I must be the only person buying stocks at the moment..
Err, no you're not. It is one of the Stock market illusions aided by the media. For every seller there is a buyer and the same number of shares at the end of the day as there was at the start.
Well, quite. And price balances it out.
It would have been more accurate to say I’m the only one (on here) willing to talk about buying stock.
'When the blood is running in the streets' .. ie possibly not quite yet. But you're thinking along the right lines.
I like Lisa Nandy a lot and she has huge potential. This campaign, however, has shown that she is not yet ready for the role of leader. She's made quite a few avoidable mistakes. I think she will be ready in time, but she has some learning to do yet.
Of the choices available, the Labour party looks set to choose the current best option.
Agreed, though Thornberry is almost as well suited in my view. I susoect that if Starmer hadn`t run, and it was between Thornberry/RLB/Nandy, we`d be saying similar things about Thornberry as we are about Starmer.
Broadly agree though I think the hatchet jobs on Thornberry (the press feast on the infamous but frankly minor tweet and the Lady Nugent jibe) would have crippled her as leader from the start. She'd be a good fighting Shadow Chancellor or Home Secretary. Lisa will be a strong contender in the future but also looks best suited this time to a heavyweight Shadow Cabinet role.
How will leaving the transition period on WTO rules fair in a global recession?
Just fine because we'll have the 𝐀𝐔𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐀 𝐃𝐄𝐀𝐋!
Great isn't it? Austalia trades just fine and isn't some apocalyptic wasteland.
Calling it the Australia deal puts into context that its not awful as people make out pretending we'll be like North Korea etc
Why not just call it the WTO No deal deal rather than try to make up stuff to pretend you have actually done something. Bunch of liars.
Because context matters. People have drawn a panic about WTO or "No Deal" like its the end of the frigging world. Its not. Calling it "Australian style trade" (which is the term I've seen used more than "Australia deal" and is entirely accurate) puts WTO into context.
There's a lot of similarities between the paranoia and overreactions over COVID and WTO. Its a new and exotic change but unlikely to actually lead to much in the end and we'll probably look back and wiser heads will wonder what all the fuss was about. Yes its got the
Tell that to our motor industry.
Sure.
The biggest risk to our motor industry is an over reliance on petrol/diesel and the technological disruption that is ongoing. Companies that have been investing in the UK with electric technologies have continued to invest in the UK.
I think he's right about this. I also wonder if Hunt might be persuaded to come back to be the Virus czar. He seemed to be at important meetings the other day and interdepartmental organisation is going to be important here.
Absolutely right. Ministers’ petulant refusal to appear on the BBCis now risks being negligent and dangerous.
Is it the BBC generally, I thought it was just the Today program. Which frankly isn't missing non answers from Ministers very much. But whoever is fronting this needs to get the public messaging right and I think Hunt would be a good choice.
Hunt is not a Minister. He is also Chair of the Select Committee on Health, which is meant to hold the government to account. So if he were to play such a role he would have an actual conflict of interest. He could only do it if he were to give up the Select Committee role, IMO.
The government is in charge so its health and other Ministers need to be out front and centre communicating with the public. That is their job, for God’s sake!
Some interesting detail on S Korean testing. It suggests that the numbers of cases will continue to rise dramatically over the next few days, as the backlog is cleared - but most of those will be confirmation of infections which has already taken place, rather than new infections occurring.
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2020/02/119_285251.html Across the nation, local governments and hospitals have launched an easier and faster testing method -- "drive-thru" test centers that allow a driver with symptoms to get a test inside his or her car. The whole test procedure takes about 10 minutes, and such facilities are also aimed at helping protect health workers.
South Korea has released 26 fully recovered novel coronavirus patients from hospitals as of Friday morning, the KCDC said.
The number of people being checked for the virus and under quarantine came to 24,751, it added. The country has tested a total of 68,918 suspected cases, with 44,167 testing negative....
I think he's right about this. I also wonder if Hunt might be persuaded to come back to be the Virus czar. He seemed to be at important meetings the other day and interdepartmental organisation is going to be important here.
Absolutely right. Ministers’ petulant refusal to appear on the BBCis now risks being negligent and dangerous.
It is utterly pathetic from a government which professes a desire to 'reunite' the country.
They need to crack on now. But I guess briefing the press about John Bercow or about trains and bridges is more important.
Just think of the opportunity cost of all that wasted time and weep.
He says that in Wuhan (so far), the coronavirus has only infected 5% of the population. That is, as he also says, massively different from the various predictions of 40-70% infection, which most epidemiologists advance.
It’s an encouraging point amidst the gloom.
However he fails to spell out how Wuhan has achieved this: with total lockdown of the entire population. And house arrest for 11m people.
This is less encouraging. It suggests that if we want to avoid apocalypse we have to accept universal imprisonment for several months. It may come to that.
Decameron 2020 will take place online rather than in a rural Tuscan retreat.
I must be the only person buying stocks at the moment..
I must be the only person (on pb) not handling his own investments; no stockbroker on the end of the phone; no pile of gold bars under the mattress. I just hope the pension people know what they are doing. Redundancy looms, which does not help.
