Will 2005 be Bullish?

[Guest]

imported post

For the past 120 years, every year ending in a "5" has been up. However, in the past 32 years, 60% of all years in which January was down was also a down year.

Which trend will hold? What do your indicators say?

 

[coolhand]

imported post

Mixed signals.M1 falling and M2 rising.Apprehension.

We need a catalyst to lift this market. I'm waiting until the FOMC before considering another move. Too much risk right now.

 

[teknobucks]

imported post

saraho wrote:

For the past 120 years, every year ending in a "5" has been up. However, in the past 32 years, 60% of all years in which January was down was also a down year.

Which trend will hold? What do your indicators say?

Had 2 post this:



Market Headlines, from Comstock funds,


July 3, 1929- “Moody’s says returns are in line with industrial activity.”



October 16, 1929- “Fisher sees stocks permanently high” New York Times (Note: Irving Fisher was the leading economist of the time)



November 2, 1968- “The Boom That won’t Stop” (Business Week)



January 1, 1973- “Not A Bear Among Them” (Barron’s annual roundtable)



October 26, 1987- “Why Greenspan Is Bullish” (Fortune)



September 1999- “Dow 36,000: The Right Price For Stocks” (Atlantic Monthly)



April 27, 2000- “…relax, the over-all market probably won’t tank.” (Business Week)

 

[teknobucks]

imported post

http://www.aireview.com/index.php?act=view&catid=6&id=1233

 

[coolhand]

imported post

Thanks for justifying my thoughts.

 

[tsptalk]

imported post

saraho wrote:

For the past 120 years, every year ending in a "5" has been up. However, in the past 32 years, 60% of all years in which January was down was also a down year.

Which trend will hold? What do your indicators say?

Also, the first year of a second term president is typically weak. And, we have to see who wins the Superbowl. That used to be a good indicator (NFC win = bullish, AFC win = bearish) but as with other trends, as soon as someone noticed it, it went flakey.

 

[Guest]

imported post

tsptalk wrote:

Also, the first year of a second term president is typically weak. And, we have to see who wins the Superbowl. That used to be a good indicator (NFC win = bullish, AFC win = bearish) but as with other trends, as soon as someone noticed it, it went flakey.

Sorry to disappoint you, Tom, but your indicators just don'tcorroborate your statements.

With respect to the first year of a second term president, at least since 1950, the market was up 60% of the time. (1957 -14%, 1965 +9.1%, 1973 -17.4%, 1985 +26.4%, 1997 +31%).

Secondly, the superbowl predictor has also fallen to less than 50% in recent years.

http://www.maa.org/mathland/mathtrek_7_3_00.html

 

[namor]

imported post

Whether it is bullish or bearish, each new day is another roll of the dice.

Place your bets, Winston Wolf.

Good luck in your investments.

 

[tsptalk]

imported post

saraho wrote:

tsptalk wrote:

Also, the first year of a second term president is typically weak. And, we have to see who wins the Superbowl. That used to be a good indicator (NFC win = bullish, AFC win = bearish) but as with other trends, as soon as someone noticed it, it went flakey.

Sorry to disappoint you, Tom, but your indicators just don'tcorroborate your statements.

Maybe it was first terms in general. But I was just trying to be facetous. As with any of these off the walltrends (Superbowl, year ending in 5, etc.)it is difficult to base your investments decisions on them.

Has anyone else noticed that Saraho disagrees with everything I say? I guess someone has to keep me honest.

 

[Guest]

imported post

tsptalk wrote:

Maybe it was first terms in general. But I was just trying to be facetous. As with any of these off the walltrends (Superbowl, year ending in 5, etc.)it is difficult to base your investments decisions on them.

Has anyone else noticed that Saraho disagrees with everything I say? I guess someone has to keep me honest.

Hey, that's totally false! I usually agree with you.

 

[tsptalk]

imported post

saraho wrote:

I usually agree with you.

I disagree.

 

[nnuut]

imported post

Seems to me that she has made her point every time she has disagreed with you? I think it's healthy to get another opinion (tastefully put) on market probabilities. I've been a member a pretty long time, but don’t contribute much sense I lost my butt in July 2004. Just murking and trying to get an idea of which way to go. It's still a great service and I'm always in the background watching.

NNUUT:^

 

[teknobucks]

imported post

http://money.cnn.com/2005/01/26/markets/january/index.htm

 

[tsptalk]

imported post

tsptalk wrote:

Maybe it was first terms in general.

[url]http://www.fosters.com/January2005/01.23.05/news/harding_01.23.05a.asp[/url]

 

[tsptalk]

imported post

teknobucks wrote:

http://money.cnn.com/2005/01/26/markets/january/index.htm

You are correct Saraho. From tekno's article...

4. The first year of a new presidential cycle tends to be a down one. Yet, the first year of a second term for the same party tends to be a good one, according to Standard & Poor's.

 

[tsptalk]

imported post

nnuut wrote:

Seems to me that she has made her point every time she has disagreed with you? I think it's healthy to get another opinion (tastefully put) on market probabilities.

I agree nnuut. I was just getting a little self-conscious.

 

[Rolo]

imported post

saraho wrote:

What do your indicators say?

When asked, "Will 2005 be a bull market", my Magic 8-Ball says "The signs point to YES".

 

[Guest]

imported post

Nice article Teknobucks!

And Tom, the measure of how much we agree is in the similarity of our allocations. As I see it, your allocation is slowly coming around to my way of thinking (at least for now). *LOL*

In that way, you were right in disagreeing with my previous statement that I usually agree with you. The truth is that you usually agree with me (eventually).

 

[tsptalk]

imported post

saraho wrote:

The truth is that you usually agree with me (eventually).

I'm a little slow. I'll learn.

 

[learning]

imported post

If you flip a coin 7 times and it lands on heads, what are the odds that the next flip will land on tails? The odds are still only 50-50. That is what casinos like. People figure that it is due or there is a trend and chase bad money with good money. Now, the market is a gamble to be sure. It is a smart bet though, unlike the casino. Patterns can even play out. More important though is what is happening in the economy. Now, if people are upbeat they will put money in. The more money going in the better it is for all of us.

Translation- It is good if people buy into the rule of five or some other rule that says the market will take off. It helps the market. More important though is what is going on in the world.

I see the market doing some down with a quick return and a lot of side movement. When fuel goes down the market will go up. It is starting to warm up and that will help. Over all I suspect the year will be like last yearthough.The end of the year I hope will also kick tail again.