4 ms·
Your first two paragraphs are severe contradictions. If this is anything like 1929, the bottom will be around 340, after retesting highs from 1987. In that case
by pyrrhotech 7y ago
Your first two paragraphs are severe contradictions. If this is anything like 1929, the bottom will be around 340, after retesting highs from 1987. In that case, 2400 SPX is a bargain sell and still getting out near the top in the scheme of things.
Even if this is only a relatively mild recession like 2000 or 1973, we'll be seeing 1600 - 1700 SPX or at least 30% below today's close.
- coliveira 7y agoGoldman Sachs already said they expect a further drop of 20%. Of course, this is just the beginning.
- xwdv 7y agoOthers have already forecast a drop of at least 60%. 20% is definitely only the beginning.
- akvadrako 7y agoIf anyone could predict the stock market they wouldn’t be telling you.
- coliveira 7y agoThe issue is not prediction, is expectation. The market moves on expected outcomes, not on reality. The reality may change down the road, but the expectation is to go down a lot more.
- akvadrako 7y agoSorry but that's completely wrong; the marketing moving is a reality. The issue is prediction - will the market move and in which way??
- coliveira 7y agoIncorrect, the market moves on expectation, anyone that has traded the market knows this. If expectations are terrible, the market will tumble, it doesn't matter what is happening right now.
- akvadrako 7y agoI am only talking about one thing - the market going up or down. That’s the entire reality. Expectations contribute to that, making them part of reality.
- zone411 7y agoThey might after they made the trade.
- aguyfromnb 7y ago>Goldman Sachs already said they expect a further drop of 20%. Of course, this is just the beginning. In November, Goldman Sachs was calling for 3.5% Global GDP growth. They are guessing, like the rest of us.
- Sargos 7y agoThey would have likely been right if not for Covid 19. It's not just guessing.
- edmundsauto 7y agoThey would also likely have been right in 2007, if it weren't for the CDS disaster. Same as LTCM in the 90s. Same with every crash -- they're right until something their models don't correctly model have a massive, outsized effect on things. The swings, and combined with high leverage positions, can wipe out firms.
- aguyfromnb 7y ago>It's not just guessing You're right, there's a lot of research that goes into the forecasts. What I meant was the results are no better than guessing. >They would have likely been right I would have likely been right about every forecast I've ever made if it wasn't for unexpected things happening. Covid19 had started in China in November, when the forecast was made. How did they account for it in their models? "It won't matter" was a huge miss. How about this one?: "According to Goldman Sachs, Brent and WTI crude oil spot prices could average $63 per barrel and $58.5 per barrel, respectively, in 2020." We're at <$30. I mean, they correctly anticipated the breakup of "OPEC+", but blew the forecast tremendously. https://marketrealist.com/2019/12/oil-prices-outlook-goldman-sachs-sees-new-high/ https://marketrealist.com/2019/12/oil-prices-outlook-goldman... You can endlessly Google examples. My point isn't that I'm better, but that Goldman Sachs' predictions are nigh worthless. And that's before taking into account any conflict of interest.
- pathseeker 7y agoIt's not a contradiction if it was meant to point how how ridiculous the market is behaving for something so relatively tame compared to the over-leverage that led to the great depression.
- raincom 7y agoOne has to account for 1929 gold standard. Since the world has confidence in the US dollar, Uncle Sam can dole out dollars, unlike gold. Just as bull markets are irrational, so are crashes; both are manifestations of herd mentality, as money ebbs and flows. Today, Vanguard and Fidelity wanted to sell 6M shares of $ROKU after hours through Morgan Stanley. That's how things will go.