I don't understand anything about investing and have zero interest in learning. I have a guy and I picked him on the basis that I liked his car - 991.1 Carrera GTS in Indischrot.
I think he's right about this. I also wonder if Hunt might be persuaded to come back to be the Virus czar. He seemed to be at important meetings the other day and interdepartmental organisation is going to be important here.
Absolutely right. Ministers’ petulant refusal to appear on the BBCis now risks being negligent and dangerous.
Is it the BBC generally, I thought it was just the Today program. Which frankly isn't missing non answers from Ministers very much. But whoever is fronting this needs to get the public messaging right and I think Hunt would be a good choice.
Hunt is not a Minister. He is also Chair of the Select Committee on Health, which is meant to hold the government to account. So if he were to play such a role he would have an actual conflict of interest. He could only do it if he were to give up the Select Committee role, IMO.
The government is in charge so its health and other Ministers need to be out front and centre communicating with the public. That is their job, for God’s sake!
I've heard ministers speaking on BBC Radio 5 Live very regularly since this began.
I must be the only person buying stocks at the moment..
Err, no you're not. It is one of the Stock market illusions aided by the media. For every seller there is a buyer and the same number of shares at the end of the day as there was at the start.
Well, quite. And price balances it out.
It would have been more accurate to say I’m the only one (on here) willing to talk about buying stock.
'When the blood is running in the streets' .. ie possibly not quite yet. But you're thinking along the right lines.
I suspect that there is going to be a good buying opportunity soon but like @AlastairMeeks I would not pretend to be able to second guess the experts on when it will be.
Taking a hard headed view of it, the South Korean data on disease progression will be very good indeed in two or three weeks time. Because they have tested so widely, they will catch a very large proportion of the asymptomatic cases, so we'll get a much better handle on the percentage of infections which lead to serious complications, or death.
I must be the only person buying stocks at the moment..
Err, no you're not. It is one of the Stock market illusions aided by the media. For every seller there is a buyer and the same number of shares at the end of the day as there was at the start.
Well, quite. And price balances it out.
It would have been more accurate to say I’m the only one (on here) willing to talk about buying stock.
'When the blood is running in the streets' .. ie possibly not quite yet. But you're thinking along the right lines.
I suspect that there is going to be a good buying opportunity soon but like @AlastairMeeks I would not pretend to be able to second guess the experts on when it will be.
There are no experts on this. We are in terra incognita.
But what we have is a second-order problem of people panicking about panic where there is not a lot of panic. We have a very, very big problem which justifies taking very, very big steps which might count as panic in other circs. I did something really panicky the other day, I SOLD ALL MY EQUITIES with the ftse at 7400 odd. What a twat: I have saved myself the price of a brand new Bentley and saddled myself with a CGT bill. If only I had kept calm and carried on.
What is really baffling is the attempt of the non-panickers to connect unrelated historical and prospective probabilities. If you think you are going to do x about coronavirus because the chances of dying in a road accident in country y are n%, you are doing this wrong.
Neither is going to be good for dogs if it’s decided they can be a reservoir for the virus.
In the absolutely bonkers tv show 'zoo', in which all animals in the world start becoming more intelligent and violent due to an infection, I seem to recall the 'heroes' sought to save the animals like their precious dogs, but accidentally sterilized the human race at the same time. Best be cautious
I must be the only person buying stocks at the moment..
Err, no you're not. It is one of the Stock market illusions aided by the media. For every seller there is a buyer and the same number of shares at the end of the day as there was at the start.
Well, quite. And price balances it out.
It would have been more accurate to say I’m the only one (on here) willing to talk about buying stock.
'When the blood is running in the streets' .. ie possibly not quite yet. But you're thinking along the right lines.
I suspect that there is going to be a good buying opportunity soon but like @AlastairMeeks I would not pretend to be able to second guess the experts on when it will be.
There are no experts on this. We are in terra incognita.
I respectfully disagree. Investment managers will have access to far more information and have a far better feel for sentiment than those who play at this. At times of crisis this is particularly important. Anyone can do fine in a rising market.
I think he's right about this. I also wonder if Hunt might be persuaded to come back to be the Virus czar. He seemed to be at important meetings the other day and interdepartmental organisation is going to be important here.
Absolutely right. Ministers’ petulant refusal to appear on the BBCis now risks being negligent and dangerous.
Is it the BBC generally, I thought it was just the Today program. Which frankly isn't missing non answers from Ministers very much. But whoever is fronting this needs to get the public messaging right and I think Hunt would be a good choice.
They’re not appearing on Newsnignt or WATO or the 5 pm news programme on Radio 4, as far as I can tell.
This is potentially serious and a government which puts its ego above the need to use all possible means of communication about this issue is providing another example of its essential frivolity and unseriousness.
One might add that it looks like an attempt to impose editorial control by the back door.
If we had a half-decent opposition, it would be a tremendous opportunity. Were I the next Labour leader, I would make it a priority to get myself and Shadow Cabinet members on every programme possible to put Labour’s case and show up the government.
