E 'Monday morning and the week for yours truly decided to start in the most unpleasant of ways. At 4 today for some reason (maybe a nightmare that I remember) I woke with a start. I then spent the following ten minutes to count the sheep in vain in a desperate attempt to get back to sleep. Col Over time I have had to resign the obvious: I would stay awake for the rest of the day (I hope not to fall in the afternoon). While I was, so as not to get bored waiting for a decent time, I turned on the pc and I began to read some economic news.
As often happens, I ended up on the page of Telegraph, the British newspaper and I threw the last of article Ambrose Evans - Pritchard , preparing the usual string of doomsday predictions from News Cassandra. Reading the piece though, I quickly realized they were facing something different. Something che pareva scritto da un individuo in preda al panico. I toni usati nell'articolo risultano anomali anche per uno come Pritchard .
Il giornalista inglese apre il suo discorso, facendo un riassunto dei dati sulla produzione industriale nelle principali economie del mondo:
the only thing that brings up the situation less dramatic than the 30 years is the absence of file for food in large cities. A perception that could tip over completely random, once the effects of the collapse of world trade will reverse, around September / October, fully on the real economy, causing a wave of layoffs. To avoid the worst, Pritchard claim the Federal Reserve That through the purchase of treasury bills to long-term obligations of mortgage interest rates to decline.
yields of Treasury bonds and long-term interest rates for loans are tied together. If the early fall, generally fall even seconds. The Fed has the right to buy treasury bills by printing money for the occasion - in essence a form of monetization of debt. The greater good to be the application for a specified period, the higher their price and lower the other hand, the return that will promise to attract investors (and vice versa). Through these purchases, then, the Fed would be able to influence the returns to the basso e di conseguenza ridurre anche l'importo dei mutui.
Questa forma di "quantitative easing " anche detta "opzione nucleare" equivale allo stampare denaro a ruota libera. Una tattica molto pericolosa, che Bernanke ha più volte minacciato di usare (ne ho scritto in passato qui e qui ) senza però ricorrervi veramente. Ad ogni annuncio fatto, seguiva un calo dei rendimenti. Gli investitori credendo alle parole pronunciate da Bernanke , compravano buoni del tesoro nella convinzione che in breve tempo il loro valore sarebbe aumentato grazie alla domanda da parte della FED . Domanda che non è mai arrivata.
Bernanke , in sostanza, ha cercato di produrre un calo dei rendimenti solo grazie alle parole e alla esplicita minaccia di utilizzare il potere della FED per eseguire certi acquisti. Alle parole però, non hanno mai fatto seguito i fatti e purtroppo per Ben, esiste un limite a quante volte qualcuno sia in grado di gridare "al lupo, al lupo" conservando una qualche credibilità. Ormai il mercato sembra aver mangiato la foglia. I rendimenti sui buoni a scadenza decennale sono saliti costantemente nelle ultime 8 settimane, salendo dal 2% al 3,04%. Nessuno crede più che il capo della FED darà seguito alle sue parole.
Inoltre, a giudicare dagli ultimi annunci, Bernanke stesso sembra have abandoned any notion of quantitative easing involving the purchase of long-term bonds, preferring to purchase securities of the two agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac . A form of "quantitative easing " seen as less disruptive of the market.
To explain this change of direction Pritchard calls into question the foreign countries.
The Telegraph journalist apparently entertains the belief that someone, whom the U.S. is forced to realize - like China - has deterred "kindly" the United States by printing money with which to buy their debt. Pritchard calls America not to bow your head in the face of threats from other nations, noting that it still holds a hegemonic power. Should use that power without fear, going their own way - that is monetizing the debt - and intimate in the case of objections, both of economic retaliation is a military / strategic.
Beyond the speeches of various military and retaliation, the thing that worried about part of Pritchard, knowing a bit 'the character, even as he seems to be convinced that the idea of \u200b\u200bbuying good long-term can truly serve. Seems to offer it as a desperate and extreme measures only because he would not see another way out.
the series: lost for lost, let's try it all.
I am opposed to the forms of monetization of debt, for the simple reason that they have never worked in the past. At best, they end up become ineffective in the worst case lead to the destruction of the currency via hyper inflation or unpleasant consequences, such as dislocations in the market for treasury bills. These are the reasons why I think Bernanke - except that we ignore threats - not yet dreamed of traveling such a path.
If the Fed began to really monetize , keep in mind that this would be last resort. A desperation move is likely to adopted by large foreign buyers of Treasury bills (since otherwise we risk feeling the explosion of the product from the market bot USA all the way here).
The title of this post however, is not frightened tone of the article by Pritchard . With 740
not intend to refer to some Italian tax form, but the level of support of the S & P 500, the main index - it includes more titles than the Dow - of Wall Street . Support on Friday afternoon was broken. I was willing to write something about the weekend, but Alexander was before me. I invite you to read his post on considerazioni generali che si possono trarre dal livello che i principali indici di Wall Street hanno toccato in chiusura di settimana.
L'unica cosa che mi sento di aggiungere, riguarda l'importanza del valore di supporto a 740.
