世界人口68亿，每日三餐，无油不欢。
在世界植物油市场中，棕油在四十年中由区区的 4%，增至目前的30%，成就非凡。
若非棕油的崛起，世界目前可能面对食脂短缺，人人都要食贵油，而受打击最大的，将是占世界人口最多的第三世界的低收入者。
这是对棕油极尽污蔑能事的所谓环保分子，视若无睹的事实。
棕油之能在食脂市场，独领风骚，自有其别的油脂难以匹敌的优势。
作物优势
生产期长：种下后第3年结果，到第25年产果不绝，其中由第5至第20年产果尤丰。
其他如大豆、油菜、向日葵、花生，都是短期作物。
生产稳定。
极少疾病。
品质一致。
生命力强，油棕鲜有良莠不齐者。
技术先进。
天然油棕每公顷仅产果2.5至5公吨，经过品种改良，目前每公顷产果可高达30公吨，马来西亚在这方面的科研成绩斐然。
大马、印尼和巴布亚新几内亚，土地得天独厚，最适合种油棕。原产地的非洲无法比拟。
成本低。棕油的生产成本是植物油中最低的。
容易管理。适合大规模种植。
市场优势
需求跟着世界人口而增长。
用途日广。除了作为食油之外，在工业上的用途，越来越多。
世界越富有，消耗油脂越多。
价格不受经济强国操纵，主要市场是在人口稠密的中国、印度、巴基斯坦和俄罗斯。
可制生物燃油：187国签订的《京都协议》，要通过采用“生物燃油”，在2012年，将破坏臭氧层的氦气，降至比1990年低5.2%，以阻止地球升温。棕油是制造生物燃油的理想植物油。
油棕业挑战
●面对其他植物油的竞争，大豆油是主要对手。
●缺乏种植地，地价涨势凌厉，业者纷纷进军印尼。
●环保分子展开污蔑行动，图置棕油业于死地。
●人力短缺，收获机械化有极限。
●成本上升，尤其是肥料。
●价格波动激烈。原棕油由 2001年的每公吨234美元，到2008年3月的1,249美元，起落不定，目前约为760美元。
●美元波动大，影响收入。
●库存设备不足，曾有“库”满之患。
●油棕鲜果割下后，需立刻运往榨油厂，稍迟就影响油质油量。通常要有2万5000亩才可养一榨油厂，小园主无建厂能力。
●出售鲜果串(FFB)，得价较低，成本较高，故油棕业不利小园主。
结论
尽管面对挑战，油棕业优势多，仍然“占尽风情向小园”，独领风骚，成为“东方不败”。
买股票要买成长行业。农业成长缓慢，原非理想投资对象，但油棕是个异数。
吉隆甲洞（KLK，2445，主板种植股）、IOI（IOICORP，1961；主板种植股）的成长，跟其他行业股票相比，不遑多让，是为明证。
棕油股是“养老金”，投资组合的理想核心股。
上选为拥有庞大未种地库而又现金充沛的油棕股。格林尼（GNEALY，2372，主板种植股）符合此二条件，值得考虑。
Sunday, March 7, 2010
分享集:不动如山两年
出自《冷眼分享集》Aug 15th, 2009
假如你在今年初股市低潮时，买进一批股票，收藏至今，已有丰厚的盈利。
现在你面对一个抉择：
1. 现在就套利离场。
2. 继续投资下去。
假如你选择现在就套利，你的“纸上富贵”立刻化为现金，你算是真正赚到了，毕竟手中的一只鸟，胜过林中的十只。
问题是：在卖掉以后，你是否从此就离开股市？
这次的金融海啸，长达将近两年，其严重程度，牵连之广，甚于1998年的东南亚货币危机，作为股票投资者，你所蒙受的亏损，可能比1998年的货币危机更大，如今股市回弹数个月，可能还没有赚回亏损额，如果你套利后就金盘洗手，你如何能弥补你的损失，又如何能增加你的财富？
沉重创伤非一年可复原
假如你在套利后又以所得资金，买进另一批股票，此买进的，肯定也是已经上升了一大截的股票，若如此，你所面对的风险，不会比你紧握原有的股票更低。
既然如此，倒不如继续持有原来的投资组合更合算。
关键在于股市的涨势能否持续？
这个问题的答案，决定于经济的复苏，能持续多久？
过去每一轮经济或股市风暴显示：下跌的速度必然比上升的速度快－－最少快一倍。
上升如走楼梯，下跌如乘升降机。
此次金融海啸，全球经济受创之重，只有1930年的经济大萧条可与比拟。
为此沉重的创伤，绝非一年半载可以复原。
经济需三年才能复苏
我的猜度是最少要三年，才能康复。
为什么是三年？
理由是企业界在受到沉重打击之后，至今惊魂未定，虽然经济看起来已触底，但他们仍小心冀冀，不敢轻举妄动。
在第一年的复苏中，他们还是把时间花在观察经济动向，策划重振旗鼓，就好像意外跌进山谷的爬山者，在爬起身来之后，头脑还是昏昏沉沉，不辨方向，在一片茫然之下，自然不敢跨出一步，更遑论爬出谷底了。
所以，第一年的复苏，还是有许多不肯定性。就好像目前美国虽说“青芽”已露头角，但失业率仍高居不下，屋价仍未上升，经济的数字还是喜忧参半。
第二年，经济回升的脚步才正式跨出，企业界由犹豫不决，转为乐观积极，许多重振旗鼓的计划，才付诸于行动，效果也逐步显露出来。
第三年，经济的康复，已由“青芽”长成亭亭小树，人们也逐渐淡忘了金融海啸时悚目惊心的情况，一切该恢复常态了。
信心是股市支柱
目前仅回升了几个月的股市，到底只是个“熊市陷阱”，还是牛市初阶，谁也无法肯定，但有一点是相当肯定的：股市不可能回跌到今年二月至三月时的低水平。因为现在大家都知道，股价无论跌得多么低，最终仍会回弹，大家的信心已重新建立起来。
信心是股市的支柱，有了信心，股市不可能倒塌。
所以，与其套利离场，或是抢进杀出，倒不如紧握手中的既有股票，不动如山两年，以争取经济和股市复苏所带来的最大利益。
既然我认为经济要三年才能全面复苏，为什么我不主张股票投资期是三年，而是两年？理由是股市问题跑在经济前头六个月到一年。两年后的股价，实际上已反映了三年后经济全面复苏时的实现。
作为反向策略的信徒，我们应在经济状况最坏时进场，最佳时离场。
假如你在今年初股市低潮时，买进一批股票，收藏至今，已有丰厚的盈利。
现在你面对一个抉择：
1. 现在就套利离场。
2. 继续投资下去。
假如你选择现在就套利，你的“纸上富贵”立刻化为现金，你算是真正赚到了，毕竟手中的一只鸟，胜过林中的十只。
问题是：在卖掉以后，你是否从此就离开股市？
这次的金融海啸，长达将近两年，其严重程度，牵连之广，甚于1998年的东南亚货币危机，作为股票投资者，你所蒙受的亏损，可能比1998年的货币危机更大，如今股市回弹数个月，可能还没有赚回亏损额，如果你套利后就金盘洗手，你如何能弥补你的损失，又如何能增加你的财富？
沉重创伤非一年可复原
假如你在套利后又以所得资金，买进另一批股票，此买进的，肯定也是已经上升了一大截的股票，若如此，你所面对的风险，不会比你紧握原有的股票更低。
既然如此，倒不如继续持有原来的投资组合更合算。
关键在于股市的涨势能否持续？
这个问题的答案，决定于经济的复苏，能持续多久？
过去每一轮经济或股市风暴显示：下跌的速度必然比上升的速度快－－最少快一倍。
上升如走楼梯，下跌如乘升降机。
此次金融海啸，全球经济受创之重，只有1930年的经济大萧条可与比拟。
为此沉重的创伤，绝非一年半载可以复原。
经济需三年才能复苏
我的猜度是最少要三年，才能康复。
为什么是三年？
理由是企业界在受到沉重打击之后，至今惊魂未定，虽然经济看起来已触底，但他们仍小心冀冀，不敢轻举妄动。
在第一年的复苏中，他们还是把时间花在观察经济动向，策划重振旗鼓，就好像意外跌进山谷的爬山者，在爬起身来之后，头脑还是昏昏沉沉，不辨方向，在一片茫然之下，自然不敢跨出一步，更遑论爬出谷底了。
所以，第一年的复苏，还是有许多不肯定性。就好像目前美国虽说“青芽”已露头角，但失业率仍高居不下，屋价仍未上升，经济的数字还是喜忧参半。
第二年，经济回升的脚步才正式跨出，企业界由犹豫不决，转为乐观积极，许多重振旗鼓的计划，才付诸于行动，效果也逐步显露出来。
第三年，经济的康复，已由“青芽”长成亭亭小树，人们也逐渐淡忘了金融海啸时悚目惊心的情况，一切该恢复常态了。
信心是股市支柱
目前仅回升了几个月的股市，到底只是个“熊市陷阱”，还是牛市初阶，谁也无法肯定，但有一点是相当肯定的：股市不可能回跌到今年二月至三月时的低水平。因为现在大家都知道，股价无论跌得多么低，最终仍会回弹，大家的信心已重新建立起来。
信心是股市的支柱，有了信心，股市不可能倒塌。
所以，与其套利离场，或是抢进杀出，倒不如紧握手中的既有股票，不动如山两年，以争取经济和股市复苏所带来的最大利益。
既然我认为经济要三年才能全面复苏，为什么我不主张股票投资期是三年，而是两年？理由是股市问题跑在经济前头六个月到一年。两年后的股价，实际上已反映了三年后经济全面复苏时的实现。
作为反向策略的信徒，我们应在经济状况最坏时进场，最佳时离场。
牛市炒股为何不赚钱
股市投资既需要技巧，也是一场心理游戏。阻碍散户成功投资的是短线投资的陋习，和未被接受的价值投资理念。他们输的，不过是与内心顽固的自我对抗
2007年股市即将拉上帷幕，上证指数的涨幅在全球领先已无悬念。可令人困惑的是，仍有相当数量的投资者在抱怨2007年赚钱难、未赚钱，甚至还赔了钱。
面对如此走牛的A股市场，部分投资者难以把握好，确实是很遗憾的。一项网上调查显示，截至12月7日，有高达51.36%的被调查者没有获利，其中18.61%称年度亏损在20%到50%之间，有16.61%亏损在10%左右，2.44%亏损超过了50%。在年度获利的投资者中，有16.88%的投资收益率在20%至50%之间，13.51%获利10%左右，11%获利在50%至100%之间；只有7.26%的投资收益率在100%以上，成功跑赢大盘。
上述调查暴露出散户投资者炒股的软肋。假设这些投资者全年持有基金，收益情况肯定完全不一样。据不完全统计，偏股型基金、平衡型基金、指数型基金今年以来的平均净值增长率约为108%、102%、131%。换句话说，基金集体跑赢了大盘，而散户投资者却是“泪洒”牛市，与太多机会“擦肩而过”。可以断言，在机构投资者逐渐占主导的A股市场上，散户投资者将被越来越严重地边缘化，想最大化分享股市财富的难度越来越大。
散户投资者的失败，主要有两大原因。
其一，买卖操作相对频繁，短线投机是散户的一大陋习。
虽然股票交易印花税上调，引导投资者中长期持有股票。可散户一是喜欢追逐热点，二是缺乏持股信心，使得散户投资者的交易仍较为频繁。调查显示，只有13.63%的被调查者对重仓股持有12个月以上。就连风险较高的新股炒作，也开始由散户投资者唱主角。深交所的统计显示，8月份，机构投资者买入新股的比例仅为3.18%，而散户买入的比例高达96.82%。中国石油(31.39,-0.15,-0.48%,股票吧)的高开低走，套牢大批盲目参与的散户投资者，赶在上市首日参与的散户套牢近半。
其二，价值投资未被接受。
银行股、钢铁股的崛起，体现了价值投资的魅力，但不少散户投资者依然被题材炒作所迷惑。
华夏基金投资总监刘文功公开表示，“只要对中国股市增长有信心，就必须买中国的金融股。”从基金公司的持仓看，金融股是其主要看好的品种。相比之下，散户投资者对银行股的青睐程度，明显不及基金。在他们看来，银行股股性不活，缺乏上涨的想象力，投机价值更不及题材股、重组股。有的散户投资者买入银行股，但缺乏持股耐心，没有分享到上涨的财富效应。其实，只要看看汇丰控股的走势，以及中国经济增长的前景，就会明白银行股的潜力不容低估。如今已是132.60港元的汇丰控股，在1995年只是20港元左右。
买银行股的价值大于银行储蓄，但散户投资者缺少的就是银行储蓄般的稳健投资心态。
2007年股市即将拉上帷幕，上证指数的涨幅在全球领先已无悬念。可令人困惑的是，仍有相当数量的投资者在抱怨2007年赚钱难、未赚钱，甚至还赔了钱。
面对如此走牛的A股市场，部分投资者难以把握好，确实是很遗憾的。一项网上调查显示，截至12月7日，有高达51.36%的被调查者没有获利，其中18.61%称年度亏损在20%到50%之间，有16.61%亏损在10%左右，2.44%亏损超过了50%。在年度获利的投资者中，有16.88%的投资收益率在20%至50%之间，13.51%获利10%左右，11%获利在50%至100%之间；只有7.26%的投资收益率在100%以上，成功跑赢大盘。
上述调查暴露出散户投资者炒股的软肋。假设这些投资者全年持有基金，收益情况肯定完全不一样。据不完全统计，偏股型基金、平衡型基金、指数型基金今年以来的平均净值增长率约为108%、102%、131%。换句话说，基金集体跑赢了大盘，而散户投资者却是“泪洒”牛市，与太多机会“擦肩而过”。可以断言，在机构投资者逐渐占主导的A股市场上，散户投资者将被越来越严重地边缘化，想最大化分享股市财富的难度越来越大。
