<p>Well… You are better than God… I don’t think God could have bought TJX on Wed. :)</p>
<p>4.4 million shares were traded so that means a lot of buyers. Basically a good down day on low volume - ideal time to buy.</p>
<p>And what was Wednesday’s volume?</p>
<p>4.4 million was Wednesday’s volume.</p>
<p>I don’t think so…</p>
<p>I think the volume was zero.</p>
<p>Was Tuesday then</p>
<p>Yeah…I was just teasing you… :)</p>
<p>Good luck on TJX.</p>
<p>I barely traded last week.</p>
<p>I am glad MSFT closed over 30 today. I did the covered write and I want to get assigned on the 30 calls. The option expiration was today…so I am good there.</p>
<p>I wish Intc closed over 27… But you can’t win them all.</p>
<p>Krlilies, that nano whatever may be good for a quick trade, but as far as long term investments go… there are better options. I’m not bullish on NSPH. ;)</p>
<p>BB, the only long-term equity investments I have are high div stocks that I bot back in 2009 and a couple of other that I got at dips. Even the 401k mutual fund investments I watched in shock as their values spiral downwards past couple of years, I was finally able to exchange out with a good gain mid-spring. It’s difficult for us to buy and hold nowadays.</p>
<p>Maybe, you can give me a hint on what those long-term better options are? I’ll look at it and see if I’m willing to hold.</p>
<p>[What</a> Whole Foods Learned From Navigating the Great Recession - DailyFinance](<a href=“Stock Portfolio & Tracker - Yahoo Finance”>Stock Portfolio & Tracker - Yahoo Finance)</p>
<p>A rather interesting anecdotal lesson on always having some cash available. I am considering paring some of my positions ahead of earnings season. I have also been giving some thought as to increasing my position in PBA - still loving the dividends.</p>
<p>The $28 INTC calls that I sold a few weeks ago are near worthless. I tried to buy them back but my limit was too low.</p>
<p>I always have cash…
I just sleep better…
It’s a hard decision to decide whether to sell long term positions when earnings season arrives…
Stocks that I want to own for several years…I usually leave alone…
BUT…
I do not have large positions in anything…which is good or bad…no position can really affect my portfolio in any meaningful way…
So…I can see somebody else reacting differently.</p>
<p>Geez…WfM was trading 2 times cash flow…What a steal…
Interesting to read about CEOs or companies not having cash. I liked
the link.</p>
<p>I also read Mauldin today…
Shiller has come up with his 10 year PE ratio…I like Shiller a lot…and it looks like Mauldin is saying PEs are still too high…</p>
<p>I am not that sure I like this 10 year PE ratio…</p>
<p>If PE ratios are high 7,8,9,10 years ago…higher than now…over time…the high PE ratios drop off and the lower ones take over and the PE ratios drop…we can have rising PE ratios today and the next several<br>
years…and have the 10 year PE ratio drop…somehow signaling that stocks are getting cheaper when that might not be true. I think the more recent years PEs have to be weighted higher than the older years. I
don’t think Shiller…and Mauldin do this. (I am assuming Mauldin is using a 10 year PE).
For example sake, we have PEs per year for 10 years of 25,25,25,25,25,15,15,15,15,15…so we we have an average 10 year PE of 20. The next 5 years we have this 15,15,15,15,15,20,20,20,20,20. Now the 10 year PE has dropped to 17.5 so stocks are supposedly
cheaper. I don’t know… PEs per year are up to 20 from 15 a few years ago…stocks may not be cheaper.</p>
<p>Maudlin says stocks bottom when PEs are below 10. A couple of years ago stocks did have a PE below 10. As you pointed out BCEagle91, you could buy WFM for 2 times cash flow…</p>
<p>The bull run is over,it ended when housing crashed…both housing and stock gains were fueled by the baby boomers and just simply the numbers of them involved in both markets…the generation just below the boomers have been on the wrong side,for the most part lost any gains they had, and they are now jaded…Volumes continue to be low in both markets, and a full recovery for ALL is unlikely…there will be areas of strength in housing and in some stocks,but not for the masses…</p>
<p>I used to use an analogy of a ballon in regards to housing prices…If you use a major city and blow up e ballon from the city, it exapnds slowly out,first suburbs and eventually rural areas where people find afgordable housing and are willng to commute to the city…When the ballon deflates,it quickly deflates from the rurual,ex-urbs,more slowly in the suburbs, and even eventaully back to the city…those out 60 miles± are never going to see their home values return to bubble days,never</p>
<p>The balloon analogy is probably a very good one…</p>
<p>To be a bit more positive the areas in and near the cities where people want to live are going to see new highs in housing prices.</p>
<p>Agreed…as long as the cities have a good job base</p>
<p>The “bubble” was more than just demographics. It has been mightily fueled by the fed, beginning in late August 1982, and they seem to be just about finished.</p>
<p>Regarding the WFM comments. I read it as typical stock promoting bs. </p>
<p>There was a great quote back in post-crash '87 from a CFO who was asked why his company had not announced a “buyback” program as so many had. His response was gospel…“I’ve never heard of a company that went out of business because their stock price was too low, but I’ve heard of lots of companies that went out of business because they ran out of cash.”</p>
<p>"There was a great quote back in post-crash '87 from a CFO who was asked why his company had not announced a “buyback” program as so many had. His response was gospel…“I’ve never heard of a company that went out of business because their stock price was too low, but I’ve heard of lots of companies that went out of business because they ran out of cash.”</p>
<p>Interesting quote…</p>
<p>I am suspicious of most buybacks. They enrich management and don’t do much for shareholders.</p>
<p>I saw the Amazing Spiderman today. I thought it was great. Brtter than I expected.</p>
<p>The two leads, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, had a nice chemistry.</p>
<p>Without the demographics,none of it would have happened,yes the Fed et al played major roles in the bubbles,but you need players and particiapants to fuel the bubbles</p>
<p>Looking soft on the open,surprise,surprise… :)</p>
<p>Statoil prepares to shutdown over strike - unions want better pension terms. Amazing to hear that in the current global economic climate. A strike might allow the world to work down some of its inventories.</p>
<p>$USD slightly down, gold and silver slightly up, oil up. Global markets weren’t happy last night. The Germans are getting tired of everyone wanting them to bail everyone else out.</p>