I must be the only person (on pb) not handling his own investments; no stockbroker on the end of the phone; no pile of gold bars under the mattress. I just hope the pension people know what they are doing. Redundancy looms, which does not help.
What, you haven't liquidated all your worldly belongings (including the dog) and piled into gold?
But what we have is a second-order problem of people panicking about panic where there is not a lot of panic. We have a very, very big problem which justifies taking very, very big steps which might count as panic in other circs. I did something really panicky the other day, I SOLD ALL MY EQUITIES with the ftse at 7400 odd. What a twat: I have saved myself the price of a brand new Bentley and saddled myself with a CGT bill. If only I had kept calm and carried on.
What is really baffling is the attempt of the non-panickers to connect unrelated historical and prospective probabilities. If you think you are going to do x about coronavirus because the chances of dying in a road accident in country y are n%, you are doing this wrong.
No if you buy high and sell low you are doing this wrong.
I am mainly at the moment referring to the economic global tsunami.
There's is an increasing global economic opportunity to acquire cheaper shares.
From an investing perspective this is is either the mother of all buying opportunities or a permanant game-changer. I`m unsure which, but edging towards the former.
I must be the only person buying stocks at the moment..
I must be the only person (on pb) not handling his own investments; no stockbroker on the end of the phone; no pile of gold bars under the mattress. I just hope the pension people know what they are doing. Redundancy looms, which does not help.
I don't understand anything about investing and have zero interest in learning. I have a guy and I picked him on the basis that I liked his car - 991.1 Carrera GTS in Indischrot.
Some plonker on here (Malcolm McAngry I think it was) tried the old Dennis Healey 'it's only paper losses' trope the other day. Like something straight out of the Nicolás Maduro book of economics.
If you caught this right, and I mean the markets not the virus, you could make an absolute killing. Selling a fortnight ago and buying at bottom will yield huge profits. The problem is this: whilst I correctly called the crash, what I don't have any real idea about is when the bottom will be reached. It could be next week. Or it could be next month. Or it could be next winter. Those scenarios probably equate to falls from the current level of 5%, 15% or 55% and you could make a plausible argument for all three.
Does anyone (We have people working in the healthcare sector here) know the actual test for Covid19 ? If it's a swab could the Gov't do a mass mailout ?
Leftie in Grauniad struggles with concept that Uncle Tom British Indians could possibly vote Conservative (let alone occupy three top Cabinet posts) - critiqued in thread:
He says that in Wuhan (so far), the coronavirus has only infected 5% of the population. That is, as he also says, massively different from the various predictions of 40-70% infection, which most epidemiologists advance.
It’s an encouraging point amidst the gloom.
However he fails to spell out how Wuhan has achieved this: with total lockdown of the entire population. And house arrest for 11m people.
This is less encouraging. It suggests that if we want to avoid apocalypse we have to accept universal imprisonment for several months. It may come to that.
Can you define the 'apocalypse' you wish to avoid.
And quantify the damage to the economy and society which you are willing to accept to avoid it.
I am mainly at the moment referring to the economic global tsunami.
There's is an increasing global economic opportunity to acquire cheaper shares.
From an investing perspective this is is either the mother of all buying opportunities or a permanant game-changer. I`m unsure which, but edging towards the former.
There are only days a share price matters: The day you buy and the day you sell.
Unless you intend to sell shortly this will be ancient history before you need to sell, no matter how bad it gets.
If we had a half-decent opposition, it would be a tremendous opportunity. Were I the next Labour leader, I would make it a priority to get myself and Shadow Cabinet members on every programme possible to put Labour’s case and show up the government.
Yes, and what about pressing some questions -
Where's that Russia report? Who paid for Johnson's Xmas holiday? Why has he taken over the Treasury? What happened to his pledge to raise the 40p threshold? Whither the fiscal rules?
I must be the only person buying stocks at the moment..
Err, no you're not. It is one of the Stock market illusions aided by the media. For every seller there is a buyer and the same number of shares at the end of the day as there was at the start.
Well, quite. And price balances it out.
It would have been more accurate to say I’m the only one (on here) willing to talk about buying stock.
'When the blood is running in the streets' .. ie possibly not quite yet. But you're thinking along the right lines.
I suspect that there is going to be a good buying opportunity soon but like @AlastairMeeks I would not pretend to be able to second guess the experts on when it will be.
There are no experts on this. We are in terra incognita.
I respectfully disagree. Investment managers will have access to far more information and have a far better feel for sentiment than those who play at this. At times of crisis this is particularly important. Anyone can do fine in a rising market.
But the large scale call - what happens to the world economy over the next twelve months - is something they have no more idea on than you or I. The more general point, I agree with entirely.
I must be the only person buying stocks at the moment..
Err, no you're not. It is one of the Stock market illusions aided by the media. For every seller there is a buyer and the same number of shares at the end of the day as there was at the start.
Well, quite. And price balances it out.
It would have been more accurate to say I’m the only one (on here) willing to talk about buying stock.
'When the blood is running in the streets' .. ie possibly not quite yet. But you're thinking along the right lines.