散户投资者的失败，主要有两大原因。
其一，买卖操作相对频繁，短线投机是散户的一大陋习。
虽然股票交易印花税上调，引导投资者中长期持有股票。可散户一是喜欢追逐热点，二是缺乏持股信心，使得散户投资者的交易仍较为频繁。调查显示，只有13.63%的被调查者对重仓股持有12个月以上。就连风险较高的新股炒作，也开始由散户投资者唱主角。深交所的统计显示，8月份，机构投资者买入新股的比例仅为3.18%，而散户买入的比例高达96.82%。中国石油(31.39,-0.15,-0.48%,股票吧)的高开低走，套牢大批盲目参与的散户投资者，赶在上市首日参与的散户套牢近半。
其二，价值投资未被接受。
银行股、钢铁股的崛起，体现了价值投资的魅力，但不少散户投资者依然被题材炒作所迷惑。
华夏基金投资总监刘文功公开表示，“只要对中国股市增长有信心，就必须买中国的金融股。”从基金公司的持仓看，金融股是其主要看好的品种。相比之下，散户投资者对银行股的青睐程度，明显不及基金。在他们看来，银行股股性不活，缺乏上涨的想象力，投机价值更不及题材股、重组股。有的散户投资者买入银行股，但缺乏持股耐心，没有分享到上涨的财富效应。其实，只要看看汇丰控股的走势，以及中国经济增长的前景，就会明白银行股的潜力不容低估。如今已是132.60港元的汇丰控股，在1995年只是20港元左右。
买银行股的价值大于银行储蓄，但散户投资者缺少的就是银行储蓄般的稳健投资心态。
牛市如何炒股？专家教你解“恨”三招
都说股民的脸与大盘息息相关：大盘一跌，脸就发青；大盘一涨，脸也红润。然而，也有例外：有时，大盘十分红火，个股牛气冲天，但仍有不少股民怨声载道，叫苦连天，不是自责，就是埋怨。
最典型的有“三恨”：
恨：踏不准节奏
即使在一轮大的牛市里，大盘也难免会出现震荡、回调。此时，最好的操作是“不操作”———拿住股票不放。但总有部分股民期望收益最大化，与大盘“跳”起了“交谊舞”。然而，大盘的“舞步”总是捉摸不透。
不会卖———重仓的股民不知道何时高抛。
大盘从去年10月触底反弹至今年8月见高3478点，涨幅十分可观。但在起涨阶段，有的股民以为指数已高，抛出了宝贵的筹码，早早地被赶了下来，以至于不得不在随后的日子里以更高的成本买回抛出的筹码，结果做了反差；在上涨后期，有的股民不知道何时高抛，在大盘涨了8个多月，指数翻了一倍还多时，仍奢望翻番后再翻番，未能及时“高抛”，错失减仓良机，结果在指数大幅下挫中“呛水”。
不会买———轻仓的股民不知道何时低吸。
大盘一路上涨，有的股民一路踏空，但当涨到3000多点的时候却忍不住买了不该买的股票；有些股民在七八月份大盘触顶前后顺利脱逃，有的还因此实现了“弯道超车”———投资收益由原来的落后大盘变成了超越大盘。但“弯道超车”后，当大盘再次“驶”入“直道”，欲二度发力时，却未能搭上大盘再次起动的顺风车———该买的没有买，“弯道”超车后的优势未能保持到最后，悔恨不已。
解“恨”方法：实践表明，在股市投资，踏不准节奏是必然的，踏准才是偶然的。当看不准方向，踏不准节奏时，要么以静制动不操作———踏不准就不踏；要么降低预期少奢望———哪怕“赚头”少一点，只要有正差，就应及时高抛(买入后)或回补(卖出后)。
恨：抓不住“牛股”
无论大盘处于什么点位，两市总会冒出不少“牛股”。投资者也希望“牛”归自己，“熊”归他人。但在两市1600多只股票里要精准地捕捉到其中为数不多的“牛股”却非易事，想要做到每次都是“牛”是自己的,“熊”是他人的，更是难上加难。
股民抓不住“牛股”，原因之一是不够果断。抓不住“牛股”的另一原因是缺乏耐心。如果对一时表现欠佳的股票有足够的耐心，能紧握不放，许多未来的“牛股”也不会从股民手中轻易溜走。骑也骑不牢，抓也抓不住，投资者当然只能望“牛”兴叹，悔恨连连。
解“恨”方法：一是一旦发现“牛股”出动，就要第一时间出击，胆要大，心要狠，切忌犹豫不决，患得患失；二是如果缺乏快速出击的本领，可以进行潜伏，抓住心目中的牛股“奉陪”到底；三要力戒“大钱赚不到，小钱眼不开”的错误做法———“大牛”抓不住，“小牛”也好嘛。
恨：“跑”不过指数
“牛市”炒股，投资者都希望能够“跑”赢指数，然而多年的炒股经验表明，要想“跑”赢指数，可谓十分不易。
投资者收益之所以赶不上指数涨幅，既有仓位方面的原因———指数涨时仓位轻，指数跌时仓位重；也有持仓结构方面的原因———持有的品种要么呆板，要么跟不上板块轮动节奏，总是慢半拍，错过投资获利的最佳时间；更有操作方面的原因———或涨时不卖、跌时不买，或追涨杀跌、做了反差，或频繁换股、白白为证券公司“打工”等。
解“恨”方法：没有十分的把握不轻易变动仓位比例，即使要“动”，也要“涨卖跌买”、高抛低吸；及时调整持仓结构，注意不同行业、盘子的股票有机搭配；在一轮明显的“牛市”行情里尽量减少操作，避免无谓的失误，还能少付些手续费；平常心看待指数涨跌、市值升降，做一名平和、理性而又幸福的股民
最典型的有“三恨”：
恨：踏不准节奏
即使在一轮大的牛市里，大盘也难免会出现震荡、回调。此时，最好的操作是“不操作”———拿住股票不放。但总有部分股民期望收益最大化，与大盘“跳”起了“交谊舞”。然而，大盘的“舞步”总是捉摸不透。
不会卖———重仓的股民不知道何时高抛。
大盘从去年10月触底反弹至今年8月见高3478点，涨幅十分可观。但在起涨阶段，有的股民以为指数已高，抛出了宝贵的筹码，早早地被赶了下来，以至于不得不在随后的日子里以更高的成本买回抛出的筹码，结果做了反差；在上涨后期，有的股民不知道何时高抛，在大盘涨了8个多月，指数翻了一倍还多时，仍奢望翻番后再翻番，未能及时“高抛”，错失减仓良机，结果在指数大幅下挫中“呛水”。
不会买———轻仓的股民不知道何时低吸。
大盘一路上涨，有的股民一路踏空，但当涨到3000多点的时候却忍不住买了不该买的股票；有些股民在七八月份大盘触顶前后顺利脱逃，有的还因此实现了“弯道超车”———投资收益由原来的落后大盘变成了超越大盘。但“弯道超车”后，当大盘再次“驶”入“直道”，欲二度发力时，却未能搭上大盘再次起动的顺风车———该买的没有买，“弯道”超车后的优势未能保持到最后，悔恨不已。
解“恨”方法：实践表明，在股市投资，踏不准节奏是必然的，踏准才是偶然的。当看不准方向，踏不准节奏时，要么以静制动不操作———踏不准就不踏；要么降低预期少奢望———哪怕“赚头”少一点，只要有正差，就应及时高抛(买入后)或回补(卖出后)。
恨：抓不住“牛股”
无论大盘处于什么点位，两市总会冒出不少“牛股”。投资者也希望“牛”归自己，“熊”归他人。但在两市1600多只股票里要精准地捕捉到其中为数不多的“牛股”却非易事，想要做到每次都是“牛”是自己的,“熊”是他人的，更是难上加难。
股民抓不住“牛股”，原因之一是不够果断。抓不住“牛股”的另一原因是缺乏耐心。如果对一时表现欠佳的股票有足够的耐心，能紧握不放，许多未来的“牛股”也不会从股民手中轻易溜走。骑也骑不牢，抓也抓不住，投资者当然只能望“牛”兴叹，悔恨连连。
解“恨”方法：一是一旦发现“牛股”出动，就要第一时间出击，胆要大，心要狠，切忌犹豫不决，患得患失；二是如果缺乏快速出击的本领，可以进行潜伏，抓住心目中的牛股“奉陪”到底；三要力戒“大钱赚不到，小钱眼不开”的错误做法———“大牛”抓不住，“小牛”也好嘛。
恨：“跑”不过指数
“牛市”炒股，投资者都希望能够“跑”赢指数，然而多年的炒股经验表明，要想“跑”赢指数，可谓十分不易。
投资者收益之所以赶不上指数涨幅，既有仓位方面的原因———指数涨时仓位轻，指数跌时仓位重；也有持仓结构方面的原因———持有的品种要么呆板，要么跟不上板块轮动节奏，总是慢半拍，错过投资获利的最佳时间；更有操作方面的原因———或涨时不卖、跌时不买，或追涨杀跌、做了反差，或频繁换股、白白为证券公司“打工”等。
解“恨”方法：没有十分的把握不轻易变动仓位比例，即使要“动”，也要“涨卖跌买”、高抛低吸；及时调整持仓结构，注意不同行业、盘子的股票有机搭配；在一轮明显的“牛市”行情里尽量减少操作，避免无谓的失误，还能少付些手续费；平常心看待指数涨跌、市值升降，做一名平和、理性而又幸福的股民
牛市和熊市各阶段特征
所谓"牛市"，也称多头市场，指市场行情普遍看涨，延续时间较长的大升市。所谓"熊市"，也称空头市场，指行情普遍看淡。延续时间相对较长的大跌中。
道·琼斯根据美国股市的经验数据。总结出牛市和熊市的不同市场特征，认为牛市和熊市可以各自分为三个不同期间 :
牛市第一期(瘦田无人耕)
与熊市第三期的一部分重合，往往是在市场最悲观的情况下出现的。大部分投资者对市场心灰意冷，即使市场出现好消息也无动于衷,很多人开始不计成本地抛出所有的股票。有远见的投资者则通过对各类经济指标和形势的分析、预期市场情况即将发生变化，开始逐步选择优质股买入。市场成交逐渐出现微量回升，经过一段时间后，许多股票已从盲目抛售者手中流到理性投资者手中。市场在回升过程中偶有回落，但每一次回落的低点都比上一次高，于是吸引新的投资人入市，整个市场交投开始活跃，这时候，上市公司的经营状况和公司业绩开始好转，盈利增加引起投资者的注意，进一步刺激人们入市的兴趣。
牛市第二期(期待业绩印证)
这时市况虽然明显好转、但熊市的惨跌使投资者心有余悸。中场出现一种非升非跌的僵持局面，但总的来说大市基调良好，股价力图上升。这段时间可维持数月甚于超过一年：主要视上次熊市造成的心理打击的严重程度而定。
牛市第三期(业绩兑现)
经过一段时间的徘徊后，股市成交量不断增加。越来越多的投资人进入市场。大市的每次回落不但不会使投资人退出市场，反而吸引更多的投资人加入。市场情绪高涨，充满乐观气氛。此外，公司利好的新闻也不断传出，例如盈利倍增、收购合并等。上市公司也趁机大举集资，或送红股或将股票拆细，以吸引中小投资者。在这一阶段的末期，市场投机气氛极浓，即使出现坏消息也会被作为投机热点炒作，变为利好消息。垃圾股、冷门股股价均大幅度上涨，而一些稳健的优质股则反而被漠视。同时，炒股席卷社会各个角落，各行各业、男女老幼均加入了抄股大军。当这种情况达到某个极点时，市场就会出现转折。
熊市第一期（反思)
其初段就是牛市第三期的未段，往往出现在市场投资气氛最高涨的情况下，这时市场绝对乐观，投资者对后市变化完全没有戒心。市场上真真假假的各种利好消息到处都是。公司的业绩和盈利达到不正常的高峰。不少企业在这段时期内加速扩张，收购合并的消息频传。正当绝大多数投资者疯狂沉迷于股市升势时，少数明智的投资者和个别投资大户已开始将资金逐步撤离或处于观望。因此，市场的交投虽然十分炽热，但已有逐渐降温的迹象。这时如果股价再进一步攀升，成交量却不能同步跟上的话，大跌就可能出现。在这个时期，当股价下跌时，许多人仍然认为这种下跌只是上升过程中的回调。其实，这是股中大跌的开始。
熊市第二期(草木皆兵)
这一阶段，股票市场、有风吹草动，就会触发"恐慌性抛售"，一方面市场上热点太多，想要买进的人反而因难以选择而退缩不前，处于观望。另一方面更多的人开始急于抛出。加剧股价急速下跌。在允许进行信用交易的市场中．从事买空交易的投机者遭受的打击更大，他们往往因偿还融入资金的压力而被迫抛售，于是股价越跌越急。经过一轮疯狂的抛售和股价急跌以后，投资者会觉得跌势有点过分。因为上市公司以及经济环境的现状尚未达到如此悲观的地步，于是市场会出现次较大的回升和反弹。这一段中期性反弹可能维持几个星期或者几个月，回升或反弹的幅度一般为整个市场总跌幅的三分之一至二分之一(参照过去从2100点跌到1300点的几次反弹)。
熊中第三期(等待业绩印证)
经过一段时间的中期性反弹以后，经济形势和上市公司的前景趋于恶化，公司业绩下降，财务困难。各种真假难辨的利空消息又接踵而至，对投资者信心造成进一步打击。这时整个股票市场弥漫着悲观气氛，股价继反弹后较大幅度下挫。
在熊市第三期中，股价持续下跌，但跌势没有加剧。
由于那些质量较差的股票已经在第一、第二期跌得差不多了，再跌的可能件已经不大，而这时由于市场信心崩溃，下跌的股票集中在业绩一向良好的蓝筹股和优质股上。这一阶段正好与牛市第一阶段的初段吻合，有远见和理智的投资者会认为这是最佳的吸纳机会，这时购入低价优质股，待大市回升后可获得丰厚回报。
一般来说，熊市经历的时间要比牛市短，大约只占牛市的三分之一至二分之一。不过每个熊市的具体时间都不尽相同，因市场和经济环境的差异会有较大的区别。回顾1993年到1997年这段时间，我国上海、深圳证券交易所经历了股价的大幅涨跌变化，就是一次完整的由牛转熊，再由熊转牛的周期性过程.
