Buy American. I Am. by Warren Buffett:
…
A simple rule dictates my buying: Be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful. And most certainly, fear is now widespread, gripping even seasoned investors. To be sure, investors are right to be wary of highly leveraged entities or businesses in weak competitive positions. But fears regarding the long-term prosperity of the nation’s many sound companies make no sense.
…
Let me be clear on one point: I can’t predict the short-term movements of the stock market. I haven’t the faintest idea as to whether stocks will be higher or lower a month — or a year — from now. What is likely, however, is that the market will move higher, perhaps substantially so, well before either sentiment or the economy turns up.
…
Today people who hold cash equivalents feel comfortable. They shouldn’t. They have opted for a terrible long-term asset, one that pays virtually nothing and is certain to depreciate in value. Indeed, the policies that government will follow in its efforts to alleviate the current crisis will probably prove inflationary and therefore accelerate declines in the real value of cash accounts.
Equities will almost certainly outperform cash over the next decade, probably by a substantial degree.
Yet more great advice from Warren Buffett. I must admit I think buying stocks from the USA and elsewhere is wise, but there isn’t any reason to listen to me instead of him.
Related: Financial Markets Continue Panicky Behavior – Great Advice from Warren Buffett – Stock Market Decline – Warren Buffett’s 2004 Annual Report – Does a Declining Stock Market Worry You?
Jim Rogers webcast: Fannie Mac and Freddie Mac should not have been bailed out. Jim Rogers is one of the most successful investors in the last 50 years. He and George Soros (together with the Quantum Fund) and then separately along with Warren Buffett have made the most as investors (that I know of – I could easily be wrong).
How you want to accept their opinions on the current crisis is up to you. I believe they are worth listening to – more than anyone else. That does not mean I believe they are totally right. To me the long term track record of each is very impressive. Especially Jim Rodgers and George Soros have been making big investment gains largely on macro economic predictions in the last 20 years. |
In The Dollar is Doomed (July 2008) Jim Rogers predicts the United States Federal Reserve is so badly run it will be gone in a decade or two. I disagree with that sentiment. He certainly has much more expertise than I do but in evaluating such a comment you need to look at what really matters to him. He doesn’t need the Federal Reserve to actually cease to exist to make profitable trades based on his prediction that the Federal Reserves policies are dooming the dollar.
Another thing to note with Rogers and Soros is they will make strong statements and take huge positions but will change their mind when conditions change (often quickly). So you can’t assume what they said awhile back is still their belief today.
Related: Jim Rogers: Why would anybody listen to Bernanke? – investment books – Rodgers on the US and Chinese Economies – A Bull on China
401(k)s are a great way to save. Yes, today those that have been saving money have the disappointment of bad recent results. But that is a minor factor compared to the major problem: Americans not saving what they need to for retirement in 401(k)s, IRAs, even just emergency funds… Do not use the scary financial market performance recently as an excuse to avoid retirement savings (if you have actually been doing well).
The importance of saving enough for retirement is actually increased by the recent results. You might have to re-evaluate your expectations and see whether you have been saving enough. I am actually considering increasing my contributions, mainly to take advantage of lower prices. But another benefit of doing so would be to add more to retirement savings, given me more safety in case long term results are not what I was hoping for.
Now there can be some 401(k) plans that are less ideal. Limited investing options can make them less valuable. Those limited options could include the lack of good diverse choices, index funds, international, money market, real estate, short term bond funds… My real estate fund is down about 2% in the last year (unlike what some might think based on the media coverage of declining housing prices). And poor investing options could include diverse but not good options (options with high expenses… [ the article, see blow, mentions some with a 2% expense rate - that is horrible]).
But those poor implementations of 401(K)s are not equivalent to making 401(k)s un-viable for saving. It might reduce the value of 401(k)s to some people (those will less good 401(k) plans). Or it might even make it so for people with bad 401(k) options that they should not save using it (or that they limit the amount in their 401k). I don’t know of such poor options, but it is theoretically possible.
The tax deferral is a huge benefit. That benefit will only increase as tax rates rise (given the huge debt we have built up it is logical to believe taxes will go up to pay off spending today with the tax increases passed to the future to pay for our current spending).
And if you get matching of 410(k) contributions that can often more than make up for other less than ideal aspects of a particular 401(k) option.
Also once you leave a job you can roll the 401(k) assets into an IRA and invest in a huge variety of assets. So even if the 401k options are not great, it is normally wise to add to them and then just roll them into an IRA when you leave. If the plan is bad, also you can use an IRA for your first $5,000 in annual retirement savings and then add additional amounts in the 401k (if they are matching funds normally adding enough to get the matching is best).