I suspect that there is going to be a good buying opportunity soon but like @AlastairMeeks I would not pretend to be able to second guess the experts on when it will be.
There are no experts on this. We are in terra incognita.
I respectfully disagree. Investment managers will have access to far more information and have a far better feel for sentiment than those who play at this. At times of crisis this is particularly important. Anyone can do fine in a rising market.
But the large scale call - what happens to the world economy over the next twelve months - is something they have no more idea on than you or I. The more general point, I agree with entirely.
That's correct. They don't. Very few of them know about, or have any experience of dealing in, a true global financial and economic crisis driven by something completely outside of their control.
I must be the only person buying stocks at the moment..
I must be the only person (on pb) not handling his own investments; no stockbroker on the end of the phone; no pile of gold bars under the mattress. I just hope the pension people know what they are doing. Redundancy looms, which does not help.
Oh dear. I`m sorry - but "pension people" do not know what they are doing. Share prices are purely a function of supply and demand for each particular share. Neither fund managers nor anyone else have a clue which way prices will move (unless they are insider trading or have a crystal ball).
If you have money in a (non final salary) pension scheme or stocks and shares ISA or the like your wealth has plummeted this week.
I'm very bearish and this morning before London trading began I put an order to sell all our shares. Not a fortune but not insignificant either. I will keep in cash for the foreseeable future.
As others have pointed out, the market was arguably already way over invested, especially the DOW, even before the coronavirus. The DOW is now only down to its level last August. Could fall a lot lower ....
But what we have is a second-order problem of people panicking about panic where there is not a lot of panic. We have a very, very big problem which justifies taking very, very big steps which might count as panic in other circs. I did something really panicky the other day, I SOLD ALL MY EQUITIES with the ftse at 7400 odd. What a twat: I have saved myself the price of a brand new Bentley and saddled myself with a CGT bill. If only I had kept calm and carried on.
What is really baffling is the attempt of the non-panickers to connect unrelated historical and prospective probabilities. If you think you are going to do x about coronavirus because the chances of dying in a road accident in country y are n%, you are doing this wrong.
I’ve realised that a lot of the Don’t Panic, hey-I’m-cool brigade are, simply, scared. And don’t want to think about how bad it could be.
It’s understandable. The worst case scenarios are genuinely terrifying. But fear is paralyzing.
If this is a plague we may have to go full Wuhan, and soon. Because the alternative is worse.
Yeah if this is a plague it could be awful. And if my aunt was a man she'd be my uncle.
This is not a plague, its a new variant of influenza that we have no herd immunity to. Worst case scenario its a bad flu season then we develop a vaccine and herd immunity.
If you caught this right, and I mean the markets not the virus, you could make an absolute killing. Selling a fortnight ago and buying at bottom will yield huge profits. The problem is this: whilst I correctly called the crash, what I don't have any real idea about is when the bottom will be reached. It could be next week. Or it could be next month. Or it could be next winter. Those scenarios probably equate to falls from the current level of 5%, 15% or 55% and you could make a plausible argument for all three.
I am mainly at the moment referring to the economic global tsunami.
There's is an increasing global economic opportunity to acquire cheaper shares.
From an investing perspective this is is either the mother of all buying opportunities or a permanant game-changer. I`m unsure which, but edging towards the former.
There are only days a share price matters: The day you buy and the day you sell.
Unless you intend to sell shortly this will be ancient history before you need to sell, no matter how bad it gets.
There's is an increasing global economic opportunity to acquire cheaper shares.
There will be. But not yet IMO.
Its cheaper than it was a month ago but may not be as cheap as next month. If you were regularly investing a month ago, you should continue to do so now and will get more bang for your bucks now.
Mr. Eadric, I'm not sure about that. The Chinese numbers may be creative.
The evidence for that is slim. Inaccurate numbers out of China are far more likely to be so because of the deficiencies in testing. It's simply not something they were prepared for.
What will be interesting over the next month or so will be the serology results from testing the 'unaffected' population for antibodies against the virus (they have only just started this on a large scale). It will give a much better idea of the numbers of undiagnosed infected/recovered.
I am mainly at the moment referring to the economic global tsunami.
There's is an increasing global economic opportunity to acquire cheaper shares.
From an investing perspective this is is either the mother of all buying opportunities or a permanant game-changer. I`m unsure which, but edging towards the former.
There are only days a share price matters: The day you buy and the day you sell.
Unless you intend to sell shortly this will be ancient history before you need to sell, no matter how bad it gets.
Financially speaking you are a blithering idiot.
No you're a panic mongering fool - if you're not another SeanT invention.
I am mainly at the moment referring to the economic global tsunami.
There's is an increasing global economic opportunity to acquire cheaper shares.
From an investing perspective this is is either the mother of all buying opportunities or a permanant game-changer. I`m unsure which, but edging towards the former.
There are only days a share price matters: The day you buy and the day you sell.
Unless you intend to sell shortly this will be ancient history before you need to sell, no matter how bad it gets.
Possibly. Although the FTSE is now lower than it was at the start of the century, so not all declines become "ancient history". FWIW (and I am not a financial advisor), I don't get the impression that the UK stock market has enjoyed the same kind of bubble that the US one has.