道·琼斯根据美国股市的经验数据。总结出牛市和熊市的不同市场特征，认为牛市和熊市可以各自分为三个不同期间 :
牛市第一期(瘦田无人耕)
与熊市第三期的一部分重合，往往是在市场最悲观的情况下出现的。大部分投资者对市场心灰意冷，即使市场出现好消息也无动于衷,很多人开始不计成本地抛出所有的股票。有远见的投资者则通过对各类经济指标和形势的分析、预期市场情况即将发生变化，开始逐步选择优质股买入。市场成交逐渐出现微量回升，经过一段时间后，许多股票已从盲目抛售者手中流到理性投资者手中。市场在回升过程中偶有回落，但每一次回落的低点都比上一次高，于是吸引新的投资人入市，整个市场交投开始活跃，这时候，上市公司的经营状况和公司业绩开始好转，盈利增加引起投资者的注意，进一步刺激人们入市的兴趣。
牛市第二期(期待业绩印证)
这时市况虽然明显好转、但熊市的惨跌使投资者心有余悸。中场出现一种非升非跌的僵持局面，但总的来说大市基调良好，股价力图上升。这段时间可维持数月甚于超过一年：主要视上次熊市造成的心理打击的严重程度而定。
牛市第三期(业绩兑现)
经过一段时间的徘徊后，股市成交量不断增加。越来越多的投资人进入市场。大市的每次回落不但不会使投资人退出市场，反而吸引更多的投资人加入。市场情绪高涨，充满乐观气氛。此外，公司利好的新闻也不断传出，例如盈利倍增、收购合并等。上市公司也趁机大举集资，或送红股或将股票拆细，以吸引中小投资者。在这一阶段的末期，市场投机气氛极浓，即使出现坏消息也会被作为投机热点炒作，变为利好消息。垃圾股、冷门股股价均大幅度上涨，而一些稳健的优质股则反而被漠视。同时，炒股席卷社会各个角落，各行各业、男女老幼均加入了抄股大军。当这种情况达到某个极点时，市场就会出现转折。
熊市第一期（反思)
其初段就是牛市第三期的未段，往往出现在市场投资气氛最高涨的情况下，这时市场绝对乐观，投资者对后市变化完全没有戒心。市场上真真假假的各种利好消息到处都是。公司的业绩和盈利达到不正常的高峰。不少企业在这段时期内加速扩张，收购合并的消息频传。正当绝大多数投资者疯狂沉迷于股市升势时，少数明智的投资者和个别投资大户已开始将资金逐步撤离或处于观望。因此，市场的交投虽然十分炽热，但已有逐渐降温的迹象。这时如果股价再进一步攀升，成交量却不能同步跟上的话，大跌就可能出现。在这个时期，当股价下跌时，许多人仍然认为这种下跌只是上升过程中的回调。其实，这是股中大跌的开始。
熊市第二期(草木皆兵)
这一阶段，股票市场、有风吹草动，就会触发"恐慌性抛售"，一方面市场上热点太多，想要买进的人反而因难以选择而退缩不前，处于观望。另一方面更多的人开始急于抛出。加剧股价急速下跌。在允许进行信用交易的市场中．从事买空交易的投机者遭受的打击更大，他们往往因偿还融入资金的压力而被迫抛售，于是股价越跌越急。经过一轮疯狂的抛售和股价急跌以后，投资者会觉得跌势有点过分。因为上市公司以及经济环境的现状尚未达到如此悲观的地步，于是市场会出现次较大的回升和反弹。这一段中期性反弹可能维持几个星期或者几个月，回升或反弹的幅度一般为整个市场总跌幅的三分之一至二分之一(参照过去从2100点跌到1300点的几次反弹)。
熊中第三期(等待业绩印证)
经过一段时间的中期性反弹以后，经济形势和上市公司的前景趋于恶化，公司业绩下降，财务困难。各种真假难辨的利空消息又接踵而至，对投资者信心造成进一步打击。这时整个股票市场弥漫着悲观气氛，股价继反弹后较大幅度下挫。
在熊市第三期中，股价持续下跌，但跌势没有加剧。
由于那些质量较差的股票已经在第一、第二期跌得差不多了，再跌的可能件已经不大，而这时由于市场信心崩溃，下跌的股票集中在业绩一向良好的蓝筹股和优质股上。这一阶段正好与牛市第一阶段的初段吻合，有远见和理智的投资者会认为这是最佳的吸纳机会，这时购入低价优质股，待大市回升后可获得丰厚回报。
一般来说，熊市经历的时间要比牛市短，大约只占牛市的三分之一至二分之一。不过每个熊市的具体时间都不尽相同，因市场和经济环境的差异会有较大的区别。回顾1993年到1997年这段时间，我国上海、深圳证券交易所经历了股价的大幅涨跌变化，就是一次完整的由牛转熊，再由熊转牛的周期性过程.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
曾渊沧@股友通讯录2010 年03 月
目前的国际经济形势应该是新世纪以来最复杂最难预测的一年。
2008 年的金融海啸，在美国政府大量印钞票，将利率降至近乎零的水平之下，形势总算稳住。
但是，大量的资金并没有投入实体经济。美国的银行取得美国政府的贷款后，并没有把这些钱借给工商界。这是为什么至今美国经济依然疲弱，通涨依然没出现的道理。那么，美国的银行取得政府的贷款后做什么？原来他们利用那笔钱在股票市场及各种各样的金融衍生工具上大炒特炒，还赚了大钱。
炒赢了，去年年底，高盛银行管理层发的花红竟然是历史新高。这是非常具讽刺性的新闻。美国的银行高盛拿公众的钱来炒股自肥已引起公愤。现在美国总统奥巴马已公开说要立法对付他们，不让他们分如此高的花红，要向银行徵收特别税，称之为金融海啸责任税。
不过，尽管美国经济仍未明显的复苏，美国联邦储备局还是决定加贴现率，做为试一试水温，测试迟些时候正式「退市」，即加息后的反应。什么时候加息？加多少？这是一个极大的难题。加息加得太早 加得太重，美国经济不但复苏无望，更会出现双底衰退。金融海啸第二波随时出现。加息加得太迟，加得太轻,必会引起超级通涨，通胀预期一出现也将是可怕的，必须下更重的药来治。
因此，美国的情况的确是复杂的。
欧洲的情况也不见得好。欧盟中的数个国家已经出了问题，这包括南欧诸国如希腊、意大利、西班牙、葡萄牙，还有爱尔兰及一些东欧国家也正处於水深火热中。欧元区的国家更糟糕，他们的政府已经没有印钞票的权力，欧元的发行由欧元区的中央银行处理，因此希腊政府面对财政赤字却不能学美国印钞票应急。怎么办？只能借，发行国库债券借。但是，有了冰岛政府宣布破产赖账不还的先例，谁敢借钱给希腊？还有西班牙、意大利……..欧盟中有那么多穷国，富国只有一个，即德国。德国能帮助多少个穷国？目前，一些国际级的大鳄对冲基金已经磨刀利利地准备狙击欧元，欧洲随时爆发1997 年式的金融风暴。
看来，全世界只有中国一枝独秀。去年经济增长率达8.7%，成功「保八」, 但是, 经济发展快带来楼价飞升, 影响民生, 导至许多想买楼的人心生怨气。为了平息怨气，中国政府不得不做一些事来打压楼价。但是，打压楼价又恐怕会打击整体消费，消费如果不振，中国经济也是非常危险的。去年，中国的出口实际上是大幅下跌了。欧美地区经济仍未复苏，出口难以增长。在出口萎缩的情况之下，中国政府只好努力推动内部消费 ，鼓励消费，津贴农民买车买电器………..
楼价上升，股价上升是消费的动力。一旦楼市，股市逆转，消费也会逆转，情况就会很糟糕。
因此，中国政府现在也是摸着石头过河，一步一 惊心。
世界三大经济板块的问题都很复杂。因此，今年全球的金融市场的波动将会是非常激烈的。
投资者会一下子乐观，一下子悲观。金融市场也就随着投资者的心情的变化而波动。
但是，整体而言， 我还是乐观的。大家可以尽量利用这大起大跌的波动「跑多两转」。在调整初期减持股票然后再趁低买回。当然，你也可以静观其变，只要你在去年3 月底依照我的建议入市，现在也可以不理这些上上下下的调整。
2008 年的金融海啸，在美国政府大量印钞票，将利率降至近乎零的水平之下，形势总算稳住。
但是，大量的资金并没有投入实体经济。美国的银行取得美国政府的贷款后，并没有把这些钱借给工商界。这是为什么至今美国经济依然疲弱，通涨依然没出现的道理。那么，美国的银行取得政府的贷款后做什么？原来他们利用那笔钱在股票市场及各种各样的金融衍生工具上大炒特炒，还赚了大钱。
炒赢了，去年年底，高盛银行管理层发的花红竟然是历史新高。这是非常具讽刺性的新闻。美国的银行高盛拿公众的钱来炒股自肥已引起公愤。现在美国总统奥巴马已公开说要立法对付他们，不让他们分如此高的花红，要向银行徵收特别税，称之为金融海啸责任税。
不过，尽管美国经济仍未明显的复苏，美国联邦储备局还是决定加贴现率，做为试一试水温，测试迟些时候正式「退市」，即加息后的反应。什么时候加息？加多少？这是一个极大的难题。加息加得太早 加得太重，美国经济不但复苏无望，更会出现双底衰退。金融海啸第二波随时出现。加息加得太迟，加得太轻,必会引起超级通涨，通胀预期一出现也将是可怕的，必须下更重的药来治。
因此，美国的情况的确是复杂的。
欧洲的情况也不见得好。欧盟中的数个国家已经出了问题，这包括南欧诸国如希腊、意大利、西班牙、葡萄牙，还有爱尔兰及一些东欧国家也正处於水深火热中。欧元区的国家更糟糕，他们的政府已经没有印钞票的权力，欧元的发行由欧元区的中央银行处理，因此希腊政府面对财政赤字却不能学美国印钞票应急。怎么办？只能借，发行国库债券借。但是，有了冰岛政府宣布破产赖账不还的先例，谁敢借钱给希腊？还有西班牙、意大利……..欧盟中有那么多穷国，富国只有一个，即德国。德国能帮助多少个穷国？目前，一些国际级的大鳄对冲基金已经磨刀利利地准备狙击欧元，欧洲随时爆发1997 年式的金融风暴。
看来，全世界只有中国一枝独秀。去年经济增长率达8.7%，成功「保八」, 但是, 经济发展快带来楼价飞升, 影响民生, 导至许多想买楼的人心生怨气。为了平息怨气，中国政府不得不做一些事来打压楼价。但是，打压楼价又恐怕会打击整体消费，消费如果不振，中国经济也是非常危险的。去年，中国的出口实际上是大幅下跌了。欧美地区经济仍未复苏，出口难以增长。在出口萎缩的情况之下，中国政府只好努力推动内部消费 ，鼓励消费，津贴农民买车买电器………..
楼价上升，股价上升是消费的动力。一旦楼市，股市逆转，消费也会逆转，情况就会很糟糕。
因此，中国政府现在也是摸着石头过河，一步一 惊心。
世界三大经济板块的问题都很复杂。因此，今年全球的金融市场的波动将会是非常激烈的。
投资者会一下子乐观，一下子悲观。金融市场也就随着投资者的心情的变化而波动。
但是，整体而言， 我还是乐观的。大家可以尽量利用这大起大跌的波动「跑多两转」。在调整初期减持股票然后再趁低买回。当然，你也可以静观其变，只要你在去年3 月底依照我的建议入市，现在也可以不理这些上上下下的调整。
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
The Oracle's Tips for the Rest of Us
Every few years, critics say Warren Buffett has lost his touch. He's too old and too old-fashioned, they claim. He doesn't get it anymore. This time he's wrong.
It happened during the dotcom bubble, when Mr. Buffett was mocked for refusing to join the party. And it happened again last year. As the Dow tumbled below 7,000, Mr. Buffett came under fire for having jumped into the crisis too early and too boldly, making big bets on Goldman Sachs and General Electric during the fall of 2008, and urging the public to plunge into shares.
Now it's time for those critics to sit down for their traditional three course meal: humble pie, their own words and crow.
On Saturday, Mr. Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway reported that net earnings rocketed 61% last year to $5,193 per share, while book value jumped 20% to a record high. Berkshire's Class A shares, which slumped to nearly $70,000 last year, have rebounded to $120,000.
Those bets on GE and Goldman? They've made billions so far. And anyone who took Mr. Buffett's advice and invested in the stock market in October 2008, even through a simple index fund, is up about 25%.
This is nothing new, of course. Anyone who held a $10,000 stake in Berkshire Hathaway at the start of 1965 has about $80 million today.
How does he do it? Mr. Buffett explained his beliefs to new investors in his letter to stockholders Saturday:
Stay liquid.
"We will never become dependent on the kindness of strangers," he wrote. "We will always arrange our affairs so that any requirements for cash we may conceivably have will be dwarfed by our own liquidity. Moreover, that liquidity will be constantly refreshed by a gusher of earnings from our many and diverse businesses."
Buy when everyone else is selling.
"We've put a lot of money to work during the chaos of the last two years. It's been an ideal period for investors: A climate of fear is their best friend ... . Big opportunities come infrequently. When it's raining gold, reach for a bucket, not a thimble."
Don't buy when everyone else is buying.
"Those who invest only when commentators are upbeat end up paying a heavy price for meaningless reassurance," Mr. Buffett wrote. The obvious corollary is to be patient. You can only buy when everyone else is selling if you have held your fire when everyone was buying.
Value, value, value.
"In the end, what counts in investing is what you pay for a business -- through the purchase of a small piece of it in the stock market -- and what that business earns in the succeeding decade or two."
Don't get suckered by big growth stories. Mr. Buffett reminded investors that he and Berkshire Vice Chairman Charlie Munger "avoid businesses whose futures we can't evaluate, no matter how exciting their products may be."
Most investors who bet on the auto industry in 1910, planes in 1930 or TV makers in 1950 ended up losing their shirts, even though the products really did change the world. "Dramatic growth" doesn't always lead to high profit margins and returns on capital. China, anyone?
Understand what you own.
"Investors who buy and sell based upon media or analyst commentary are not for us," Mr. Buffett wrote.
"We want partners who join us at Berkshire because they wish to make a long-term investment in a business they themselves understand and because it's one that follows policies with which they concur."
Defense beats offense.
"Though we have lagged the S&P in some years that were positive for the market, we have consistently done better than the S&P in the eleven years during which it delivered negative results. In other words, our defense has been better than our offense, and that's likely to continue." All timely advice from Mr. Buffett for turbulent times.
It happened during the dotcom bubble, when Mr. Buffett was mocked for refusing to join the party. And it happened again last year. As the Dow tumbled below 7,000, Mr. Buffett came under fire for having jumped into the crisis too early and too boldly, making big bets on Goldman Sachs and General Electric during the fall of 2008, and urging the public to plunge into shares.
Now it's time for those critics to sit down for their traditional three course meal: humble pie, their own words and crow.
On Saturday, Mr. Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway reported that net earnings rocketed 61% last year to $5,193 per share, while book value jumped 20% to a record high. Berkshire's Class A shares, which slumped to nearly $70,000 last year, have rebounded to $120,000.
Those bets on GE and Goldman? They've made billions so far. And anyone who took Mr. Buffett's advice and invested in the stock market in October 2008, even through a simple index fund, is up about 25%.
This is nothing new, of course. Anyone who held a $10,000 stake in Berkshire Hathaway at the start of 1965 has about $80 million today.
How does he do it? Mr. Buffett explained his beliefs to new investors in his letter to stockholders Saturday:
Stay liquid.
"We will never become dependent on the kindness of strangers," he wrote. "We will always arrange our affairs so that any requirements for cash we may conceivably have will be dwarfed by our own liquidity. Moreover, that liquidity will be constantly refreshed by a gusher of earnings from our many and diverse businesses."
Buy when everyone else is selling.
"We've put a lot of money to work during the chaos of the last two years. It's been an ideal period for investors: A climate of fear is their best friend ... . Big opportunities come infrequently. When it's raining gold, reach for a bucket, not a thimble."
Don't buy when everyone else is buying.
"Those who invest only when commentators are upbeat end up paying a heavy price for meaningless reassurance," Mr. Buffett wrote. The obvious corollary is to be patient. You can only buy when everyone else is selling if you have held your fire when everyone was buying.
Value, value, value.
"In the end, what counts in investing is what you pay for a business -- through the purchase of a small piece of it in the stock market -- and what that business earns in the succeeding decade or two."
Don't get suckered by big growth stories. Mr. Buffett reminded investors that he and Berkshire Vice Chairman Charlie Munger "avoid businesses whose futures we can't evaluate, no matter how exciting their products may be."
Most investors who bet on the auto industry in 1910, planes in 1930 or TV makers in 1950 ended up losing their shirts, even though the products really did change the world. "Dramatic growth" doesn't always lead to high profit margins and returns on capital. China, anyone?
Understand what you own.
"Investors who buy and sell based upon media or analyst commentary are not for us," Mr. Buffett wrote.
"We want partners who join us at Berkshire because they wish to make a long-term investment in a business they themselves understand and because it's one that follows policies with which they concur."
Defense beats offense.
"Though we have lagged the S&P in some years that were positive for the market, we have consistently done better than the S&P in the eleven years during which it delivered negative results. In other words, our defense has been better than our offense, and that's likely to continue." All timely advice from Mr. Buffett for turbulent times.
Deflation Is Coming and There's Nothing Bernanke Can Do About It, Says Robert Prechter
Contrary to popular belief, noted technical analyst Robert Prechter says the extraordinary action taken by the Federal Reserve to bail out the economy will not lead to runaway inflation.
"Deflation is gaining the upper hand very, very slowly, but it's happening," Prechter the founder of Elliott Wave International tells Tech Ticker. Of course, as anyone familiar with his work knows, he's been saying this for years.
Why should we believe him now?
For the first time since 1982 core inflation fell in January as measured by the consumer price index. Prechter says it's even more noteworthy that it's happening "in the face of this tremendous amount of stimulus...from the government and a real attempt at stimulus from the central bank."
Prechter describes the forces of deflation as a "socio-nomic" shift in social mood that will prevent Federal Reserve Chairman from printing too much money. "At some point, the voters - as you can already see from the Tea Parties - are going to start saying we've had enough" with government spending and bailouts.
"Deflation is gaining the upper hand very, very slowly, but it's happening," Prechter the founder of Elliott Wave International tells Tech Ticker. Of course, as anyone familiar with his work knows, he's been saying this for years.
Why should we believe him now?
For the first time since 1982 core inflation fell in January as measured by the consumer price index. Prechter says it's even more noteworthy that it's happening "in the face of this tremendous amount of stimulus...from the government and a real attempt at stimulus from the central bank."
Prechter describes the forces of deflation as a "socio-nomic" shift in social mood that will prevent Federal Reserve Chairman from printing too much money. "At some point, the voters - as you can already see from the Tea Parties - are going to start saying we've had enough" with government spending and bailouts.
Bear Market Armageddon: Why Prechter Might Be Right This Time
In late February last year, Robert Prechter of Elliott Wave International said "cover your shorts" and predicted a sharp rally that would take the S&P into the 1000 to 1100 range. That prediction came to pass. Prechter then urged investors to "step aside" from long positions, and speculators should "start looking at the short side."
With Prechter firmly back in familiar bearish territory, he joined Aaron and Henry again, armed with scary charts that forecast an imminent "grand, super cycle top" and collapse, mirroring the decline after the 1929 crash. A firm believer in deflation on the horizon, Prechter sees commodity prices falling this year into next.
