44 replies to this topic

[IndexTrader]

Z:

That $59 looks like it might be the 2009 forecast. If it's truly 2010 I think it's way too low. At any rate, what I'm talking about is 2010. Here's a link:

http://www.bloomberg...id=aUbVti8SvAMA

Yes that estimate is for an amazing unrealistic rise in the next 2 quarters just to get to 59. HOW? What is the catalyst? We already cut the heck out of jobs, lots of the fat, forwarded house sales, cars sales and that is how you got to these "good beat the estimate" numbers in the first place. Lets see next earnings when they come out and by then we will see if we get close to 59 pace.

So we have two choices believe stock sales people estimates who never lie or peak historical pace in earnings best case. I will go with Plan B.

The last quarter of this year we will begin to focus on the 2010 earnings, not the 2009 earnings that you're focusing on. But I'm firmly convinced that you won't be believing any of this anyway. So let's leave it like this...if $70 comes in next year, stocks are going higher, corrections notwithstanding.

IT

IT it is not a matter of believing it is a matter of show me the money. If you show me how it can be done with some kind of catalyst and some numbers that beat the normal peak to peak pace I will buy it until then I am going by historical peak to peak earnings pace best case scenario vs. some fantasy number cranked out by the sales force of a brokerage firm. Just to get to year end $59 earnings we would need a 17.8% per quarter pace for next two. Man that is a tuff enough pill to swallow let alone the 70 next year. Even the gang at S and P has it at 54 for year end as of now.

OK. I guess you'll be shorting em from now until doomsday then eh? Garzarelli by the way is an independent analyst, not from a brokerage firm. Good record too by the way...one of the few to call the 87 crash. Take a look at the links.

We can revisit this topic later on when you have some crow to eat.

IT

[zoropb]

Z:

That $59 looks like it might be the 2009 forecast. If it's truly 2010 I think it's way too low. At any rate, what I'm talking about is 2010. Here's a link:

http://www.bloomberg...id=aUbVti8SvAMA

Yes that estimate is for an amazing unrealistic rise in the next 2 quarters just to get to 59. HOW? What is the catalyst? We already cut the heck out of jobs, lots of the fat, forwarded house sales, cars sales and that is how you got to these "good beat the estimate" numbers in the first place. Lets see next earnings when they come out and by then we will see if we get close to 59 pace.

So we have two choices believe stock sales people estimates who never lie or peak historical pace in earnings best case. I will go with Plan B.

The last quarter of this year we will begin to focus on the 2010 earnings, not the 2009 earnings that you're focusing on. But I'm firmly convinced that you won't be believing any of this anyway. So let's leave it like this...if $70 comes in next year, stocks are going higher, corrections notwithstanding.

IT

IT it is not a matter of believing it is a matter of show me the money. If you show me how it can be done with some kind of catalyst and some numbers that beat the normal peak to peak pace I will buy it until then I am going by historical peak to peak earnings pace best case scenario vs. some fantasy number cranked out by the sales force of a brokerage firm. Just to get to year end $59 earnings we would need a 17.8% per quarter pace for next two. Man that is a tuff enough pill to swallow let alone the 70 next year. Even the gang at S and P has it at 54 for year end as of now.

OK. I guess you'll be shorting em from now until doomsday then eh? Garzarelli by the way is an independent analyst, not from a brokerage firm. Good record too by the way...one of the few to call the 87 crash. Take a look at the links.

We can revisit this topic later on when you have some crow to eat.

IT

No data no ideas for how it can be done? Just an emotional reply hmm are you like way long IT? I am surprised by reply.

IT I went 2 shorts today and one long on es trades and 2 longs on dollar. So just because I am bearish for LT does not mean I trade this way st. I hope we are clear on that. I am only killing some time and enjoying the conversation when I post here. Nothing more.

I know very well who she is bud and as for crow it goes both ways. Most did not believe we would ever, never,ever take out the 2002 lows and I guess lots of crow was eaten wasn't it?

So let the fantasy continue I have lots of patience for this issue... plus I really do not care well not really I do care for 5 mins. two days at most at any one time that is about my avg. trade.

Z

Edited by zoropb, 14 August 2009 - 02:23 PM.

[IndexTrader]

Z:

That $59 looks like it might be the 2009 forecast. If it's truly 2010 I think it's way too low. At any rate, what I'm talking about is 2010. Here's a link:

http://www.bloomberg...id=aUbVti8SvAMA

Yes that estimate is for an amazing unrealistic rise in the next 2 quarters just to get to 59. HOW? What is the catalyst? We already cut the heck out of jobs, lots of the fat, forwarded house sales, cars sales and that is how you got to these "good beat the estimate" numbers in the first place. Lets see next earnings when they come out and by then we will see if we get close to 59 pace.

So we have two choices believe stock sales people estimates who never lie or peak historical pace in earnings best case. I will go with Plan B.

The last quarter of this year we will begin to focus on the 2010 earnings, not the 2009 earnings that you're focusing on. But I'm firmly convinced that you won't be believing any of this anyway. So let's leave it like this...if $70 comes in next year, stocks are going higher, corrections notwithstanding.

