong. (But then why does he have to hawk newsletters?)
He was wrong in the 1990’s. Prechter was predicting a crash from the early 1990’s when the Dow was at 3000 and missed the rally (bubble?) all the way up to 2000.
That bull market ended in 2007 if measured in curent dollars. If measured against gold, the bull market ended in 2000.
The flow through the spigot has increased, but the flow -- temporarily dammed in the banks -- is moving out of financial instruments and back into commodities. This will set off hyperinflation for things that you absolutely need (oil and food), but deflation for things you can live without (real estate).
The net result will see a bear market bottom around 400. Housing will bottom when a typical piece of real estate has lost 95% of its 2007 value, much the way it did during the Great Depression.
Presumably under a Global Communist regime the Dow would be at zero?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.