Taking a hard headed view of it, the South Korean data on disease progression will be very good indeed in two or three weeks time. Because they have tested so widely, they will catch a very large proportion of the asymptomatic cases, so we'll get a much better handle on the percentage of infections which lead to serious complications, or death.
You've been good on this. I'm tracking you as a key input in my decision as to when to buy back into shares. Hope your shoulders are wide enough to carry such a burden.
I am mainly at the moment referring to the economic global tsunami.
There's is an increasing global economic opportunity to acquire cheaper shares.
From an investing perspective this is is either the mother of all buying opportunities or a permanant game-changer. I`m unsure which, but edging towards the former.
There are only days a share price matters: The day you buy and the day you sell.
Unless you intend to sell shortly this will be ancient history before you need to sell, no matter how bad it gets.
You could say the same about betting on politics. The only thing that matters is the result at the end - so just bet on the result you expect and then sit and wait.
Of course you can bet that way, and some people do.
But there are opportunities for money to be made by anticipating trends, trying to judge when particular positions are overbought or oversold, and very many PB'ers trade the political markets that way. The same is true of financial markets.
I am mainly at the moment referring to the economic global tsunami.
There's is an increasing global economic opportunity to acquire cheaper shares.
From an investing perspective this is is either the mother of all buying opportunities or a permanant game-changer. I`m unsure which, but edging towards the former.
There are only days a share price matters: The day you buy and the day you sell.
Unless you intend to sell shortly this will be ancient history before you need to sell, no matter how bad it gets.
This is not true. It`s a tale often told by financial advisers to clients.
Your assets have a particular value each day (each second even). If you buy a share, or property or any other asset, and it rises in value, this rise is "real" in that it can be liquidated at that point for the current value (less leech fees). If you die, your estate is valued at the value of your assets at the time, not at the purchase price. When you buy a car and it depreciates, you can`t say "my car is worth the purchase price until the day I sell it".
But what we have is a second-order problem of people panicking about panic where there is not a lot of panic. We have a very, very big problem which justifies taking very, very big steps which might count as panic in other circs. I did something really panicky the other day, I SOLD ALL MY EQUITIES with the ftse at 7400 odd. What a twat: I have saved myself the price of a brand new Bentley and saddled myself with a CGT bill. If only I had kept calm and carried on.
What is really baffling is the attempt of the non-panickers to connect unrelated historical and prospective probabilities. If you think you are going to do x about coronavirus because the chances of dying in a road accident in country y are n%, you are doing this wrong.
No if you buy high and sell low you are doing this wrong.
You seem to be conflating two unrelated points there in a self-referential sort of way. And as I said that I sold at 7400 when the index is now at 6550 I think I have cracked the "sell high" bit.
PB is not at its best when moonlighting as an investment forum, so I will just say this and leave it there: the fact that a market has halved doesn't by any means guarantee it will not halve again. The big swinging dick stuff about blood on the streets, others are fearful etc is useless because it doesn't specify how fearful, or how much blood. Going back into this market before it has stabilised for a minimum of six months might make you a fortune but it iwould be a very, very, very high risk thing to do.
But what we have is a second-order problem of people panicking about panic where there is not a lot of panic. We have a very, very big problem which justifies taking very, very big steps which might count as panic in other circs. I did something really panicky the other day, I SOLD ALL MY EQUITIES with the ftse at 7400 odd. What a twat: I have saved myself the price of a brand new Bentley and saddled myself with a CGT bill. If only I had kept calm and carried on.
What is really baffling is the attempt of the non-panickers to connect unrelated historical and prospective probabilities. If you think you are going to do x about coronavirus because the chances of dying in a road accident in country y are n%, you are doing this wrong.
I’ve realised that a lot of the Don’t Panic, hey-I’m-cool brigade are, simply, scared. And don’t want to think about how bad it could be.
It’s understandable. The worst case scenarios are genuinely terrifying. But fear is paralyzing.
If this is a plague we may have to go full Wuhan, and soon. Because the alternative is worse.
Being scared is natural. We are all scared. Every sane solider in war is scared.
That’s not what courage or stoicism is: it’s when you put in a brave face and carry on even though you’re scared. You've thought about it, considered it, and put it to the back of their minds so you can carry on.
You seem to think the only honest way to behave is to openly emote to everyone else your fears. Everyone feels the same way, and it doesn’t help. It just pisses people off and undermines their resilience.
It’s a good job you’re not a leader. You’d be shite. If it were up to me I’d temporarily ban you until you learned to dial down the panic.
But what we have is a second-order problem of people panicking about panic where there is not a lot of panic. We have a very, very big problem which justifies taking very, very big steps which might count as panic in other circs. I did something really panicky the other day, I SOLD ALL MY EQUITIES with the ftse at 7400 odd. What a twat: I have saved myself the price of a brand new Bentley and saddled myself with a CGT bill. If only I had kept calm and carried on.