IT

IT it is not a matter of believing it is a matter of show me the money. If you show me how it can be done with some kind of catalyst and some numbers that beat the normal peak to peak pace I will buy it until then I am going by historical peak to peak earnings pace best case scenario vs. some fantasy number cranked out by the sales force of a brokerage firm. Just to get to year end $59 earnings we would need a 17.8% per quarter pace for next two. Man that is a tuff enough pill to swallow let alone the 70 next year. Even the gang at S and P has it at 54 for year end as of now.

OK. I guess you'll be shorting em from now until doomsday then eh? Garzarelli by the way is an independent analyst, not from a brokerage firm. Good record too by the way...one of the few to call the 87 crash. Take a look at the links.

We can revisit this topic later on when you have some crow to eat.

IT

No data no ideas for how it can be done? Just an emotional reply hmm are you like way long IT? I am surprised by reply.

IT I went 2 shorts today and one long on es trades and 2 longs on dollar. So just because I am bearish for LT does not mean I trade this way st. I hope we are clear on that. I am only killing some time and enjoying the conversation when I post here. Nothing more.

I know very well who she is bud and as for crow it goes both ways. Most did not believe we would ever, never,ever take out the 2002 lows and I guess lots of crow was eaten wasn't it?

So let the fantasy continue I have lots of patience for this issue... plus I really do not care well not really I do care for 5 mins. two days at most at any one time that is about my avg. trade.

Z

Z, you seem a little overly sensitive over my last post. I think you're underestimating the economy....but hey, that's what makes a market. As to what you did last year, or what you forecast, just remember you didn't show up here until late last year, so there's no way I could know what you forecast or what you did. But knowing you, I'm sure you did well.

Either way, I posted a few weeks ago about the strength in the economy and provided some links. This earnings estimate fits in well with that. So let's see what develops.

IT

[zoropb]

Z:

That $59 looks like it might be the 2009 forecast. If it's truly 2010 I think it's way too low. At any rate, what I'm talking about is 2010. Here's a link:

http://www.bloomberg...id=aUbVti8SvAMA

Yes that estimate is for an amazing unrealistic rise in the next 2 quarters just to get to 59. HOW? What is the catalyst? We already cut the heck out of jobs, lots of the fat, forwarded house sales, cars sales and that is how you got to these "good beat the estimate" numbers in the first place. Lets see next earnings when they come out and by then we will see if we get close to 59 pace.

So we have two choices believe stock sales people estimates who never lie or peak historical pace in earnings best case. I will go with Plan B.

The last quarter of this year we will begin to focus on the 2010 earnings, not the 2009 earnings that you're focusing on. But I'm firmly convinced that you won't be believing any of this anyway. So let's leave it like this...if $70 comes in next year, stocks are going higher, corrections notwithstanding.

IT

IT it is not a matter of believing it is a matter of show me the money. If you show me how it can be done with some kind of catalyst and some numbers that beat the normal peak to peak pace I will buy it until then I am going by historical peak to peak earnings pace best case scenario vs. some fantasy number cranked out by the sales force of a brokerage firm. Just to get to year end $59 earnings we would need a 17.8% per quarter pace for next two. Man that is a tuff enough pill to swallow let alone the 70 next year. Even the gang at S and P has it at 54 for year end as of now.

OK. I guess you'll be shorting em from now until doomsday then eh? Garzarelli by the way is an independent analyst, not from a brokerage firm. Good record too by the way...one of the few to call the 87 crash. Take a look at the links.

We can revisit this topic later on when you have some crow to eat.

IT

No data no ideas for how it can be done? Just an emotional reply hmm are you like way long IT? I am surprised by reply.

IT I went 2 shorts today and one long on es trades and 2 longs on dollar. So just because I am bearish for LT does not mean I trade this way st. I hope we are clear on that. I am only killing some time and enjoying the conversation when I post here. Nothing more.

I know very well who she is bud and as for crow it goes both ways. Most did not believe we would ever, never,ever take out the 2002 lows and I guess lots of crow was eaten wasn't it?

So let the fantasy continue I have lots of patience for this issue... plus I really do not care well not really I do care for 5 mins. two days at most at any one time that is about my avg. trade.

Z

Z, you seem a little overly sensitive over my last post. I think you're underestimating the economy....but hey, that's what makes a market. As to what you did last year, or what you forecast, just remember you didn't show up here until late last year, so there's no way I could know what you forecast or what you did. But knowing you, I'm sure you did well.

Either way, I posted a few weeks ago about the strength in the economy and provided some links. This earnings estimate fits in well with that. So let's see what develops.

IT

It I just wanted you to know I do go long too bud. I am going to have to post more of them.

As for the rest that is all we can do is talk and toss some ideas around wait for results and adjust so fair enough. I agree.

[Echo]

Z, just curious. Your sig line has 1018 Mount Hoperest and we've hit that and your LT is 606 for SPX. So what is your near term take on SPX for the next week or three? Any magic out there? You nailed 956 before on the way up--uncanny, but we didn't quite get down to 810 area in July (I got fooled on that one too). Watcha see coming up if you care to speculate. Thx IT, I gather you are bullish, any thought on your part same timeframe? Echo