401(k)s, 403(b), IRAs… are still great tools for saving. The performance of financial markets recently have been poor. Accepting periods of poor performance is hard psychologically. But retirement accounts are still a excellent tool for saving for retirement. Using them correctly is important: allocating resources correctly, moving into safer asset allocations as one approaches and reaches retirement…
Read more
The panic driven declines in worldwide stock markets have been remarkable. Deciding whether to join the panic and sell, or hold firm, or buy in now is very difficult. In general trying to time the stock market is difficult and not something many have succeeded trying to do. When I look at the long term values of individual stocks I see plenty that seem like bargains to me. Of course I have no idea if they will be greater bargains in a week, a month or a year. And I could easily be wrong that they are bargains at all.
Still I have bought some Google (GOOG), Templeton Dragon Fund (TDF), Toyota (TM) and ATP Oil (ATPG). The first three I am happy to buy and hold for 10 years (and actually there is a greater than 90% chance I will hold the shares I have now own 10 years from now). The fourth one is fairly speculative, we will see how it goes. I did sell one stock, not because I think it is overvalued but because I liked what I could buy if I sold it (the price had held up well so relatively I could trade it for more shares of what I wanted today than I could have a month or 6 months… ago) – Comtech Telecommunications (CMTL). Often those stocks that hold up well in declines are very strong and do very well once the market corrects, so this could well turn out to be a mistake.
Trying to time when things have hit bottom is very difficult. So I am not trying to do that. I did not invest all my cash now, and will be adding to my positions over the next year (most likely). I have been fortunately that I have been saving up cash and not buying into the market much (I wasn’t smart enough to sell though, and my retirement accounts were still going into stock funds primarily). I am guessing the declining prospects (due to the worsening economy) on the stocks I am buying have been more than offset by the declining stock prices. Only time will tell whether that was a profitable move or not.
Related: Does a Declining Stock Market Worry You? – 12 Stocks for 10 Years June 2008 Update – Beating the Market – Another Great Quarter for Amazon
SEC to temporarily ban short-selling: report
Wow, that would be very surprising to me (especially if you asked more than a month ago the chances of this happening). But given these crazy times I can believe it. I wish they just properly regulated short selling the last 10 years (the failure to do so has been very disappointing). And I would be against banning short selling unless there were a very extreme situation. I don’t see that are necessary now, but I have far from all the details so maybe it is warranted now (though I am skeptical).
Update: SEC Halts Short Selling of Financial Stocks
Given the importance of confidence in financial markets, the SEC’s action halts short selling in 799 financial institutions.
Related: Naked Short Selling – Shorting Using Inverse Funds – Investor Protection Needed
Watching your new worth decline isn’t fun. But when investing over the long term you will have some good periods and some bad periods. Diversification can help smooth out the extremes but the markets are often driven by emotion. And those emotions (greed, fear…) cause extreme price swings. I am getting ready to invest more in the market. I don’t know how much further we will go down, or if we are at the bottom now (unlikely). But there are investments I am happy to own at these prices. The main reason I don’t buy more is the limitation of my capital. And I would rather buy in slowly so if prices decline I can get more for my money.
Not surprisingly the stocks I am looking at are those in the 12 stocks for 10 years portfolio. I am looking at buying more Templeton Dragon Fund, Toyota and Google for myself now. I am happy to be able to buy more of these stocks for the long term. It is not fun to see my net asset value decrease but that does provide some opportunities for buying stocks at lower prices. They may turn out to be bargains, or maybe they will drop much further. That only time will tell, but I am happy to add to those positions at these prices.
On the overall market I am waiting and watching. But I am leaning now toward moving more of my long term investing into stocks – I am already over-weighted there compared to the conventional wisdom but that is my style. I am willing to take more risk with a long long term investment portfolio. As the time frame shrinks (and the assets grow) I believe in reducing the risk profile for the overall portfolio (though I still believe conventional wisdom over-emphasizes price volatility risk (compared to inflation risk, for example). This market does have real potential for creating serious long term problems, which is why I need to think more (and get more information) about the long term implications.
Related: Investment Risks – books on investing – Does a Declining Stock Market Worry You? – Uncertain Economic Times
I respect the management of Google. They are not tied to conventional ways of thinking. When they bought huge amounts of dark fiber (fiber optic cable that had been laid down in the internet bubble period, but was sitting unused). I figured they had made good investments while the cable was very cheap (pennies on the dollar). I watch with interest as they continue to build their own (with partners) fiber network. I am guessing this may be partially because they are smart enough to know the business oligopolies providing internet infrastructure will try to exploit their positions and government cannot be counted out to play their proper regulatory role, which is required in a capitalist system. And partially due to their huge bandwidth needs and projections for future growth.