What is really baffling is the attempt of the non-panickers to connect unrelated historical and prospective probabilities. If you think you are going to do x about coronavirus because the chances of dying in a road accident in country y are n%, you are doing this wrong.
No if you buy high and sell low you are doing this wrong.
True. Although if you buy and sell for the wrong reasons off the wrong information, you will screw up.
But what we have is a second-order problem of people panicking about panic where there is not a lot of panic. We have a very, very big problem which justifies taking very, very big steps which might count as panic in other circs. I did something really panicky the other day, I SOLD ALL MY EQUITIES with the ftse at 7400 odd. What a twat: I have saved myself the price of a brand new Bentley and saddled myself with a CGT bill. If only I had kept calm and carried on.
What is really baffling is the attempt of the non-panickers to connect unrelated historical and prospective probabilities. If you think you are going to do x about coronavirus because the chances of dying in a road accident in country y are n%, you are doing this wrong.
No if you buy high and sell low you are doing this wrong.
You seem to be conflating two unrelated points there in a self-referential sort of way. And as I said that I sold at 7400 when the index is now at 6550 I think I have cracked the "sell high" bit.
PB is not at its best when moonlighting as an investment forum, so I will just say this and leave it there: the fact that a market has halved doesn't by any means guarantee it will not halve again. The big swinging dick stuff about blood on the streets, others are fearful etc is useless because it doesn't specify how fearful, or how much blood. Going back into this market before it has stabilised for a minimum of six months might make you a fortune but it iwould be a very, very, very high risk thing to do.
Yes, correct. Markets don`t have a "too low" or "too high" price. They are priced in exactly the right place because they represent an equilibrium between weight of money on the buy side and weight of money on the sell side. If the markets were "too low" then they would already be higher (vice versa)!
It follows that the market, even at this low point, has a roughly 50/50 chance of going lower/higher. As I say, unless you can see into the future you can`t predict markets unless you have insider knowledge in relation to a particular stock.
I think he's right about this. I also wonder if Hunt might be persuaded to come back to be the Virus czar. He seemed to be at important meetings the other day and interdepartmental organisation is going to be important here.
Absolutely right. Ministers’ petulant refusal to appear on the BBCis now risks being negligent and dangerous.
Is it the BBC generally, I thought it was just the Today program. Which frankly isn't missing non answers from Ministers very much. But whoever is fronting this needs to get the public messaging right and I think Hunt would be a good choice.
They’re not appearing on Newsnignt or WATO or the 5 pm news programme on Radio 4, as far as I can tell.
This is potentially serious and a government which puts its ego above the need to use all possible means of communication about this issue is providing another example of its essential frivolity and unseriousness.
Goodness me what nonsense. If there is a need to broadcast information surely social media/press announcements and national TV news would be the best way to get messages out rather than sily news conferences with journalists trying to score points just to satisfy their and other egos. Who the hell watches Newsnight or listens to the WATO anyway.?
He says that in Wuhan (so far), the coronavirus has only infected 5% of the population. That is, as he also says, massively different from the various predictions of 40-70% infection, which most epidemiologists advance.
It’s an encouraging point amidst the gloom.
However he fails to spell out how Wuhan has achieved this: with total lockdown of the entire population. And house arrest for 11m people.
This is less encouraging. It suggests that if we want to avoid apocalypse we have to accept universal imprisonment for several months. It may come to that.
As an epidemiologist who does some work on projections (not in infectious disease, so I'm no expert on this specifically), it's perhaps worth pointing out that, asked for projections with limited data, they'll almost certainly be doing realistic worst case scenarios (you can do that based on other epidemics and some basic assumptions). Sometimes you can also do a realistic best case scenario, but for COVID-19 in the UK, that is just some very small number (few people come in with the virus and they are successfully isolated). There simply isn't the data now (at least in the public domain, from what Ive seen) to make any stab at a most-likely scenario. So most of the estimates being produced (or at least the parts of them being publicised) are at the worst-case end of the scale (although entirely plausible if containment fails - and it could be worse than those if some of the assumptions are wrong). That does mean that over a large number of epidemics, most would come in under the headline estimates, although this one may not. Realistic worst-case is useful, as that's what's needed to make contingency plans, but the use in newspaper headlines does tend to make people think that the experts get it wrong or exaggerate (e.g. headlines about how many millions might die from CJD - the studies will have been based on how many were exposed and a - probably, as it turns out - high guess at the risk of infection).
South Korea and Italy will give a much better bound on what would be most likely to happen here, assuming we're approximately as competent in responding as they are.
Taking a hard headed view of it, the South Korean data on disease progression will be very good indeed in two or three weeks time. Because they have tested so widely, they will catch a very large proportion of the asymptomatic cases, so we'll get a much better handle on the percentage of infections which lead to serious complications, or death.
Yes you are absolutely right. But at the same time, it's a bit like a general getting excited over his percentage of losses in a battle. It's going to be horrible either way. The question is, how horrible?
But what we have is a second-order problem of people panicking about panic where there is not a lot of panic. We have a very, very big problem which justifies taking very, very big steps which might count as panic in other circs. I did something really panicky the other day, I SOLD ALL MY EQUITIES with the ftse at 7400 odd. What a twat: I have saved myself the price of a brand new Bentley and saddled myself with a CGT bill. If only I had kept calm and carried on.