Prechter admits he hasn't always been right. "The disinflationary period lasted longer than I thought," he confesses. But, this time it's different, he promises.
With Prechter firmly back in familiar bearish territory, he joined Aaron and Henry again, armed with scary charts that forecast an imminent "grand, super cycle top" and collapse, mirroring the decline after the 1929 crash. A firm believer in deflation on the horizon, Prechter sees commodity prices falling this year into next.
Prechter admits he hasn't always been right. "The disinflationary period lasted longer than I thought," he confesses. But, this time it's different, he promises.
Bullish a Year Ago, Robert Prechter Now Sees "the Biggest Bubble in History"
In February 2009, Robert Prechter of Elliott Wave International predicted a market rally that would be "sharp and scary for anyone who is short."
In recent months, Prechter returned to more familiar territory, declaring here in November the market was in a "topping area."
A few weeks ago, the veteran market watcher told the Society of Technical Analysts in London that a "grand, super-cycle top" is at hand, The WSJ reported.
"What has happened is a complete change in psychology from extreme negativity [a year ago] to extreme optimism" heading into the market's recent top in January, Prechter says.
Among the many sentiment indicators he watched, Prechter cited the very low levels of cash at mutual funds, which is approaching levels seen near major tops in 1973, 2000 and 2007.
"Nobody should be taking risk right now. This is a time to be safe," he says.
But considering U.S. equity funds suffered about $46 billion of outflows from August to December 2009 while bond funds took in about $198 billion, according to ICI, aren't investors already playing it safe -- a bullish contrarian signal?
"The individual investor has been more or less abandoning stocks" and buying bond funds, Prechter concedes. "I think that is going from the frying pan into the fire. The bond market is the biggest bubble in the history of the world. "
Corporate debt, municipal debt, mortgages and consumer loans will all suffer in the great deflation Prechter believes is already underway, as detailed in his book Conquer the Crash.
So is there any way for investors to protect themselves from the carnage? Check the accompanying video for Prechter's recommendations.
In recent months, Prechter returned to more familiar territory, declaring here in November the market was in a "topping area."
A few weeks ago, the veteran market watcher told the Society of Technical Analysts in London that a "grand, super-cycle top" is at hand, The WSJ reported.
"What has happened is a complete change in psychology from extreme negativity [a year ago] to extreme optimism" heading into the market's recent top in January, Prechter says.
Among the many sentiment indicators he watched, Prechter cited the very low levels of cash at mutual funds, which is approaching levels seen near major tops in 1973, 2000 and 2007.
"Nobody should be taking risk right now. This is a time to be safe," he says.
But considering U.S. equity funds suffered about $46 billion of outflows from August to December 2009 while bond funds took in about $198 billion, according to ICI, aren't investors already playing it safe -- a bullish contrarian signal?
"The individual investor has been more or less abandoning stocks" and buying bond funds, Prechter concedes. "I think that is going from the frying pan into the fire. The bond market is the biggest bubble in the history of the world. "
Corporate debt, municipal debt, mortgages and consumer loans will all suffer in the great deflation Prechter believes is already underway, as detailed in his book Conquer the Crash.
So is there any way for investors to protect themselves from the carnage? Check the accompanying video for Prechter's recommendations.
Preparing for the Inevitable Bursting Bubble
Financial bubbles are a way of life now. They can upend your industry, send your portfolio into spasms and leave you with whiplash. And then, once you've recovered, the next one will hit.
Or so you might think, as a veteran of two gut-wrenching market declines and a housing bubble over the last decade.
There's plenty of reason to expect more surprises, given the number of hedge funds moving large amounts of money quickly around the world and the big banks making their own trades.
Individuals, as always, may be tempted to make their own financial bets, too. Last time, they bought overpriced homes with too much borrowed money. Next time, who knows what the bubble will be? And that's the problem, as it always is. How do you identify the next thing that will pop? Is it China? Or Greece? Or Treasury bonds? It is difficult to predict and make the right defensive (or offensive) moves at the correct moment to save or make money.
Still, if you want to better insulate yourself from bubbles -- however often they may inflate -- there are plenty of things you can do. Your debt levels matter, and you may want to consider a more flexible investment strategy. But perhaps most important, this is a mental exercise that begins and ends with an honest assessment of your long-term goals and how you handle the emotional jolts that come from the bubbles that burst along the way.
Fixed Expenses
Start with the basics. The less you have to pay toward monthly obligations, the better off you are, and that's especially true at a time of economic disruption. You certainly wouldn't want any bills increasing, so now's a good time to refinance to a fixed-rate mortgage.
Whittle down student loan and credit card debt, too, and pay cash for your car if possible. "Flexibility is priceless in a time of panic," said Lucas Hail, a financial planner with Foster & Motley in Cincinnati.
Self-Reliance
Then take a hard look at how much you should rely on promises from the government. Social Security and Medicare may not fit the traditional definition of bubbles, but that hasn't stopped Rick Brooks from advising his financial planning clients to expect less from both programs. "Something that is not sustainable will not continue. It just can't," he said of Medicare.
Mr. Brooks, the vice president for investment management with Blankinship & Foster in Solana Beach, Calif., said anyone under 50 should assume that Medicare will look nothing like it does now and examine private health insurance premiums for guidance as to what may need to be spent on health care in retirement. Meanwhile, the firm advises current retirees to assume a 20 percent cut in Social Security benefits at some point.
Bedda D'Angelo, president of Fiduciary Solutions in Durham, N.C., has an equally stark outlook on long-term employment risk. If there are two adults in the household, your goal should probably be to have two incomes instead of one. "I do believe that unemployment is inevitable," she said, adding that people who think they are going to retire at 65 should save for retirement as if they will be forced out of the work force in their mid-50s.
Portfolio Tactics
Perhaps you did what you thought you were supposed to during the last decade. You got religion and stopped trading stocks. Then, you split your assets among various low-cost mutual funds and added money regularly. And the results weren't quite what you hoped.
Tempted to make big bets on emerging markets or short Treasury bills? You've landed in the middle of the debate between those who favor a more passive asset allocation and those who prefer something called tactical allocation.
The first camp sets up a practical mix of investments, according to a target level of risk, and then readjusts back to that mix every year or so.
They frown on the hubris of the tactical practitioners. To make a tactical approach work, they note, you need to know what the right signals will be to buy and sell everything from stocks to gold, during every future market cycle. Then, these tacticians need to have the discipline to act each and every time. This is extraordinarily hard.
The tacticians, however, believe they have no choice. "What consumers need to know is that no matter how comforting it is to believe a formulaic approach or prepackaged investment product will allow them to put their financial future on autopilot, our current and future financial environment will require advice, diligence, education and responsiveness, which takes into account strategic consideration of geopolitical and economic relationships," as Ryan Darwish, a financial planner in Eugene, Ore., put it to me this week.
Mr. Darwish scoffed at the notion of mere bubbles and said he thought that more fundamental and far-reaching shifts were under way, like the transfer of economic power from the United States to China and other nations.
A growing number of financial planners are embracing a middle, more measured approach: If diversification across stocks, bonds and other asset classes has proved to be a good thing in most investing environments, why not diversification around investment approaches?
"I am not a financial genius, but the geniuses are even worse off because they're anchored on one philosophy," said David O'Brien, a financial planner in Midlothian, Va. So he and a growing number of his peers have added some strategies to their baseline portfolios aimed at losing less during bubbles while still gaining in better times. "We're not trying to shoot for the moon," he added.
These tactics can include managed futures, absolute return funds, merger arbitrage and other approaches that will get their own column someday.
The embrace of all this even led one investment professional I spoke with this week to express the ultimate sacrilege: It really is different this time.
Thomas C. Meyer of Meyer Capital Group in Marlton, N.J., noted that many of these alternative strategies were not even available in mutual-fund form three to four years ago. So that's different. He's now putting 30 percent of his clients' equity portfolios into such investments.
The big change, however, is that the baby boomer money is getting older. People are further along in their careers than they were during the market crash in 1987, and they can't rely on pensions as so many more near retirees could in the 1980s (while shrugging off stock market volatility). And the boomers don't have as much time to make up lost ground, especially if they're already retired.
"Losing less means a lot right now," Mr. Meyer said. "So we want to suck volatility out where we can."
Matter of the Mind
But can you live with less volatility -- and the permanent end of occasional portfoliowide returns in the teens or higher? Markets run on greed and fear; bubbles expand and deflate thanks to outsize versions of each. One of the few things you can predict about bubbles is that they will test your conviction on where you sit along the fear-greed continuum.
And once they pop, you'll know a bit more about how your mind works than you did before.
This last downturn was severe enough that about 10 percent of Steven A. Weydert's clients realized that they had overestimated their own risk tolerance. "Ideally, with an asset allocation, you never want to look back and say you're sorry," said Mr. Weydert of Bowyer, Weydert Wealth Planning Partners in Park Ridge, Ill.
So rather than trying to predict the number and type of bubbles, it may make more sense to look inward when trying to predict the future. Bob Goldman, a financial planner in Sausalito, Calif., said that clients often looked at him blankly when he asked them what it was they imagined for themselves in the future. Sometimes, they need to go home and figure out what sort of life it is that they're saving for -- and how much (or little) it might cost.
"People come in and talk about how we all know that inflation is going to explode next year," Mr. Goldman said. "Well, we don't all know that. We don't know anything. But we can know something about our own lives, and there is a person we can talk to about that. A person in the mirror."
Or so you might think, as a veteran of two gut-wrenching market declines and a housing bubble over the last decade.
There's plenty of reason to expect more surprises, given the number of hedge funds moving large amounts of money quickly around the world and the big banks making their own trades.
Individuals, as always, may be tempted to make their own financial bets, too. Last time, they bought overpriced homes with too much borrowed money. Next time, who knows what the bubble will be? And that's the problem, as it always is. How do you identify the next thing that will pop? Is it China? Or Greece? Or Treasury bonds? It is difficult to predict and make the right defensive (or offensive) moves at the correct moment to save or make money.
Still, if you want to better insulate yourself from bubbles -- however often they may inflate -- there are plenty of things you can do. Your debt levels matter, and you may want to consider a more flexible investment strategy. But perhaps most important, this is a mental exercise that begins and ends with an honest assessment of your long-term goals and how you handle the emotional jolts that come from the bubbles that burst along the way.
Fixed Expenses
Start with the basics. The less you have to pay toward monthly obligations, the better off you are, and that's especially true at a time of economic disruption. You certainly wouldn't want any bills increasing, so now's a good time to refinance to a fixed-rate mortgage.
Whittle down student loan and credit card debt, too, and pay cash for your car if possible. "Flexibility is priceless in a time of panic," said Lucas Hail, a financial planner with Foster & Motley in Cincinnati.
Self-Reliance
Then take a hard look at how much you should rely on promises from the government. Social Security and Medicare may not fit the traditional definition of bubbles, but that hasn't stopped Rick Brooks from advising his financial planning clients to expect less from both programs. "Something that is not sustainable will not continue. It just can't," he said of Medicare.
Mr. Brooks, the vice president for investment management with Blankinship & Foster in Solana Beach, Calif., said anyone under 50 should assume that Medicare will look nothing like it does now and examine private health insurance premiums for guidance as to what may need to be spent on health care in retirement. Meanwhile, the firm advises current retirees to assume a 20 percent cut in Social Security benefits at some point.
Bedda D'Angelo, president of Fiduciary Solutions in Durham, N.C., has an equally stark outlook on long-term employment risk. If there are two adults in the household, your goal should probably be to have two incomes instead of one. "I do believe that unemployment is inevitable," she said, adding that people who think they are going to retire at 65 should save for retirement as if they will be forced out of the work force in their mid-50s.
Portfolio Tactics
Perhaps you did what you thought you were supposed to during the last decade. You got religion and stopped trading stocks. Then, you split your assets among various low-cost mutual funds and added money regularly. And the results weren't quite what you hoped.
Tempted to make big bets on emerging markets or short Treasury bills? You've landed in the middle of the debate between those who favor a more passive asset allocation and those who prefer something called tactical allocation.
The first camp sets up a practical mix of investments, according to a target level of risk, and then readjusts back to that mix every year or so.
They frown on the hubris of the tactical practitioners. To make a tactical approach work, they note, you need to know what the right signals will be to buy and sell everything from stocks to gold, during every future market cycle. Then, these tacticians need to have the discipline to act each and every time. This is extraordinarily hard.
The tacticians, however, believe they have no choice. "What consumers need to know is that no matter how comforting it is to believe a formulaic approach or prepackaged investment product will allow them to put their financial future on autopilot, our current and future financial environment will require advice, diligence, education and responsiveness, which takes into account strategic consideration of geopolitical and economic relationships," as Ryan Darwish, a financial planner in Eugene, Ore., put it to me this week.
Mr. Darwish scoffed at the notion of mere bubbles and said he thought that more fundamental and far-reaching shifts were under way, like the transfer of economic power from the United States to China and other nations.
A growing number of financial planners are embracing a middle, more measured approach: If diversification across stocks, bonds and other asset classes has proved to be a good thing in most investing environments, why not diversification around investment approaches?
"I am not a financial genius, but the geniuses are even worse off because they're anchored on one philosophy," said David O'Brien, a financial planner in Midlothian, Va. So he and a growing number of his peers have added some strategies to their baseline portfolios aimed at losing less during bubbles while still gaining in better times. "We're not trying to shoot for the moon," he added.
These tactics can include managed futures, absolute return funds, merger arbitrage and other approaches that will get their own column someday.
The embrace of all this even led one investment professional I spoke with this week to express the ultimate sacrilege: It really is different this time.
Thomas C. Meyer of Meyer Capital Group in Marlton, N.J., noted that many of these alternative strategies were not even available in mutual-fund form three to four years ago. So that's different. He's now putting 30 percent of his clients' equity portfolios into such investments.
The big change, however, is that the baby boomer money is getting older. People are further along in their careers than they were during the market crash in 1987, and they can't rely on pensions as so many more near retirees could in the 1980s (while shrugging off stock market volatility). And the boomers don't have as much time to make up lost ground, especially if they're already retired.
"Losing less means a lot right now," Mr. Meyer said. "So we want to suck volatility out where we can."
Matter of the Mind
But can you live with less volatility -- and the permanent end of occasional portfoliowide returns in the teens or higher? Markets run on greed and fear; bubbles expand and deflate thanks to outsize versions of each. One of the few things you can predict about bubbles is that they will test your conviction on where you sit along the fear-greed continuum.
And once they pop, you'll know a bit more about how your mind works than you did before.
This last downturn was severe enough that about 10 percent of Steven A. Weydert's clients realized that they had overestimated their own risk tolerance. "Ideally, with an asset allocation, you never want to look back and say you're sorry," said Mr. Weydert of Bowyer, Weydert Wealth Planning Partners in Park Ridge, Ill.
So rather than trying to predict the number and type of bubbles, it may make more sense to look inward when trying to predict the future. Bob Goldman, a financial planner in Sausalito, Calif., said that clients often looked at him blankly when he asked them what it was they imagined for themselves in the future. Sometimes, they need to go home and figure out what sort of life it is that they're saving for -- and how much (or little) it might cost.
"People come in and talk about how we all know that inflation is going to explode next year," Mr. Goldman said. "Well, we don't all know that. We don't know anything. But we can know something about our own lives, and there is a person we can talk to about that. A person in the mirror."