Con supporto si intende un punto in cui l'andamento di un indice al ribasso inverte la rotta e prende a salire. Quando invece è l'andamento al rialzo di un indice a fermarsi ed invertire direzione si parla di resistenza. Più un supporto od una resistenza vengono testati senza essere infranti - cioè senza che l'indice continui scendere o salire senza invertire direzione - e più divengono un punto di riferimento fondamentale. Il grafico sotto preso dalla wikipedia English more clearly illustrates the concept:
As often happens, I ended up on the page of Telegraph, the British newspaper and I threw the last of article Ambrose Evans - Pritchard , preparing the usual string of doomsday predictions from News Cassandra. Reading the piece though, I quickly realized they were facing something different. Something che pareva scritto da un individuo in preda al panico. I toni usati nell'articolo risultano anomali anche per uno come Pritchard .
Il giornalista inglese apre il suo discorso, facendo un riassunto dei dati sulla produzione industriale nelle principali economie del mondo:
La produzione industriale sta collassando dappertutto con una velocità mai riscontrata prima. I dati disponibili per i mesi recenti sono, anno su anno: Taiwan (-43%), Ucraina (-34%), Giappone (-30%), Singapore (-29%), Ungheria (-23%), Svezia (-20%), Korea (-19%), Turchia (-18%), Russia (-16%), Spagna (-15%), Polonia (-15%), Brasile (-15%), Italy (-14%), Germany (-12%), France (-11%), USA (-10%) and England (-9%). Norway shows a rather surprising (+4%). What do they drink over there?drink in Norway What honestly do not know. A friend of mine who works the however, told me of debates in parliament which focused on ensuring the citizens of the Nordic country a decent pension. The amount by which we discussed amounted to EUR 120,000 per year (if you're eyes wide have had my same reaction). This is just to highlight what that Norway is a particular case, even in the current crisis. Data for other countries however, are terrifying. The decline far exceeds the found during the Great Depression and last week to give a further blow has been widespread since the contraction of the U.S. economy: -6.2%, while analysts expected a -5%. According to Pritchard
the only thing that brings up the situation less dramatic than the 30 years is the absence of file for food in large cities. A perception that could tip over completely random, once the effects of the collapse of world trade will reverse, around September / October, fully on the real economy, causing a wave of layoffs. To avoid the worst, Pritchard claim the Federal Reserve That through the purchase of treasury bills to long-term obligations of mortgage interest rates to decline.
yields of Treasury bonds and long-term interest rates for loans are tied together. If the early fall, generally fall even seconds. The Fed has the right to buy treasury bills by printing money for the occasion - in essence a form of monetization of debt. The greater good to be the application for a specified period, the higher their price and lower the other hand, the return that will promise to attract investors (and vice versa). Through these purchases, then, the Fed would be able to influence the returns to the basso e di conseguenza ridurre anche l'importo dei mutui.
Questa forma di "quantitative easing " anche detta "opzione nucleare" equivale allo stampare denaro a ruota libera. Una tattica molto pericolosa, che Bernanke ha più volte minacciato di usare (ne ho scritto in passato qui e qui ) senza però ricorrervi veramente. Ad ogni annuncio fatto, seguiva un calo dei rendimenti. Gli investitori credendo alle parole pronunciate da Bernanke , compravano buoni del tesoro nella convinzione che in breve tempo il loro valore sarebbe aumentato grazie alla domanda da parte della FED . Domanda che non è mai arrivata.
Bernanke , in sostanza, ha cercato di produrre un calo dei rendimenti solo grazie alle parole e alla esplicita minaccia di utilizzare il potere della FED per eseguire certi acquisti. Alle parole però, non hanno mai fatto seguito i fatti e purtroppo per Ben, esiste un limite a quante volte qualcuno sia in grado di gridare "al lupo, al lupo" conservando una qualche credibilità. Ormai il mercato sembra aver mangiato la foglia. I rendimenti sui buoni a scadenza decennale sono saliti costantemente nelle ultime 8 settimane, salendo dal 2% al 3,04%. Nessuno crede più che il capo della FED darà seguito alle sue parole.
Inoltre, a giudicare dagli ultimi annunci, Bernanke stesso sembra have abandoned any notion of quantitative easing involving the purchase of long-term bonds, preferring to purchase securities of the two agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac . A form of "quantitative easing " seen as less disruptive of the market.
To explain this change of direction Pritchard calls into question the foreign countries.
The Telegraph journalist apparently entertains the belief that someone, whom the U.S. is forced to realize - like China - has deterred "kindly" the United States by printing money with which to buy their debt. Pritchard calls America not to bow your head in the face of threats from other nations, noting that it still holds a hegemonic power. Should use that power without fear, going their own way - that is monetizing the debt - and intimate in the case of objections, both of economic retaliation is a military / strategic.
Beyond the speeches of various military and retaliation, the thing that worried about part of Pritchard, knowing a bit 'the character, even as he seems to be convinced that the idea of \u200b\u200bbuying good long-term can truly serve. Seems to offer it as a desperate and extreme measures only because he would not see another way out.
the series: lost for lost, let's try it all.