What is really baffling is the attempt of the non-panickers to connect unrelated historical and prospective probabilities. If you think you are going to do x about coronavirus because the chances of dying in a road accident in country y are n%, you are doing this wrong.
Yes. I think this is the boy that cried wolf in reverse. As most panics are misplaced, there are lots of 'clever' people who can make hay from saying 'don't worry this is fine'. They don't do this on a case by case basis by assessing risk or thinking, they do it as a heuristic as generally everything is fine. Cue the bad thing not happening, they look clever, say I told you so and we all go home.
But what happens when all those clever people get it wrong and something bad does happen?
Individually they look like cretins but no one cares by then because the shit has hit the fan.
But what we have is a second-order problem of people panicking about panic where there is not a lot of panic. We have a very, very big problem which justifies taking very, very big steps which might count as panic in other circs. I did something really panicky the other day, I SOLD ALL MY EQUITIES with the ftse at 7400 odd. What a twat: I have saved myself the price of a brand new Bentley and saddled myself with a CGT bill. If only I had kept calm and carried on.
What is really baffling is the attempt of the non-panickers to connect unrelated historical and prospective probabilities. If you think you are going to do x about coronavirus because the chances of dying in a road accident in country y are n%, you are doing this wrong.
It's a matter of keeping things in perspective and not running around like a headless chicken screaming 'panic everyone'. NB I'm not suggesting you are doing that.
The FT letter helps put a perspective on it. So do the comparisions with other risks such as road accidents.
There are experts working very hard on all aspects of this threat such as vaccines, new tests, control mechanisms, health resources etc. For the ordiunary citizen the thing to do is take sensible precautions, avoid crowds where possible, wash your hands and if you get symptoms self-isolate. But don't panic and don't encourage others to panic.
The economic damage I suspect will be greater than the health damage and it will be fuelled by panic.
Good for you selling out the FT at 7400. It doesn't make me feel any better.
I think he's right about this. I also wonder if Hunt might be persuaded to come back to be the Virus czar. He seemed to be at important meetings the other day and interdepartmental organisation is going to be important here.
Absolutely right. Ministers’ petulant refusal to appear on the BBCis now risks being negligent and dangerous.
Is it the BBC generally, I thought it was just the Today program. Which frankly isn't missing non answers from Ministers very much. But whoever is fronting this needs to get the public messaging right and I think Hunt would be a good choice.
They’re not appearing on Newsnignt or WATO or the 5 pm news programme on Radio 4, as far as I can tell.
This is potentially serious and a government which puts its ego above the need to use all possible means of communication about this issue is providing another example of its essential frivolity and unseriousness.
Goodness me what nonsense. If there is a need to broadcast information surely social media/press announcements and national TV news would be the best way to get messages out rather than sily news conferences with journalists trying to score points just to satisfy their and other egos. Who the hell watches Newsnight or listens to the WATO anyway.?
Politics will sort it out anyway. You can get away with hiding from the media when you're 20% up in the polls because by definition, the opposition's either useless or absent (or both), and you can afford to give them a free run because they'll probably either fall flat on their face, run in the wrong direction or lovingly gaze at the grass.
But it's a different issue when you're 10% behind in the polls, the opposition is focusing on the right issues, asking the right questions and the public are watching (or listening). That produces a feedback effect where the public see, and have contempt for, a bunker mentality.
Amongst other things, that analysis is a very fine example of scientific writing in plain but lucid English prose, entirely accessible to the intelligent layman.
It also suggests he knows whereof he speaks. We cannot rely on warmer skies.
In the last 7 years, the time that PB vanilla comments have been stored, the word "whereof" has only been used about 25 times. Can you guess who used the word more than half of those times?
I must be the only person buying stocks at the moment..
Err, no you're not. It is one of the Stock market illusions aided by the media. For every seller there is a buyer and the same number of shares at the end of the day as there was at the start.
Well, quite. And price balances it out.
It would have been more accurate to say I’m the only one (on here) willing to talk about buying stock.
I have bought a couple , but my existing ones are down a bundle
Comments
The biggest risk to our motor industry is an over reliance on petrol/diesel and the technological disruption that is ongoing. Companies that have been investing in the UK with electric technologies have continued to invest in the UK.
The government is in charge so its health and other Ministers need to be out front and centre communicating with the public. That is their job, for God’s sake!
It suggests that the numbers of cases will continue to rise dramatically over the next few days, as the backlog is cleared - but most of those will be confirmation of infections which has already taken place, rather than new infections occurring.
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2020/02/119_285251.html
Across the nation, local governments and hospitals have launched an easier and faster testing method -- "drive-thru" test centers that allow a driver with symptoms to get a test inside his or her car. The whole test procedure takes about 10 minutes, and such facilities are also aimed at helping protect health workers.
South Korea has released 26 fully recovered novel coronavirus patients from hospitals as of Friday morning, the KCDC said.