Monday, March 1, 2010
分享集:红股·拆细·回购（上） 红股无法创造财富
某翁逝世，留下财富100万令吉。未立遗嘱，儿女10人争夺遗产。
假如由1人独得，他得到100万令吉。
假如由5人均分，每人得到20万令吉。
假如由10人均分，每人得到10万令吉。
100 万令吉财产，数目保持不变。分享的人越多，所得数目越少。
同样的情况，一家公司的盈利保持不变，股票数目越多，每股所分得的盈利、股息和资产就越少。
有了这个概念，你就会对公司发红股、拆细面值和股票回购对股票价值的影响，一目了然。
我常常劝告投资者，养成“反向”思维的习惯。在股价暴跌（例如在次贷金融海啸期间）买进，但大部分投资者都做不到，不敢买进。是因为他们不了解股票的价值，以当时的股价，无法判断股票到底是便宜还是昂贵。
如果他们了解股票的价值的话，他们会发现股价暴跌后，股票的价值已被严重低估，是一个难得的投资机会。这样，他们就有胆识买进，并在较后大赚特赚。
面值小股票多
了解股票价值是“做功课”的终极目的。
股票价值与公司的股票数目，息息相关。而红股、拆细和股票回购，影响股票数目。所以，要了解股票的价值必须对红股、拆细和回购，有深入的了解。
公司的股票数目，跟每股的面值息息相关。通常是面值越小，股票越多。
为了方便说明，我把红股、拆细和回购对股票价值的影响，以确实的数字说明。
假设一家上市公司在发红股、拆细和回购前的资本为6000万令吉，每股面值为1令吉，故股票总数为6000万股。此公司每年净赚 3000万令吉，等于每股净利为50仙（计算方法：RM30÷60m股=RM0.50），每股净有形资产价值为6令吉。股价为8令吉。
该公司以一股送一股发红股后，股票数目增至1亿2000万股，但公司的盈利还是3000万令吉，每股净利由50仙降至25仙，股息由原来的20仙降至10 仙，每股净有形资产价值由6令吉降至3令吉，股价也由8令吉调整至4令吉。
本益比没改变
假如你拥有1000股，发红股后增至2000股，但无论是股价，每股净利、每股股息或每股净有形资产价值，也相应减半。所以，你手中的财富，跟发红股前没有两样。
更明显的是，本益比保持不变。
这说明了发红股并没有增加股票的价值，也没有增加你的财富。
故发红股不能制造财富。
股票拆细 财富不增
同样的情形，在股票面值由1令吉拆细为10仙之后，你原本拥有1000股的，现在变成拥有1万股，你沾沾自喜，以为自己 “发”了。实际上你的财富并没有增加。
由于股票数目增加了十倍，由6000万股增至6亿股，但每年盈利保持不变，故股价、每股净利、股息、资产也相应的减少十倍。1万股的市值还是8000令吉（RM0.80×10,000=RM8,000），本益比十六倍也原封不动。
这说明了，股票拆细并没有增加股票的价值，因为拆细不能创造财富。
其实，股票拆细就是发红股，原来面值1令吉的股票，拆细为10仙，原本的 1股，现在变为10股，这其实跟以1股送9股的比例发红股没有两样。
惟一的区别是，发红股后面值保持1令吉，股票数目增至6亿股，故实收资本为6亿令吉。
假如是将面值由1令吉拆细为10仙的话，股票数目增至6亿股，故实收资本仍为6000万令吉。
发红股使实收资本增加十倍至6亿令吉，而拆细后实收资本仍为6000万令吉。表面上看起来股票的价值也增加了十倍，实际上没有。
理由是每股的盈利、股息、资产，是以股票的数目计算出来，与面值无关。实收资本6亿令吉（面值1令吉）和实收资本6000万令吉（面值10仙），股票数目同为6亿股。
美国没红股
实际上，美国的股票多数是没有面值的，因为每股的价值是以股票数目计算出来，与面值无关，故面值不重要，重要的是股数，这种情形就好像本文开始时的例子，无论是1人独得或是10人均分，遗产的价值都是100万令吉。遗产的价值并不随人数而增减。美国根本没人说“红股”，只有“拆细”。
所以，红股=拆细。两者都没有增加股票的价值。
假如由1人独得，他得到100万令吉。
假如由5人均分，每人得到20万令吉。
假如由10人均分，每人得到10万令吉。
100 万令吉财产，数目保持不变。分享的人越多，所得数目越少。
同样的情况，一家公司的盈利保持不变，股票数目越多，每股所分得的盈利、股息和资产就越少。
有了这个概念，你就会对公司发红股、拆细面值和股票回购对股票价值的影响，一目了然。
我常常劝告投资者，养成“反向”思维的习惯。在股价暴跌（例如在次贷金融海啸期间）买进，但大部分投资者都做不到，不敢买进。是因为他们不了解股票的价值，以当时的股价，无法判断股票到底是便宜还是昂贵。
如果他们了解股票的价值的话，他们会发现股价暴跌后，股票的价值已被严重低估，是一个难得的投资机会。这样，他们就有胆识买进，并在较后大赚特赚。
面值小股票多
了解股票价值是“做功课”的终极目的。
股票价值与公司的股票数目，息息相关。而红股、拆细和股票回购，影响股票数目。所以，要了解股票的价值必须对红股、拆细和回购，有深入的了解。
公司的股票数目，跟每股的面值息息相关。通常是面值越小，股票越多。
为了方便说明，我把红股、拆细和回购对股票价值的影响，以确实的数字说明。
假设一家上市公司在发红股、拆细和回购前的资本为6000万令吉，每股面值为1令吉，故股票总数为6000万股。此公司每年净赚 3000万令吉，等于每股净利为50仙（计算方法：RM30÷60m股=RM0.50），每股净有形资产价值为6令吉。股价为8令吉。
该公司以一股送一股发红股后，股票数目增至1亿2000万股，但公司的盈利还是3000万令吉，每股净利由50仙降至25仙，股息由原来的20仙降至10 仙，每股净有形资产价值由6令吉降至3令吉，股价也由8令吉调整至4令吉。
本益比没改变
假如你拥有1000股，发红股后增至2000股，但无论是股价，每股净利、每股股息或每股净有形资产价值，也相应减半。所以，你手中的财富，跟发红股前没有两样。
更明显的是，本益比保持不变。
这说明了发红股并没有增加股票的价值，也没有增加你的财富。
故发红股不能制造财富。
股票拆细 财富不增
同样的情形，在股票面值由1令吉拆细为10仙之后，你原本拥有1000股的，现在变成拥有1万股，你沾沾自喜，以为自己 “发”了。实际上你的财富并没有增加。
由于股票数目增加了十倍，由6000万股增至6亿股，但每年盈利保持不变，故股价、每股净利、股息、资产也相应的减少十倍。1万股的市值还是8000令吉（RM0.80×10,000=RM8,000），本益比十六倍也原封不动。
这说明了，股票拆细并没有增加股票的价值，因为拆细不能创造财富。
其实，股票拆细就是发红股，原来面值1令吉的股票，拆细为10仙，原本的 1股，现在变为10股，这其实跟以1股送9股的比例发红股没有两样。
惟一的区别是，发红股后面值保持1令吉，股票数目增至6亿股，故实收资本为6亿令吉。
假如是将面值由1令吉拆细为10仙的话，股票数目增至6亿股，故实收资本仍为6000万令吉。
发红股使实收资本增加十倍至6亿令吉，而拆细后实收资本仍为6000万令吉。表面上看起来股票的价值也增加了十倍，实际上没有。
理由是每股的盈利、股息、资产，是以股票的数目计算出来，与面值无关。实收资本6亿令吉（面值1令吉）和实收资本6000万令吉（面值10仙），股票数目同为6亿股。
美国没红股
实际上，美国的股票多数是没有面值的，因为每股的价值是以股票数目计算出来，与面值无关，故面值不重要，重要的是股数，这种情形就好像本文开始时的例子，无论是1人独得或是10人均分，遗产的价值都是100万令吉。遗产的价值并不随人数而增减。美国根本没人说“红股”，只有“拆细”。
所以，红股=拆细。两者都没有增加股票的价值。
Sunday, February 28, 2010
股市短期好不了 看空房地產等四大行業
獨立經濟學家謝國忠在接受理財一週報記者採訪時表示，由於受政府信貸調控影響，今年金融、房地產、IT、鋼鐵四大行業可能遭遇寒流。但使用率較高的能源、能夠抵禦通脹的黃金則將成為今年的投資熱點。
中國經濟的兩大問題：地產過大和產能過剩
理財一週報：2010年您對中國經濟發展勢頭怎麼看？
謝國忠：經濟增長應該還可以，出口也會有所反彈，但投資這一塊，就不會像去年那麼快了；房地產也不會快。
總體來說，今年出口這塊會稍微好些，從經濟層面來說，相對穩定。
理財一週報：中國經濟目前的主要問題出在哪？
謝國忠：我覺得，現在最大的問題是出現在經濟結構上，這是一個很大的問題。我們國家的很多問題都跟結構有關係，一個是房地產過大，一個是行業生產能力過剩，這兩個問題都還是比較明顯的。
我經常說中國的經濟增長，其實就意味著把銀行裏的錢扔出去，但是還要看結果是否有效。去年房地產銷售過熱，整個GDP都增加了。
現在的問題是，你談什麼都不重要，重要的是，我們的錢從哪來？針對這個問題，我認為，無非就是房地產過大、過熱了。國家於是就開始調控地產，因為中國房地產裏的資金都是流動的，你要是調控房地產的話，錢就不流動了。
經濟結構本來就有問題，現在政府這樣一調控，如果能夠維持一年的話，政府對房地產的調控可能又會變化。這個誰都說不準。
理財一週報：如果信貸這一塊持續收緊的話，資本市場流動性將會受到哪些影響？
謝國忠：因為錢都是從房地產市場流出來的，房地產一調控，市場需求馬上就沒有了。然後呢，銀行的錢就轉不出來了。最終的結果就是，開發商還有底下很多的關聯公司大家都等著，等著政策再作新的調整。
而且，國內的房地產開發商已經習慣了這樣的日子——基本上就是，輪到政府調控前夕，他就拼命賣房子，收攏資金。過去兩年就是這樣的，所以大家都不信政府調控是真心的。
中國的房地產市場也不像美國，美國的房價在漲得很高的時候，可以通過增值的部分拿去銀行抵押借錢，但在中國還沒有出現這樣的情況。
中國的房地產就是炒，說白了，就是把銀行的錢卷出來，卷到地產市場，然後再卷到地方政府，最後變成地方政府的財政收入。地方房地產市場的存在，就是為政府融資的，在中國買房子，跟繳稅沒啥區別。
股市短期好不了
理財一週報：2010年資本市場更趨複雜，您對於整年的資本市場如何展望？
謝國忠：我覺得短期內好不了。因為中國的股市不是基本面決定的，它是由銀根來決定的。銀根一旦收緊的話，股市就不好了。
目前國內的銀根還沒有收得很緊，但是今年至今中國的信貸還是增長了很多。以前銀行放貸比現在少很多，所以看到現在這麼龐大的信貸數字，政府開始緊張了。就是因為信貸盤子做得太大，房地產市場也顯得過大了。房地產市場去年全年就投資了4萬億元左右，漲了70%，撐得太大了，你說這樣的盤子還怎麼撐呢？
如果房地產市場調控政策能夠維持一年左右的時間，那它的銷售就可能掉一半左右。我統計了一下，掉一半銷售額的話，那這個數字就是在2萬多億元，你想想看，這會掉多少？！
理財一週報：除了房地產之外，出口這一塊會拉動中國的經濟嗎？
謝國忠：這個應該比較難，現在美國失業率這麼高，日本的也不好，歐洲現在又出現危機。出口會很火嗎？我覺得不太可能低位反彈。美國去年下滑了6000多億美元的出口額，縮得很緊，今年要反彈的話也是理所應當。但是，出口數據再怎麼反彈，也彈不到原來的那個高位。
理財一週報：那就您來看，中國未來經濟增長的突破口在哪？
謝國忠：現在中國經濟有一個突破結構的問題，老是出事兒。出事兒之後，就是讓政府出手相救。所以，結構問題不解決，中國經濟也就只能這麼維持，最近這幾年就是這樣子。
理財一週報：今年初始，股指期貨等新金融業務宣佈推出，從您的個人角度來看，這對股市投資會產生哪些影響？
謝國忠：如果股市的股指期貨是政府想把錢朝裏面砸，搞個基金什麼的，我認為這是有可能的。但是，總的來說，股指期貨的推出應該對股市投資不會產生太大的影響。因為中國股市的核心問題，還是銀根。銀根收緊的話，整體股市就好不了。因為中國的股市跟銀根連得非常緊。
我覺得，中國經濟到了今年第二季度，就是明顯不好的時候。因為房子賣不出去，一連串的問題都會出來。可能去年地方政府還藏了不少錢，能夠混個幾個月。但是，過段時候投資一熱，這些錢又沒了，政府壓力也就來了。
反正，房地產一松的話，你就應該知道股市要漲了，因為這牽涉到信貸的投放量問題。
看空四大行業
理財一週報：去年您自己投資了哪些領域，今年還會投資哪些板塊？
謝國忠：我有投過能源，比較看好它。也想投黃金，但是最終沒有投資它。因為黃金就是通脹的概念，既有通脹，又有短缺。大部分的情況下，像石油這種能源是天天要用的，還比較實用。黃金是貨幣的替代品，可能就不像能源這樣靠得住。
總的來說，貨幣政策還是很寬鬆的，通貨膨脹會來。黃金的話，兩年內還是不錯的。黃金會炒起來，也容易炒起來，但不一定像能源那麼好。
理財一週報：今年您看好哪些領域的投資？
謝國忠：我覺得今年股市會來來回回波動，因為A股從6000多點掉到1600點，然後反彈至3000點左右，一直在曲線波動。現在也還沒有脫離這樣的局面。
我原來比較看好能源和黃金，中國的黃金過去很貴，都是在海外購買。因為概念好，很多國內投資者就炒作這些了。我是看中了能源和黃金，但是香港這邊很貴，價格高一倍左右。
水泥的成長性也已經不錯了，但是前段時間因為產能過剩很嚴重，今年可能也還可以，但是明後年肯定會有問題的。
理財一週報：那您今年不看好的是哪些領域？
謝國忠：今年的金融業肯定不好，銀行業是金融巨頭，今年肯定要大量配股補充資本金，再加上信貸投放的速度要放慢，成本又大幅上升，所以，今年的金融業不會很好。
成本大幅上升是因為中國勞動力短缺，雖然金融行業的薪水很高，但是它要慣性地增長。成本要繼續大幅的上升，今年肯定會上升20%左右。另外，銀行息差還會繼續收窄，信貸速度也不會超過20%。再加上要配那麼多新股，今年銀行不會太好。
保險公司也跟股市連得很緊，股市不好的話，保險公司也會受影響。因為國內保險公司是從股市裏投資賺錢的，今年可能會受壓。
今年，地產也會受壓。去年地產市場漲得那麼高，地皮比較貴，現在房價肯定要往下掉。目前來看，二級市場的房價已經在開始往下掉了。
如果國家再不改政策的話，房地產市場會出問題。本來房地產商是預期房價漲四成，但是現在房價不漲反跌的話，那他們豈不是會很慘。去年買了很多地的開發商，今年的問題就會很大。
IT的話，雖然科技對經濟的影響很大，但是我不看好IT，大多都是炒一把，然後賺了就跑。像物聯網，成功的話就變得很大，不成功的話，就變得很糟糕。科技行業的公司，即使一家公司做得再好，總有另一家公司會比你做得更好。
像微軟做得這麼成功的公司，現在也開始有倒的趨勢了。科技股的話，只能炒一把。如果是製造硬體產品的公司股，就更不能進去了，有些就是搞晶片很難長久賺錢，短期內一會兒賺錢，一會兒虧錢，通過波動吸引大家。
另外，鋼鐵業面臨產能過剩的問題，鋼鐵業今年很難好。我看到建築鋼就是這樣的局面，一般的板材生產能力都是過剩的。鐵礦石的價格又相對較高，而且澳大利亞必和必拓和力拓又合併了，鐵礦石的價格要上漲的可能性要比下降的可能性大很多。這些我都不看好。
中國經濟的兩大問題：地產過大和產能過剩
理財一週報：2010年您對中國經濟發展勢頭怎麼看？
謝國忠：經濟增長應該還可以，出口也會有所反彈，但投資這一塊，就不會像去年那麼快了；房地產也不會快。
總體來說，今年出口這塊會稍微好些，從經濟層面來說，相對穩定。
理財一週報：中國經濟目前的主要問題出在哪？
謝國忠：我覺得，現在最大的問題是出現在經濟結構上，這是一個很大的問題。我們國家的很多問題都跟結構有關係，一個是房地產過大，一個是行業生產能力過剩，這兩個問題都還是比較明顯的。
我經常說中國的經濟增長，其實就意味著把銀行裏的錢扔出去，但是還要看結果是否有效。去年房地產銷售過熱，整個GDP都增加了。
現在的問題是，你談什麼都不重要，重要的是，我們的錢從哪來？針對這個問題，我認為，無非就是房地產過大、過熱了。國家於是就開始調控地產，因為中國房地產裏的資金都是流動的，你要是調控房地產的話，錢就不流動了。
經濟結構本來就有問題，現在政府這樣一調控，如果能夠維持一年的話，政府對房地產的調控可能又會變化。這個誰都說不準。
理財一週報：如果信貸這一塊持續收緊的話，資本市場流動性將會受到哪些影響？
謝國忠：因為錢都是從房地產市場流出來的，房地產一調控，市場需求馬上就沒有了。然後呢，銀行的錢就轉不出來了。最終的結果就是，開發商還有底下很多的關聯公司大家都等著，等著政策再作新的調整。
而且，國內的房地產開發商已經習慣了這樣的日子——基本上就是，輪到政府調控前夕，他就拼命賣房子，收攏資金。過去兩年就是這樣的，所以大家都不信政府調控是真心的。
中國的房地產市場也不像美國，美國的房價在漲得很高的時候，可以通過增值的部分拿去銀行抵押借錢，但在中國還沒有出現這樣的情況。
中國的房地產就是炒，說白了，就是把銀行的錢卷出來，卷到地產市場，然後再卷到地方政府，最後變成地方政府的財政收入。地方房地產市場的存在，就是為政府融資的，在中國買房子，跟繳稅沒啥區別。
股市短期好不了
理財一週報：2010年資本市場更趨複雜，您對於整年的資本市場如何展望？
謝國忠：我覺得短期內好不了。因為中國的股市不是基本面決定的，它是由銀根來決定的。銀根一旦收緊的話，股市就不好了。
目前國內的銀根還沒有收得很緊，但是今年至今中國的信貸還是增長了很多。以前銀行放貸比現在少很多，所以看到現在這麼龐大的信貸數字，政府開始緊張了。就是因為信貸盤子做得太大，房地產市場也顯得過大了。房地產市場去年全年就投資了4萬億元左右，漲了70%，撐得太大了，你說這樣的盤子還怎麼撐呢？
如果房地產市場調控政策能夠維持一年左右的時間，那它的銷售就可能掉一半左右。我統計了一下，掉一半銷售額的話，那這個數字就是在2萬多億元，你想想看，這會掉多少？！
理財一週報：除了房地產之外，出口這一塊會拉動中國的經濟嗎？
謝國忠：這個應該比較難，現在美國失業率這麼高，日本的也不好，歐洲現在又出現危機。出口會很火嗎？我覺得不太可能低位反彈。美國去年下滑了6000多億美元的出口額，縮得很緊，今年要反彈的話也是理所應當。但是，出口數據再怎麼反彈，也彈不到原來的那個高位。
理財一週報：那就您來看，中國未來經濟增長的突破口在哪？
謝國忠：現在中國經濟有一個突破結構的問題，老是出事兒。出事兒之後，就是讓政府出手相救。所以，結構問題不解決，中國經濟也就只能這麼維持，最近這幾年就是這樣子。
理財一週報：今年初始，股指期貨等新金融業務宣佈推出，從您的個人角度來看，這對股市投資會產生哪些影響？
謝國忠：如果股市的股指期貨是政府想把錢朝裏面砸，搞個基金什麼的，我認為這是有可能的。但是，總的來說，股指期貨的推出應該對股市投資不會產生太大的影響。因為中國股市的核心問題，還是銀根。銀根收緊的話，整體股市就好不了。因為中國的股市跟銀根連得非常緊。
我覺得，中國經濟到了今年第二季度，就是明顯不好的時候。因為房子賣不出去，一連串的問題都會出來。可能去年地方政府還藏了不少錢，能夠混個幾個月。但是，過段時候投資一熱，這些錢又沒了，政府壓力也就來了。
反正，房地產一松的話，你就應該知道股市要漲了，因為這牽涉到信貸的投放量問題。
看空四大行業
理財一週報：去年您自己投資了哪些領域，今年還會投資哪些板塊？
謝國忠：我有投過能源，比較看好它。也想投黃金，但是最終沒有投資它。因為黃金就是通脹的概念，既有通脹，又有短缺。大部分的情況下，像石油這種能源是天天要用的，還比較實用。黃金是貨幣的替代品，可能就不像能源這樣靠得住。
總的來說，貨幣政策還是很寬鬆的，通貨膨脹會來。黃金的話，兩年內還是不錯的。黃金會炒起來，也容易炒起來，但不一定像能源那麼好。
理財一週報：今年您看好哪些領域的投資？
謝國忠：我覺得今年股市會來來回回波動，因為A股從6000多點掉到1600點，然後反彈至3000點左右，一直在曲線波動。現在也還沒有脫離這樣的局面。
我原來比較看好能源和黃金，中國的黃金過去很貴，都是在海外購買。因為概念好，很多國內投資者就炒作這些了。我是看中了能源和黃金，但是香港這邊很貴，價格高一倍左右。
水泥的成長性也已經不錯了，但是前段時間因為產能過剩很嚴重，今年可能也還可以，但是明後年肯定會有問題的。
理財一週報：那您今年不看好的是哪些領域？
謝國忠：今年的金融業肯定不好，銀行業是金融巨頭，今年肯定要大量配股補充資本金，再加上信貸投放的速度要放慢，成本又大幅上升，所以，今年的金融業不會很好。
成本大幅上升是因為中國勞動力短缺，雖然金融行業的薪水很高，但是它要慣性地增長。成本要繼續大幅的上升，今年肯定會上升20%左右。另外，銀行息差還會繼續收窄，信貸速度也不會超過20%。再加上要配那麼多新股，今年銀行不會太好。
保險公司也跟股市連得很緊，股市不好的話，保險公司也會受影響。因為國內保險公司是從股市裏投資賺錢的，今年可能會受壓。
今年，地產也會受壓。去年地產市場漲得那麼高，地皮比較貴，現在房價肯定要往下掉。目前來看，二級市場的房價已經在開始往下掉了。
如果國家再不改政策的話，房地產市場會出問題。本來房地產商是預期房價漲四成，但是現在房價不漲反跌的話，那他們豈不是會很慘。去年買了很多地的開發商，今年的問題就會很大。
IT的話，雖然科技對經濟的影響很大，但是我不看好IT，大多都是炒一把，然後賺了就跑。像物聯網，成功的話就變得很大，不成功的話，就變得很糟糕。科技行業的公司，即使一家公司做得再好，總有另一家公司會比你做得更好。
像微軟做得這麼成功的公司，現在也開始有倒的趨勢了。科技股的話，只能炒一把。如果是製造硬體產品的公司股，就更不能進去了，有些就是搞晶片很難長久賺錢，短期內一會兒賺錢，一會兒虧錢，通過波動吸引大家。
另外，鋼鐵業面臨產能過剩的問題，鋼鐵業今年很難好。我看到建築鋼就是這樣的局面，一般的板材生產能力都是過剩的。鐵礦石的價格又相對較高，而且澳大利亞必和必拓和力拓又合併了，鐵礦石的價格要上漲的可能性要比下降的可能性大很多。這些我都不看好。
Dividends
Stocks that pay dividends, or will eventually pay dividends, make perfect sense to me. I pay some money to gain partial ownership of this company, which will in turn share its profits with me in the form of dividends. If the company is doing well, other people will want to buy in, and as a result, the share price will increase. Now I can sell my shares for a profit.
If the company isn't paying dividends now, but chooses to reinvest its money, this is fine; it only means that the dividends in the future will be even larger. I might not stick around with the company long enough to receive any of those dividends. But because of the company's growth, people realize that the eventual dividends will be even larger, and demand for the stock goes up, resulting in a higher share price. Now I can sell my stock to somebody else, who will eventually sell it to somebody else, and so on, and so forth, until somebody gets the dividends. It might be 25, 50, or 100 years from now, but as long as somebody eventually gets dividends, it makes sense to me, because the shares have an intrinsic value: present or future profit from the company itself.