I am opposed to the forms of monetization of debt, for the simple reason that they have never worked in the past. At best, they end up become ineffective in the worst case lead to the destruction of the currency via hyper inflation or unpleasant consequences, such as dislocations in the market for treasury bills. These are the reasons why I think Bernanke - except that we ignore threats - not yet dreamed of traveling such a path.
If the Fed began to really monetize , keep in mind that this would be last resort. A desperation move is likely to adopted by large foreign buyers of Treasury bills (since otherwise we risk feeling the explosion of the product from the market bot USA all the way here).
The title of this post however, is not frightened tone of the article by Pritchard . With 740
not intend to refer to some Italian tax form, but the level of support of the S & P 500, the main index - it includes more titles than the Dow - of Wall Street . Support on Friday afternoon was broken. I was willing to write something about the weekend, but Alexander was before me. I invite you to read his post on considerazioni generali che si possono trarre dal livello che i principali indici di Wall Street hanno toccato in chiusura di settimana.
L'unica cosa che mi sento di aggiungere, riguarda l'importanza del valore di supporto a 740.
Con supporto si intende un punto in cui l'andamento di un indice al ribasso inverte la rotta e prende a salire. Quando invece è l'andamento al rialzo di un indice a fermarsi ed invertire direzione si parla di resistenza. Più un supporto od una resistenza vengono testati senza essere infranti - cioè senza che l'indice continui scendere o salire senza invertire direzione - e più divengono un punto di riferimento fondamentale. Il grafico sotto preso dalla wikipedia English more clearly illustrates the concept:
what are called trend lines and probably have seen often, are lines that connect two or more substrates or two or more resistors.
In theory, one might expect that when the index approaches the level of the trend line support is close to reverse direction and begin to rise and vice versa near the trend line resistance it would tend to decline. The two lines in this sense, form a range within which the index value si muoverebbe. Un investitore potrebbe quindi regolare i tempi d'acquisto e di vendita sulla base di queste considerazioni (comprare vicino al supporto e vendere dalle parti delle resistenza). Nella pratica invece, può succedere di tutto all'andamento di un indice. I fattori da tenere in considerazione sono molteplici e vanno al di la di banali discorsi su supporti e resistenze. In un periodo turbolento come questo poi, ogni supporto lascia il tempo che trova. Essi assumono un valore di carattere prettamente psicologico.
Il valore di 740 sullo S&P 500 nello specifico, rappresentava quella barriera che aveva retto al tracollo dei listini durante lo scorso Ottobre/Novembre, ed era arrivato col tempo a simboleggiare un limite che molti speravano si dimostrasse invalicabile. Rueters riportava venerdì :
In soldoni, sotto 740 - e venerdì lo S&P 500 ha chiuso a 735 - il mercato naviga in acque sconosciute prive di riferimenti solidi. Non necessarily mean that we will see a bloodbath on the stock exchange during this week, but the possibility certainly exists. According to Philippe Gijsels strategic analyst at Fortis , which has so far prevented the complete capitulation of the market was the absence of a shocking event :
We'll see if this week, the mere failure of the support at 740 on the S & P will be sufficient to capitulate markets or if we have to wait a traumatic event in the future. Whatever the case, I can not imagine in the short term a significant recovery of the scales.
Il valore di 740 sullo S&P 500 nello specifico, rappresentava quella barriera che aveva retto al tracollo dei listini durante lo scorso Ottobre/Novembre, ed era arrivato col tempo a simboleggiare un limite che molti speravano si dimostrasse invalicabile. Rueters riportava venerdì :
Sebbene i segnali siano contraddittori, l'indice dello S&P 500 a 740 è estremamente importante, ha detto Larry McMillan , presidente del McMillan Analisys Corp , in una nota ai clienti. "Molti persone lo tengono d'occhio. Se verrà infranto, sembra che si auto avvererà la previsione di una serie di vendite torrenziali che travolgeranno il mercato" ha detto.
In soldoni, sotto 740 - e venerdì lo S&P 500 ha chiuso a 735 - il mercato naviga in acque sconosciute prive di riferimenti solidi. Non necessarily mean that we will see a bloodbath on the stock exchange during this week, but the possibility certainly exists. According to Philippe Gijsels strategic analyst at Fortis , which has so far prevented the complete capitulation of the market was the absence of a shocking event :
"We should see an index down 7% or 8% within a trading day, with large volumes involved and then proceed to a flat level during the rest of the day, as more buyers come, "said Philippe Gijsels , strategic analyst at Fortis of Brussels.
"Instead, what we are experiencing is the torture of Chinese water drop, without there being a real clean sweep. Governments and central banks tend to watch the markets and give only brief flashes of hope, not enough to bring the Markets up, but enough to prevent them from collapsing "
So why the Capital markets, should be affected by a large and negative event, and would then need a general improvement of the situation because there is a subsequent recovery.
"We need to witness an event which sends shock everyone - the failure of a large U.S. bank, or a European country," said Mark Bon , fund manager at Canada Life .
We'll see if this week, the mere failure of the support at 740 on the S & P will be sufficient to capitulate markets or if we have to wait a traumatic event in the future. Whatever the case, I can not imagine in the short term a significant recovery of the scales.
0 comments:
Post a Comment