And since those oligopolies are not very effective companies (that rely largely on paying politicians, in order to undermine the proper role of government in a capitalist system, to gain government granted monopolist profits). That increases the benefit of Google buying into their own distribution network since excess capacity can likely be sold at a large profit: the competing companies are so used to charging monopoly prices leaving lots of room for profit. The second point can be debated but I don’t think if the economy functioned properly, with intelligently regulated natural monopolies providing internet bandwidth, I doubt Google would invest in this, but, of course, I could be wrong.
About the Unity bandwidth consortium
Google stretching underwater comms cable?
…
Meanwhile, ITWeb reports that Google is looking to run a third underwater cable to South Africa.
Related: Monopolies and Oligopolies do not a Free Market Make – Challenges in Laying Internet Fiber Under Oceans – Plugging America’s Broadband Gap – Not Understanding Capitalism
Short selling is when you sell something before you buy it (you try to sell high and then buy low later, instead of buying low and then selling high later). In order to sell short, you are required to borrow the shares that you then sell. So if I own 1,000 shares of Google (I wish), I could lend them to someone to sell. Nothing happens to my position, it is just that those shares are now allocated to that short sale. If I sell them then the short seller has to go borrow them elsewhere or buy the stock to close their position. In general the borrowing is either from brokers that hold shares for individuals or from large institution (mutual funds, insurance companies…).
However from everything that I read it appears the SEC hasn’t bothered to actually enforce this law much. There was a bunch of excitement recently when the SEC announced it would bother to enforce the law to protect a few large banks, many of whom are said to practice naked short selling but didn’t like it when that was done to their stock. As you can see, this does make the SEC look pretty bad, when they chose to enforce a law, not in all circumstances, but only to protect a few of those who actually take advantage of the SEC’s failure to enforce the law to make money.
CEOs Launch Web Site To Protect Short Sellers
Some people find the whole concept of short selling bad since it is based on making money on stock price declines. I don’t feel that way and believe it can help the market. But it requires regulators that actually do their jobs and enforce laws. A favorite tacit of those who seek to keep open special ways for themselves to benefit from abusing the system is to try and make things seem complex. The recent SEC order saying they would enforce the intent of the law to protect a few powerful banks from the behavior many (or most) practice themselves for years shows that it isn’t that complicated.
Adding the decision not to enforce the requirement to borrow shares to their recent decision to eliminate the requirement that short sales take place on down ticks in price (a measure put in after the 1929 stock market crash to not have short sellers accelerate market declines and insight panic seems like a really bad combination).
Related: Shorting Using Inverse Funds – Monopolies and Oligopolies do not a Free Market Make – Fed Continues Wall Street Welfare – SEC data on “failures to deliver”
Today, the market capitalization of Apple exceeded Google for the first time since Google went public. Both Companies are now valued at $185 billion. In 2007 Google had revenue of $16.6 billion and net profit of $4.2 billion. Apple had revenue of $24 billion and net profit of $3.5 billion. Since Google went public on 27 August 2004 their stock price is up 367% and Apple is up 1064% – both pretty good. I own Google and have it as the largest holding in the 12 stocks for 10 years portfolio.
Related: Buy Google – Stop Picking Stocks – Lazy Portfolio Results – Great Google Earnings
The USA stock market has not been doing so well recently (the S&P 500 index is down over 9% so far this year). And I own S&P 500 indexes in my retirement account (in addition to other index funds). So I am losing money on those investments but I am not worried. It is possible the market will do very poorly over the next few months, year… if the economy struggles (and with the huge credit card like spending Washington much of the last 30 years and huge increases in gas prices that is certainly possible). But I am not worried.
I don’t plan on using that money for decades. Therefore the short term declines really have no impact on my life. Sure if I was able to move all that money into a money market fund for the decline and then move it back into stock funds for the increase that would be wonderful. But I can’t and no-one has proven to be able to time the market effectively over the long term. It is unlikely you or I will be the ones that do it right. I wouldn’t be surprised if the market was lower at the end of the year, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was higher either.
Dollar cost averaging is the best long term strategy (not trying to time the market). And using that strategy, if you assume stocks reach whatever level they do say 20 years from now, I am actually better off will prices falling now – so I can buy more shares now that will reach that final price. You actually are better off with wild swings in stock prices, when you dollar cost average, than if they just went up .8% every single month (if both ended with stocks at the same price 20 years later). Really the wilder the better (the limit is essentially the limit at which the economy was harmed by the wild swings (people deciding they didn’t want to take risk, make investments…) to the point that the final value 20 years later is deflated.
Read more