Now, suppose we take dividends out entirely. This is how I see it. Suppose companies are actually sealed boxes with cash inside of them. These boxes have the magic power of generating money at varying rates. The boxes are indestructible, so there is no way of breaking them open and getting the money. The magic boxes, just like companies, have their IPO and people can put money into the box to buy shares of stock, which represent partial ownership of everything in the box. The only catch is that you can't actually use the cash that you own, since it's sealed inside the box.
Every year, Box A spits out (just for you) a portion of the money it generated that year, based on how much of the box you own. Since the boxes are always guaranteed to generate money, other people are interested in buying shares, and as a result of high demand, you can sell your shares to them for a profit.
Box B generates money faster than box A, but it won't spit out any money for the next ten years. This is OK, because by the time it spits out money, it'll spit out way more money than box A will. So there's still demand for the stock, and shares appreciate in value.
Box C generates money even faster than box B, but it will never, ever spit out any money to anyone for the rest of eternity. Again, you have no way of breaking open this box and getting the cash that you supposedly own. The cash is legally yours, but you can't use it. Your only hope of making any usable money is selling off your shares to somebody else. The amount of cash each share represents goes up a tremendous amount every day, but again, there is no way of actually getting that cash.
Now, why on earth would anyone put money into box C in the first place, and why would anyone in their right mind want to buy shares of box C?! Do shares of box C have any intrinsic value beyond the paper they're printed on?! If there's never any chance of getting any REAL money from box C, then are the shares really worth anything? Why are people willing to trade with each other for a piece of the pie that nobody will actually get? What happens when the company gets so big that they just can't grow anymore, no matter how much they reinvest?
If the company isn't paying dividends now, but chooses to reinvest its money, this is fine; it only means that the dividends in the future will be even larger. I might not stick around with the company long enough to receive any of those dividends. But because of the company's growth, people realize that the eventual dividends will be even larger, and demand for the stock goes up, resulting in a higher share price. Now I can sell my stock to somebody else, who will eventually sell it to somebody else, and so on, and so forth, until somebody gets the dividends. It might be 25, 50, or 100 years from now, but as long as somebody eventually gets dividends, it makes sense to me, because the shares have an intrinsic value: present or future profit from the company itself.
Now, suppose we take dividends out entirely. This is how I see it. Suppose companies are actually sealed boxes with cash inside of them. These boxes have the magic power of generating money at varying rates. The boxes are indestructible, so there is no way of breaking them open and getting the money. The magic boxes, just like companies, have their IPO and people can put money into the box to buy shares of stock, which represent partial ownership of everything in the box. The only catch is that you can't actually use the cash that you own, since it's sealed inside the box.
Every year, Box A spits out (just for you) a portion of the money it generated that year, based on how much of the box you own. Since the boxes are always guaranteed to generate money, other people are interested in buying shares, and as a result of high demand, you can sell your shares to them for a profit.
Box B generates money faster than box A, but it won't spit out any money for the next ten years. This is OK, because by the time it spits out money, it'll spit out way more money than box A will. So there's still demand for the stock, and shares appreciate in value.
Box C generates money even faster than box B, but it will never, ever spit out any money to anyone for the rest of eternity. Again, you have no way of breaking open this box and getting the cash that you supposedly own. The cash is legally yours, but you can't use it. Your only hope of making any usable money is selling off your shares to somebody else. The amount of cash each share represents goes up a tremendous amount every day, but again, there is no way of actually getting that cash.
Now, why on earth would anyone put money into box C in the first place, and why would anyone in their right mind want to buy shares of box C?! Do shares of box C have any intrinsic value beyond the paper they're printed on?! If there's never any chance of getting any REAL money from box C, then are the shares really worth anything? Why are people willing to trade with each other for a piece of the pie that nobody will actually get? What happens when the company gets so big that they just can't grow anymore, no matter how much they reinvest?
The Importance of Dividends
Dividends are very important to the investor. Every young investment student learns of the "greater fool theory" when their professor or mentor asks whether dividends are important. If the answer is "not really, if the share price increases", the professor then goes on to explain that without eventual dividends to the investor, the share is worthless. Consider, in the extreme, the purchase of a share that guaranteed not to pay any dividends or other payouts to the holder. What would be the worth of this share to the holder? Simply, it would be a "promise not to pay". Ever. The holder might get some psychographic thrill from saying they owned the share, but they would in reality have the same claim to its assets and cashflows as anyone else. Their claim would be worthless, except if they sold it to someone who hadn't figured this out. Hence the "greater fool theory".
The annualized dividend divided by the market price of a common share is called the "dividend yield" and forms an important component of the valuation process. Even though many companies don't pay dividends, they have the potential to pay dividends in the future. If they invest their earnings in new assets which will earn future cashflows, we have a claim on these future cashflows. This is why many "growth companies" in an expanding phase don't pay dividends. The shareholders hope the company reinvests their share of profits at a high return. If the company fails to make profits on these reinvestments, they would be better to pay out the profits as dividends to shareholders who could do a better job of reinvestment on their own.
Long term studies have shown that reinvested dividends are very important to the returns that investors make. They form a very important component in securities valuation and should have a very important place in the investor's analysis of a company. Well managed and excellent companies like General Electric have a history of increasing dividends. An investor should be very wary of a company that doesn't seem to want to pay dividends. If the analysis shows the earnings are reinvested in profitable projects rather than paid in dividends, this is a very good thing. If the analysis shows the projects are unprofitable or that excessive corporate expenses have eaten up the potential dividends, this is a very bad sign. Absence of a corporate dividend with stories of the corporate jet flying the President's poodle around the globe should not be taken lightly.
High dividends is not always a sign of good management. A company that needs to reinvest should not pay out all of its accounting profits in dividends. This will cause the productive capacity of the company to diminish and the company to eventually fall into bankruptcy. This actually is a technique of "corporate vultures". They buy a large controlling position in a fine company and purposefully pay far more dividends than they should. This causes the competitive position and productive capacity of the company to falter. This all takes a long time to happen and the company can rest on its laurels for a while. It takes outside analysts a long time to figure all this out. Accounting rules offer lots of scope to obscure what's going on The company is usually able to borrow money to pay dividends for quite a while before the market refuses to offer more credit. Then the inevitable day
The annualized dividend divided by the market price of a common share is called the "dividend yield" and forms an important component of the valuation process. Even though many companies don't pay dividends, they have the potential to pay dividends in the future. If they invest their earnings in new assets which will earn future cashflows, we have a claim on these future cashflows. This is why many "growth companies" in an expanding phase don't pay dividends. The shareholders hope the company reinvests their share of profits at a high return. If the company fails to make profits on these reinvestments, they would be better to pay out the profits as dividends to shareholders who could do a better job of reinvestment on their own.
Long term studies have shown that reinvested dividends are very important to the returns that investors make. They form a very important component in securities valuation and should have a very important place in the investor's analysis of a company. Well managed and excellent companies like General Electric have a history of increasing dividends. An investor should be very wary of a company that doesn't seem to want to pay dividends. If the analysis shows the earnings are reinvested in profitable projects rather than paid in dividends, this is a very good thing. If the analysis shows the projects are unprofitable or that excessive corporate expenses have eaten up the potential dividends, this is a very bad sign. Absence of a corporate dividend with stories of the corporate jet flying the President's poodle around the globe should not be taken lightly.