The number of people being checked for the virus and under quarantine came to 24,751, it added. The country has tested a total of 68,918 suspected cases, with 44,167 testing negative....
Just think of the opportunity cost of all that wasted time and weep.
Absolute fools.
Because they have tested so widely, they will catch a very large proportion of the asymptomatic cases, so we'll get a much better handle on the percentage of infections which lead to serious complications, or death.
I am mainly at the moment referring to the economic global tsunami.
We are in terra incognita.
What is really baffling is the attempt of the non-panickers to connect unrelated historical and prospective probabilities. If you think you are going to do x about coronavirus because the chances of dying in a road accident in country y are n%, you are doing this wrong.
Sleepy.
If you caught this right, and I mean the markets not the virus, you could make an absolute killing. Selling a fortnight ago and buying at bottom will yield huge profits. The problem is this: whilst I correctly called the crash, what I don't have any real idea about is when the bottom will be reached. It could be next week. Or it could be next month. Or it could be next winter. Those scenarios probably equate to falls from the current level of 5%, 15% or 55% and you could make a plausible argument for all three.
If it's a swab could the Gov't do a mass mailout ?
And quantify the damage to the economy and society which you are willing to accept to avoid it.
Unless you intend to sell shortly this will be ancient history before you need to sell, no matter how bad it gets.
Where's that Russia report?
Who paid for Johnson's Xmas holiday?
Why has he taken over the Treasury?
What happened to his pledge to raise the 40p threshold?
Whither the fiscal rules?
The more general point, I agree with entirely.
Share prices are purely a function of supply and demand for each particular share. Neither fund managers nor anyone else have a clue which way prices will move (unless they are insider trading or have a crystal ball).
If you have money in a (non final salary) pension scheme or stocks and shares ISA or the like your wealth has plummeted this week.
As others have pointed out, the market was arguably already way over invested, especially the DOW, even before the coronavirus. The DOW is now only down to its level last August. Could fall a lot lower ....
This is not a plague, its a new variant of influenza that we have no herd immunity to. Worst case scenario its a bad flu season then we develop a vaccine and herd immunity.
Inaccurate numbers out of China are far more likely to be so because of the deficiencies in testing. It's simply not something they were prepared for.
What will be interesting over the next month or so will be the serology results from testing the 'unaffected' population for antibodies against the virus (they have only just started this on a large scale). It will give a much better idea of the numbers of undiagnosed infected/recovered.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/27/huge-crowds-expected-for-greta-thunberg-visit-to-bristol
This thread has crashed
Of course you can bet that way, and some people do.
But there are opportunities for money to be made by anticipating trends, trying to judge when particular positions are overbought or oversold, and very many PB'ers trade the political markets that way. The same is true of financial markets.
Your assets have a particular value each day (each second even). If you buy a share, or property or any other asset, and it rises in value, this rise is "real" in that it can be liquidated at that point for the current value (less leech fees). If you die, your estate is valued at the value of your assets at the time, not at the purchase price. When you buy a car and it depreciates, you can`t say "my car is worth the purchase price until the day I sell it".
PB is not at its best when moonlighting as an investment forum, so I will just say this and leave it there: the fact that a market has halved doesn't by any means guarantee it will not halve again. The big swinging dick stuff about blood on the streets, others are fearful etc is useless because it doesn't specify how fearful, or how much blood. Going back into this market before it has stabilised for a minimum of six months might make you a fortune but it iwould be a very, very, very high risk thing to do.
NEW THREAD
That’s not what courage or stoicism is: it’s when you put in a brave face and carry on even though you’re scared. You've thought about it, considered it, and put it to the back of their minds so you can carry on.
You seem to think the only honest way to behave is to openly emote to everyone else your fears. Everyone feels the same way, and it doesn’t help. It just pisses people off and undermines their resilience.
It’s a good job you’re not a leader. You’d be shite. If it were up to me I’d temporarily ban you until you learned to dial down the panic.
Sorry.
It follows that the market, even at this low point, has a roughly 50/50 chance of going lower/higher. As I say, unless you can see into the future you can`t predict markets unless you have insider knowledge in relation to a particular stock.
South Korea and Italy will give a much better bound on what would be most likely to happen here, assuming we're approximately as competent in responding as they are.
But what happens when all those clever people get it wrong and something bad does happen?
Individually they look like cretins but no one cares by then because the shit has hit the fan.
For this see the 2008 financial crash etc etc.
The FT letter helps put a perspective on it. So do the comparisions with other risks such as road accidents.
There are experts working very hard on all aspects of this threat such as vaccines, new tests, control mechanisms, health resources etc. For the ordiunary citizen the thing to do is take sensible precautions, avoid crowds where possible, wash your hands and if you get symptoms self-isolate. But don't panic and don't encourage others to panic.
The economic damage I suspect will be greater than the health damage and it will be fuelled by panic.
Good for you selling out the FT at 7400. It doesn't make me feel any better.
But it's a different issue when you're 10% behind in the polls, the opposition is focusing on the right issues, asking the right questions and the public are watching (or listening). That produces a feedback effect where the public see, and have contempt for, a bunker mentality.