High dividends is not always a sign of good management. A company that needs to reinvest should not pay out all of its accounting profits in dividends. This will cause the productive capacity of the company to diminish and the company to eventually fall into bankruptcy. This actually is a technique of "corporate vultures". They buy a large controlling position in a fine company and purposefully pay far more dividends than they should. This causes the competitive position and productive capacity of the company to falter. This all takes a long time to happen and the company can rest on its laurels for a while. It takes outside analysts a long time to figure all this out. Accounting rules offer lots of scope to obscure what's going on The company is usually able to borrow money to pay dividends for quite a while before the market refuses to offer more credit. Then the inevitable day
Saturday, February 27, 2010
股票投资 快进快出赚钱更少
买入并持有的方式最近不太管用，但频繁交易也不比它好。
股票比以前流动地更快也更便宜了。只要7.95美元甚至更少，你就能上网进行交易。据Rosenblatt Securities公司称，纽约证券交易所每天的交易量近20亿股，这还不包括竞争市场中的交易。全都算上，交易量有如滔天巨浪，2月份迄今为止平均达94亿股，比1月份的91亿股有所上升。
冲进股市之前先暂停一下。交易耗费资金，增加纳税额，并能助长不良习惯。正如格雷厄姆(Benjamin Graham)所述，投资需要全面分析并保证本金的安全和充足的回报。基于传言、预感或恐惧的交易与投资的含义有天壤之别。
格雷厄姆坚持认为普通的个人投资者与大型机构相比有一个巨大的优势。主要是个人与机构不同，不需要进行荒谬的短期业绩评测。因此，交易越频繁，就越浪费这一优势。
咨询公司Mercer和投资智库IRRC Institute进行的最新调查中询问了800多家机构基金的经理的交易频率。
三分之二的人的交易量高于预期；他们的交易率平均被自己低估了26%。尽管大多数人的业绩均以三年为周期进行评判，但他们的平均持股时间约为17个月，其中19%的基金经理一般持股时间仅为一年或更短。
一位基金经理强烈否认自己过于关注短期业务，抱怨说对冲基金导致市场流通量增加，散户倾向于关注短期业绩，并且过快的买进和卖出基金。
自身有短，莫笑他人；据Mercer公司调查显示，这名基金经理一般每次持股时间约为27周。
这些专家们一边抱怨市场过于以短期为导向，一边又认为他们自己能够通过更为短期的方式跑赢市场。该研究报告的合着者盖耶特(Danyelle Guyatt)说，这是非常严重的过于自负的表现。
更多的交易并不确保更高的回报，这对个人和专业投资者都一样。
对折扣经纪券商客户近200万笔交易进行分析后发现，交易最频繁者所赚取的收益并不比交易最少者的收益高。扣除经纪业务成本后，交易最快者远远落后于交易最慢者。
据晨星公司(Morningstar)称，投资组合交易率最高的共同基金在过去十年间的年平均业绩比交易最慢的基金低1.8个百分点。对退休基金股票投资组合的研究发现，平均而言，如果基金经理休假12个月、不做一单交易，基金年回报率将增加近一个百分点。
这可能是因为许多投资者倾向于过快地卖出赚钱的股票，直到后来才发现用不太好的股票代替了赚钱的股票。同时，锁定收益让人有一种成就感。
Mercer/IRRC研究的合着者卢孔尼克(Jon Lukomnik)说，不采取行动就很难证明一位资金管理人存在的正当性。他还说，如果市场上下波动，要很有把握的人才敢说，我用不着交易。
巴菲特的话仍然值得记取：1992年2月道指位于3200点时，他写道，股市就是一个再交换中心，资金从积极人士之手流向有耐心之人手中。
股票比以前流动地更快也更便宜了。只要7.95美元甚至更少，你就能上网进行交易。据Rosenblatt Securities公司称，纽约证券交易所每天的交易量近20亿股，这还不包括竞争市场中的交易。全都算上，交易量有如滔天巨浪，2月份迄今为止平均达94亿股，比1月份的91亿股有所上升。
冲进股市之前先暂停一下。交易耗费资金，增加纳税额，并能助长不良习惯。正如格雷厄姆(Benjamin Graham)所述，投资需要全面分析并保证本金的安全和充足的回报。基于传言、预感或恐惧的交易与投资的含义有天壤之别。
格雷厄姆坚持认为普通的个人投资者与大型机构相比有一个巨大的优势。主要是个人与机构不同，不需要进行荒谬的短期业绩评测。因此，交易越频繁，就越浪费这一优势。
咨询公司Mercer和投资智库IRRC Institute进行的最新调查中询问了800多家机构基金的经理的交易频率。
三分之二的人的交易量高于预期；他们的交易率平均被自己低估了26%。尽管大多数人的业绩均以三年为周期进行评判，但他们的平均持股时间约为17个月，其中19%的基金经理一般持股时间仅为一年或更短。
一位基金经理强烈否认自己过于关注短期业务，抱怨说对冲基金导致市场流通量增加，散户倾向于关注短期业绩，并且过快的买进和卖出基金。
自身有短，莫笑他人；据Mercer公司调查显示，这名基金经理一般每次持股时间约为27周。
这些专家们一边抱怨市场过于以短期为导向，一边又认为他们自己能够通过更为短期的方式跑赢市场。该研究报告的合着者盖耶特(Danyelle Guyatt)说，这是非常严重的过于自负的表现。
更多的交易并不确保更高的回报，这对个人和专业投资者都一样。
对折扣经纪券商客户近200万笔交易进行分析后发现，交易最频繁者所赚取的收益并不比交易最少者的收益高。扣除经纪业务成本后，交易最快者远远落后于交易最慢者。
据晨星公司(Morningstar)称，投资组合交易率最高的共同基金在过去十年间的年平均业绩比交易最慢的基金低1.8个百分点。对退休基金股票投资组合的研究发现，平均而言，如果基金经理休假12个月、不做一单交易，基金年回报率将增加近一个百分点。
这可能是因为许多投资者倾向于过快地卖出赚钱的股票，直到后来才发现用不太好的股票代替了赚钱的股票。同时，锁定收益让人有一种成就感。
Mercer/IRRC研究的合着者卢孔尼克(Jon Lukomnik)说，不采取行动就很难证明一位资金管理人存在的正当性。他还说，如果市场上下波动，要很有把握的人才敢说，我用不着交易。
巴菲特的话仍然值得记取：1992年2月道指位于3200点时，他写道，股市就是一个再交换中心，资金从积极人士之手流向有耐心之人手中。
不合时宜且老掉牙的花旗故事－－－丑即美
温莎基金管理人聂夫的忍耐力（聂夫自传中的一段）
花旗再度粉碎了我们的希望。1991年温莎投资的银行股票中，只有花旗的盈利不如预期。我们做了一些似乎很有道理的事，我们买进花旗银行的平均持股成本是33美元／股，而当时花旗的股价是14美元／股，因此我们又买进了更多的花旗股票。1991年，股价继续下跌，媒体一再痛责花旗。《商业周刊》（Business Week）1991年10月号一则刺眼的标题说，“花旗的噩梦愈来愈糟”。12月，《机构投资人》（Instiutional Investor）杂志用一篇特别报道配上全页的死鱼照片，表达出华尔街的感受。不少人认为花旗即将破产，据说罗斯·裴洛(Ross Perot)正在放空花旗股票。市场上传说的实际情况比花旗的财务报表所呈现的更糟，这引起了新闻媒体的恐慌性骚动。为了平息谣言，花旗银行不得不公开宣布：主管机关还没有判它死刑。
温莎此时持有2,300万股花旗，受益人的资产有5亿美元身置险境。与此同时，众议院银行委员会主席约翰·丁格尔（John Dingle）暗示花旗可能会技术性破产，花旗一家亚洲分行遭挤兑的报道也在传开。1991年年底，花旗股价一路下滑到8美元／股左右。
我不能说这是叫人欢欣鼓舞的时光，但我们坚持自己的信念，我压根没想过在报酬率令人满意之前卖出股票。即使在大量失血之后，我们仍然觉得这家公司的价值大致上毫发无损。由于成本大幅下降，盈利转好的画面清楚地呈现在我们眼前。依我们的看法，随着不动产问题烟消云散，1991年之后盈利将止跌回升。我们发现花旗的处境和1987年的美国银行（America Bank）有些相似。美国银行后来枯木逢春，股价涨了8倍以上。
我们忍受着枪林弹雨的袭击，最后终于尝到了甜美的果实，获得了非常高的报酬。1992年年初，花旗盈利和股价都明显回升，这一年结束之前，我们的持股已经获得了利润，温莎敢于为人不敢为的做法终有所获，值得等待那么长的时间。
温莎投资花旗忽上忽下的经验说明了很重要的一点：投资要成功，不需靠光彩夺目的股票和多头市场，正确判断和坚持信念是我们之所以获胜的先决条件。利用判断力，可以找到好机会；坚持信念，可以在别人争先恐后往某个方向跑时毫不动摇。花旗的例子生动地证明了这一点。对我们来说，丑股票往往是美丽的。
花旗再度粉碎了我们的希望。1991年温莎投资的银行股票中，只有花旗的盈利不如预期。我们做了一些似乎很有道理的事，我们买进花旗银行的平均持股成本是33美元／股，而当时花旗的股价是14美元／股，因此我们又买进了更多的花旗股票。1991年，股价继续下跌，媒体一再痛责花旗。《商业周刊》（Business Week）1991年10月号一则刺眼的标题说，“花旗的噩梦愈来愈糟”。12月，《机构投资人》（Instiutional Investor）杂志用一篇特别报道配上全页的死鱼照片，表达出华尔街的感受。不少人认为花旗即将破产，据说罗斯·裴洛(Ross Perot)正在放空花旗股票。市场上传说的实际情况比花旗的财务报表所呈现的更糟，这引起了新闻媒体的恐慌性骚动。为了平息谣言，花旗银行不得不公开宣布：主管机关还没有判它死刑。
温莎此时持有2,300万股花旗，受益人的资产有5亿美元身置险境。与此同时，众议院银行委员会主席约翰·丁格尔（John Dingle）暗示花旗可能会技术性破产，花旗一家亚洲分行遭挤兑的报道也在传开。1991年年底，花旗股价一路下滑到8美元／股左右。
我不能说这是叫人欢欣鼓舞的时光，但我们坚持自己的信念，我压根没想过在报酬率令人满意之前卖出股票。即使在大量失血之后，我们仍然觉得这家公司的价值大致上毫发无损。由于成本大幅下降，盈利转好的画面清楚地呈现在我们眼前。依我们的看法，随着不动产问题烟消云散，1991年之后盈利将止跌回升。我们发现花旗的处境和1987年的美国银行（America Bank）有些相似。美国银行后来枯木逢春，股价涨了8倍以上。
我们忍受着枪林弹雨的袭击，最后终于尝到了甜美的果实，获得了非常高的报酬。1992年年初，花旗盈利和股价都明显回升，这一年结束之前，我们的持股已经获得了利润，温莎敢于为人不敢为的做法终有所获，值得等待那么长的时间。
温莎投资花旗忽上忽下的经验说明了很重要的一点：投资要成功，不需靠光彩夺目的股票和多头市场，正确判断和坚持信念是我们之所以获胜的先决条件。利用判断力，可以找到好机会；坚持信念，可以在别人争先恐后往某个方向跑时毫不动摇。花旗的例子生动地证明了这一点。对我们来说，丑股票往往是美丽的。
股市真正的赢家是谁？
中国今天的股市又变成了一个世界上最大的赌场，真正的赢家是政府、证券公司、机构和庄家及跑的快的散户。因此，对于自己不会办企业也没有投资入股机会的人而言，在选购上市公司的股票时应该慎之又慎。
鉴于中国的股市还很不成熟，在我国还没有像美国那样严格保护中小投资者利益的法律，对违规者的惩处力度还过于疲软，有法不依的状况还很严重。需要国家不断完善法律，加强监管力度，才能使股市的信息逐渐趋于公开、公正和透明。所以在当前的情况下，一般的中小投资者在中国参与炒股是非常危险的（尤其是在3000点以上时）。为了尽量减少风险并且不因购买股票而耽误自己太多的时间和精力，最好的方式就是理性地选购股票进行“价值投资”。
股票投资有可能获得利润，但利润决不是炒出来的。股票的利润来自两个方面：一是企业当前可以分给股东的红利，这部分利润的高低取决于该企业的经营业绩；二是来自对企业前景的正确判断（未来的利润）。
比方说有一家资源稀缺型企业，由于管理不善造成当前盈利水平很低，因而股票价格很低。但它的产品销路很好，而且预计到价格会因资源的进一步稀缺而越来越高。所以，只要改善管理，盈利水平很快就可以上去。如果基于这种对企业前景的正确判断而买进它的股票，以后就很可能实现较高的利润。如果股票价格真的上升，股民就可以真的得到更多的利润。除了上面这两个利润来源，再也没有别的因素可以为整个股市的股民提供利润了。所以，理智的股民要作“价值投资”，要去关心企业经营的实际业绩和未来的发展前景，从而决定去买哪些企业的股票。
股票的合理价格由三部分组成：上市公司的每股净资产、现实收益水平和未来预期的收益水平的贴现。超过这个合理的价值水平的股价，就是泡沫。
当然，股市是允许有一定的泡沫存在的。如果企业未来经营得很好，泡沫就会慢慢被充实。但如果没有任何理由能估计到企业泡沫被充实的迹象，那参与炒股就相当于赌博。虽然赌博也有赢家，但他赢的钱就等于另一部分人输的钱减去交易费用，并且赌博浪费的时间也是没有人给你付工资的。所以，赌博只能使社会的财富越来越少。
当然，影响股市的原因还有很多，能否在股票市场获利，另一个根本的因素在于对信息的掌握是否及时和充分，因为股市的交易本身就是围绕着信息展开的。但目前的信息对于机构和散户来说是严重不对称的。比方说，许多上市公司在限售股解禁前后突然出台利好消息，以便让自己手中的股票卖个好价钱；有些机构收买某些股评家按自己的愿望做股评或者推荐个股，引诱散户进入圈套；而散户却没有这种制造虚假信息左右股价走势的能力。许多散户亏钱往往都是亏在股评家的嘴上。
以2007年和2008年的中国股市为例，上市公司能分给流通股股民的利润还不足以交纳交易费用。但很多股评家天天在喊“中国股市还会牛下去”，导致很多小股民血本无归。所以大家最好不要相信股评家的荐股，既然在股市是充满竞争的，人家凭什么把好股票推荐给你呢？也许有人会说，有些股评家有时也说对了。其实这不是他说对了，而是如果多数人上当受骗去跟风购买，就会造成这只股票真的上涨甚至涨停，结果大家误以为他说对了。只要大家误以为他说对了，就对他下次骗人形成“利好”。但只要企业没有利润，即使股票价格被哄抬，也一定是要跌下去的。
所以就股票投资而言，理性地选择股票是第一位的。只要你选择的股票是真正有投资价值的，它总会给你带来利润。如果在持有的过程中运气很好遇到特别的“牛市”，你在高点抛出的话还有意外收获。但如果盲目地选购股票去炒作，即使赚了钱也是其他股民亏的钱。并且，谁又能保证自己不会成为最大的傻瓜呢？如果只做“价值投资”，不因股市的大起大落而随波逐流，虽然很难获得暴利，但收益是比较安全稳健的。因为即使在大跌势中依然有股票保持强势，大涨势中依然有股票持续下跌。如果你决定入市，最重要的是选股，而选股最重要的是看价格。因为任何好东西只要价格太高就不算好东西。如果选对了股，就用不着天天去盯盘看股市行情。
按著名财经评论家时寒冰的话说：“除了职业炒股的投机家，他们才有精力有必要天天去盯着股市行情。否则，天天盯盘是非常愚蠢的做法。因为，盘面所有的陷阱都是机构和庄家给盯盘者量身定做的，机构最不喜欢那些买了股票就去干他自己的正事的人，因为他们很多招儿都用不上了！另外，无论盈亏，如果你天天浪费那么多时间和精力本身就已经是亏了！倘若因亏损而动怒，因盈利而狂喜，那么，你亏得就更大了，因为你把健康也陪进去了！倘若因亏损而把怒火释放在家人或同事身上，那么，你已经亏得血本无归了，因为你连家庭、单位的和睦都葬送了！”
要做好“价值投资”，就应该多花点时间去选择有投资价值的股票，而不是天天去盯着股市行情和胡乱听消息。只要选好了一只股票，买好放在那里等待着
企业给你去分享红利，它几乎是没有多大风险的。万一整个股市行情差，你照样能得到利润；万一股市行情特别好，你就可以乘机抛掉获得额外的投机收益。好股票就是你可以长时间持有的股票。
在目前这样一个信息严重不对称的市场上，机构和庄家不仅能看着散户的牌博弈，甚至在某种程度上还可以决定散户能拿什么牌。散户唯有做“价值投资”才能最大限度地规避风险，否则除了极少数人因运气好而获利外，大部分人将被玩弄于股掌之中。
做“价值投资”要看重的是企业过去和现在的盈利水平、在同行业的竞争力、国家政策对企业未来的潜在影响、企业的品牌和市场占有率以及企业的发展前景等。考虑这些因素去买它的股票，投资的安全性就相对有保障了。
如果兼职股民实在不知道如何选股，就要么离开股市，要么参考一些值得信赖的炒股行家的理性选择。
国外和国内的股票投资经验告诉我们，市场的唯一主旋律就是“价值投资”。但股市也有其自身的规律，同一只股票在不同的时期往往存在着价值低估、价值挖掘、价值实现和价值高估（过度投机）四个阶段的周而复始。“价值投资”指的是投资于目前已具有投资价值，或者目前价值尚被低估、但已经体现出成长性，在可预期的时间里将实现业绩增长的投资对象。
兼职股民要做好“价值投资”，以下的几点经验可供参考：
1.买股票一定要有充分的理由，决不要做没有道理的交易。任何时候都不要用“或许”作为你选择股票的理由。
2、绝大多数有关股票的小道消息都是不可信的。“价值投资”是你真正的朋友，思考一下每一笔交易的“风险收益比”是很有必要的。
3、不要一路追涨杀跌，贪婪与恐惧等于死亡。
4、你不需要每天都炒股，不要像嫁给股票似的粘住不肯离场，不要因为炒股而严重影响你正常的工作和生活。
5、注意大势，要顺势而为，不要逆势而行，控制你的“博傻”心理，进行有效的风险管理。
6、当今中国股市真正的赢家是政府、证券公司、机构和庄家及少部分经验丰富的老股民，如果你今天才开始学炒股，我建议你远离股市，否则绝大部分是没有好下场的。
鉴于中国的股市还很不成熟，在我国还没有像美国那样严格保护中小投资者利益的法律，对违规者的惩处力度还过于疲软，有法不依的状况还很严重。需要国家不断完善法律，加强监管力度，才能使股市的信息逐渐趋于公开、公正和透明。所以在当前的情况下，一般的中小投资者在中国参与炒股是非常危险的（尤其是在3000点以上时）。为了尽量减少风险并且不因购买股票而耽误自己太多的时间和精力，最好的方式就是理性地选购股票进行“价值投资”。
股票投资有可能获得利润，但利润决不是炒出来的。股票的利润来自两个方面：一是企业当前可以分给股东的红利，这部分利润的高低取决于该企业的经营业绩；二是来自对企业前景的正确判断（未来的利润）。
比方说有一家资源稀缺型企业，由于管理不善造成当前盈利水平很低，因而股票价格很低。但它的产品销路很好，而且预计到价格会因资源的进一步稀缺而越来越高。所以，只要改善管理，盈利水平很快就可以上去。如果基于这种对企业前景的正确判断而买进它的股票，以后就很可能实现较高的利润。如果股票价格真的上升，股民就可以真的得到更多的利润。除了上面这两个利润来源，再也没有别的因素可以为整个股市的股民提供利润了。所以，理智的股民要作“价值投资”，要去关心企业经营的实际业绩和未来的发展前景，从而决定去买哪些企业的股票。
股票的合理价格由三部分组成：上市公司的每股净资产、现实收益水平和未来预期的收益水平的贴现。超过这个合理的价值水平的股价，就是泡沫。
当然，股市是允许有一定的泡沫存在的。如果企业未来经营得很好，泡沫就会慢慢被充实。但如果没有任何理由能估计到企业泡沫被充实的迹象，那参与炒股就相当于赌博。虽然赌博也有赢家，但他赢的钱就等于另一部分人输的钱减去交易费用，并且赌博浪费的时间也是没有人给你付工资的。所以，赌博只能使社会的财富越来越少。
当然，影响股市的原因还有很多，能否在股票市场获利，另一个根本的因素在于对信息的掌握是否及时和充分，因为股市的交易本身就是围绕着信息展开的。但目前的信息对于机构和散户来说是严重不对称的。比方说，许多上市公司在限售股解禁前后突然出台利好消息，以便让自己手中的股票卖个好价钱；有些机构收买某些股评家按自己的愿望做股评或者推荐个股，引诱散户进入圈套；而散户却没有这种制造虚假信息左右股价走势的能力。许多散户亏钱往往都是亏在股评家的嘴上。
以2007年和2008年的中国股市为例，上市公司能分给流通股股民的利润还不足以交纳交易费用。但很多股评家天天在喊“中国股市还会牛下去”，导致很多小股民血本无归。所以大家最好不要相信股评家的荐股，既然在股市是充满竞争的，人家凭什么把好股票推荐给你呢？也许有人会说，有些股评家有时也说对了。其实这不是他说对了，而是如果多数人上当受骗去跟风购买，就会造成这只股票真的上涨甚至涨停，结果大家误以为他说对了。只要大家误以为他说对了，就对他下次骗人形成“利好”。但只要企业没有利润，即使股票价格被哄抬，也一定是要跌下去的。
所以就股票投资而言，理性地选择股票是第一位的。只要你选择的股票是真正有投资价值的，它总会给你带来利润。如果在持有的过程中运气很好遇到特别的“牛市”，你在高点抛出的话还有意外收获。但如果盲目地选购股票去炒作，即使赚了钱也是其他股民亏的钱。并且，谁又能保证自己不会成为最大的傻瓜呢？如果只做“价值投资”，不因股市的大起大落而随波逐流，虽然很难获得暴利，但收益是比较安全稳健的。因为即使在大跌势中依然有股票保持强势，大涨势中依然有股票持续下跌。如果你决定入市，最重要的是选股，而选股最重要的是看价格。因为任何好东西只要价格太高就不算好东西。如果选对了股，就用不着天天去盯盘看股市行情。
按著名财经评论家时寒冰的话说：“除了职业炒股的投机家，他们才有精力有必要天天去盯着股市行情。否则，天天盯盘是非常愚蠢的做法。因为，盘面所有的陷阱都是机构和庄家给盯盘者量身定做的，机构最不喜欢那些买了股票就去干他自己的正事的人，因为他们很多招儿都用不上了！另外，无论盈亏，如果你天天浪费那么多时间和精力本身就已经是亏了！倘若因亏损而动怒，因盈利而狂喜，那么，你亏得就更大了，因为你把健康也陪进去了！倘若因亏损而把怒火释放在家人或同事身上，那么，你已经亏得血本无归了，因为你连家庭、单位的和睦都葬送了！”
要做好“价值投资”，就应该多花点时间去选择有投资价值的股票，而不是天天去盯着股市行情和胡乱听消息。只要选好了一只股票，买好放在那里等待着
企业给你去分享红利，它几乎是没有多大风险的。万一整个股市行情差，你照样能得到利润；万一股市行情特别好，你就可以乘机抛掉获得额外的投机收益。好股票就是你可以长时间持有的股票。
在目前这样一个信息严重不对称的市场上，机构和庄家不仅能看着散户的牌博弈，甚至在某种程度上还可以决定散户能拿什么牌。散户唯有做“价值投资”才能最大限度地规避风险，否则除了极少数人因运气好而获利外，大部分人将被玩弄于股掌之中。
做“价值投资”要看重的是企业过去和现在的盈利水平、在同行业的竞争力、国家政策对企业未来的潜在影响、企业的品牌和市场占有率以及企业的发展前景等。考虑这些因素去买它的股票，投资的安全性就相对有保障了。
如果兼职股民实在不知道如何选股，就要么离开股市，要么参考一些值得信赖的炒股行家的理性选择。
国外和国内的股票投资经验告诉我们，市场的唯一主旋律就是“价值投资”。但股市也有其自身的规律，同一只股票在不同的时期往往存在着价值低估、价值挖掘、价值实现和价值高估（过度投机）四个阶段的周而复始。“价值投资”指的是投资于目前已具有投资价值，或者目前价值尚被低估、但已经体现出成长性，在可预期的时间里将实现业绩增长的投资对象。
兼职股民要做好“价值投资”，以下的几点经验可供参考：
1.买股票一定要有充分的理由，决不要做没有道理的交易。任何时候都不要用“或许”作为你选择股票的理由。
2、绝大多数有关股票的小道消息都是不可信的。“价值投资”是你真正的朋友，思考一下每一笔交易的“风险收益比”是很有必要的。
3、不要一路追涨杀跌，贪婪与恐惧等于死亡。
4、你不需要每天都炒股，不要像嫁给股票似的粘住不肯离场，不要因为炒股而严重影响你正常的工作和生活。
5、注意大势，要顺势而为，不要逆势而行，控制你的“博傻”心理，进行有效的风险管理。
6、当今中国股市真正的赢家是政府、证券公司、机构和庄家及少部分经验丰富的老股民，如果你今天才开始学炒股，我建议你远离股市，否则绝大部分是没有好下场的。
Citigroup: The New Greatest Trade Ever?
John Paulson, the subject of Gregory Zuckerman’s recently published book, “The Greatest Trade Ever” (see my recent review of the book) posted his new 13F filing on Friday. The 13F filing is the listing of all of the firm’s stocks that it owns as of the most recent quarter-end. I’ve traded very successfully for hedge funds based on the idea of buying positions that the super-investors own - but, ideally, at discounts to where they bought their positions.
It’s important to point out that Paulson not only guessed way in advance that the housing boom was going to completely implode but he invested billions of dollars on that thesis despite the fact that most of the investment community was laughing at him — including me, I might add (and as mentioned in Greg Zuckerman’s book). I met with his firm but declined to invest in the Paulson Fund despite the enormous evidence it presented that the housing bubble was about to go bust.
Should I make the mistake again? Or follow the new positions listed in the recent filing?
Paulson’s newest position is in Citigroup, the largest bank on the planet. A few months ago, Citigroup share price had fallen to less than a dollar when investors were making the bet that the bank was insolvent. He bought 300 million shares in the last quarter. That’s not chump change even though the stock, at $4.05 as of the close Friday, is more than 90% off of its June 2007 high of $54.75. This is not a standalone bet but part of a broader bet on the return of the banking industry. For instance, he also started a new position in JP Morgan. He sold his 2 million-share stake in Goldman Sachs but I don’t think this is a bet against the broker-dealer model but more of a reflection that he’s probably taking profits on significant gains and reallocating into the banks that haven’t moved as fast as Goldman.
New positions in Cemex (a bet that the housing industry is coming back, not to mention infrastructure build-up triggered by the stimulus package) and Starwood Hotels, Starwood Property Trust, Ashford Hospitality Trust, and Felcor Lodging Trust. (all bets on real estate and the hotel industry) all reflect bets that Paulson thinks the worst is behind us and the economy is going to roar back.
With a roaring economy and money flooding the system, one thing worth being wary about is a weakening dollar. Paulson’s largest position: GLD, the ETF that tracks the price of gold.
I’ve made the mistake once before not to bet on Paulson. I’m probably not going to do it again.
It’s important to point out that Paulson not only guessed way in advance that the housing boom was going to completely implode but he invested billions of dollars on that thesis despite the fact that most of the investment community was laughing at him — including me, I might add (and as mentioned in Greg Zuckerman’s book). I met with his firm but declined to invest in the Paulson Fund despite the enormous evidence it presented that the housing bubble was about to go bust.
Should I make the mistake again? Or follow the new positions listed in the recent filing?
Paulson’s newest position is in Citigroup, the largest bank on the planet. A few months ago, Citigroup share price had fallen to less than a dollar when investors were making the bet that the bank was insolvent. He bought 300 million shares in the last quarter. That’s not chump change even though the stock, at $4.05 as of the close Friday, is more than 90% off of its June 2007 high of $54.75. This is not a standalone bet but part of a broader bet on the return of the banking industry. For instance, he also started a new position in JP Morgan. He sold his 2 million-share stake in Goldman Sachs but I don’t think this is a bet against the broker-dealer model but more of a reflection that he’s probably taking profits on significant gains and reallocating into the banks that haven’t moved as fast as Goldman.
New positions in Cemex (a bet that the housing industry is coming back, not to mention infrastructure build-up triggered by the stimulus package) and Starwood Hotels, Starwood Property Trust, Ashford Hospitality Trust, and Felcor Lodging Trust. (all bets on real estate and the hotel industry) all reflect bets that Paulson thinks the worst is behind us and the economy is going to roar back.
With a roaring economy and money flooding the system, one thing worth being wary about is a weakening dollar. Paulson’s largest position: GLD, the ETF that tracks the price of gold.
I’ve made the mistake once before not to bet on Paulson. I’m probably not going to do it again.
John Paulson Buys Citigroup Inc., Varian Inc., Cemex, Sells Centex Corp., State Street Corp., Goldman Sachs
Hedge fund giant John Paulson made money shorting financials in 2007 and 2008. Now he is buying heavily into the big banks. He also bought a lot of hotels. This is his Q3 portfolio update.
John Paulson buys Citigroup Inc., Varian Inc., Cemex S.a.b. De C.v., Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc., The Hartford Financial Services Group In, Sunstone Hotel Investors Inc., Starwood Property Trust Inc., Conseco Inc., Old National Bancorp, Felcor Lodging Trust Inc., Ashford Hospitality Trust Inc., sells Centex Corp., State Street Corp., Petrocanada, Kimco Realty Corp., Humana Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. The, Market Vectors - Gold Miners Etf, Data Domain, Inc., Centennial Communications Corp., At&t Inc. during the 3-months ended 09/30/2009, according to the most recent filings of his investment company, Paulson & Co.. John Paulson owns 39 stocks with a total value of $20.5 billion. These are the details of the buys and sells.
New Purchase: Citigroup Inc. (C)
John Paulson initiated holdings in Citigroup Inc.. His purchase prices were between $2.59 and $5.23, with an estimated average price of $3.85. The impact to his portfolio due to this purchase was 7.1%. His holdings were 300,000,000 shares as of 09/30/2009.
Citigroup Inc. has a market cap of $92.6 billion; its shares were traded at around $4.05 with and P/S ratio of 1.8. Citigroup Inc. had an annual average earning growth of 5.1% over the past 10 years.
John Paulson buys Citigroup Inc., Varian Inc., Cemex S.a.b. De C.v., Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc., The Hartford Financial Services Group In, Sunstone Hotel Investors Inc., Starwood Property Trust Inc., Conseco Inc., Old National Bancorp, Felcor Lodging Trust Inc., Ashford Hospitality Trust Inc., sells Centex Corp., State Street Corp., Petrocanada, Kimco Realty Corp., Humana Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. The, Market Vectors - Gold Miners Etf, Data Domain, Inc., Centennial Communications Corp., At&t Inc. during the 3-months ended 09/30/2009, according to the most recent filings of his investment company, Paulson & Co.. John Paulson owns 39 stocks with a total value of $20.5 billion. These are the details of the buys and sells.
New Purchase: Citigroup Inc. (C)
John Paulson initiated holdings in Citigroup Inc.. His purchase prices were between $2.59 and $5.23, with an estimated average price of $3.85. The impact to his portfolio due to this purchase was 7.1%. His holdings were 300,000,000 shares as of 09/30/2009.
Citigroup Inc. has a market cap of $92.6 billion; its shares were traded at around $4.05 with and P/S ratio of 1.8. Citigroup Inc. had an annual average earning growth of 5.1% over the past 10 years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)