My colleague (sort of) James Cramer has suddenly turned into a giant, growling bear. He has been moving in that direction for a few months and now he thinks we all should go into hibernation for five years. He is so wrong!
First of all, it is never a good idea to make decisions while you are in panic mode. Second, Jim's guidance is moving with the market so he is not making any serious prognostication, just staying slightly ahead of the mob. He might as well stick his finger in the air.
Are things bad? Yes! Could they get worse? Yes! Would I run for the hills? ABSOLUTELY NOT! Even though I agree we are in for some tough times, I think the market is reacting to more than meets the eye (see All bets are off -- stocks' irrational downside).
If I recall correctly, 50% of the significant gains in the Dow Jones Industrial Average were made on 7% of the up days. You have to be in the game to win the game. If you are in panic mode you should alter your investment portfolio so that you can rest easy. Diversification helps and speculation hurts.
Most people who have been investing for any length of time have heard of dollar cost averaging. This is where you put a certain amount of money into an index fund regularly each month, so that when the market is up you are buying fewer shares at higher prices and when the market is on sale, like it may be today, you are buying more shares at a lower price. This allows you to grow your portfolio consistently while paying a reasonable price for the shares you add -- on average.
There is a lot of bad news affecting the stock market and prices are falling for some very important reasons. These include reduced expectations for earnings, higher unemployment, a lack of liquidity, a housing market that has not bottomed yet, federal spending gone wild, and the collapse of some venerable financial institutions to name a select few.
The Standard & Poor's 500 Index: started the year (Dec 28, 2007) at 1,478.49 and as of Friday October 3 it was 1,099.23, down 25.7%.
There are concerns about recession and even a depression and the global market for most commodities has softened.
Given all this how can I believe that the market is becoming irrational to the downside and values abound?
For one reason I know that many people are selling stocks out of fear of the market going lower and they do not want to be the last one out of the pool. That is a legitimate reason to sell but has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of a company or stock. If the index is being sold off then that means the good are being sold along with the bad.
Another factor pressuring the market relates directly to tight liquidity. I recently refinanced my home and the bank wanted me to reduce my home equity line to comply with its much tighter lending requirements. I sold some stock to accommodate them but this had nothing to do with stock valuations. I also sold some stocks and funds to buy down a commercial real estate loan in the past month. I had no pressure to do so because the loan to value is very low, but we are looking to acquire additional property as distress sales turn up and want to keep our powder dry.
Many people have been allowing their credit card debts to increase but facing little hope of growth in the stock market; those that can are selling stocks to buy down their debts where they can. This too has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of the stocks they are selling.
In an interview with Reuters, Senator John McCain mentioned Warren Buffett and former eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY) CEO Meg Whitman as possible choices to succeed Hank Paulson as Treasury secretary: "I think it would be someone that Americans would recognize that would inspire trust and confidence. There's people like (Cisco chief executive) John Chambers, there's people like Meg Whitman, there's people like Warren Buffett."
That certainly would be interesting as, in addition to being the greatest financial mind in the world ever, Buffett is also a hardcore Democrat and a supporter of Senator Barack Obama.
It's also almost inconceivable that Buffett would leave Omaha and Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A) to go wrestle pigs in Washington. Buffett's pledge of substantially all of his fortune to the William and Melinda Gates Foundation demonstrates his commitment to charity and improving the world but there is nothing in Buffett's history to indicate he would want to spend his days devoted to matters of public policy: he enjoys investing.
So why would McCain bring it up? He probably just wants to look more competent and open-minded on matters of economic policy -- and name-dropping Buffett is easy because he knows nothing will ever come of it.
The market is bouncing around with every bit of news leaked from the Congress as well as company warnings and Federal reports. 'My pal Warren' is frequently being asked his opinion about the stock market and his 'stock answer' is that he ignores the overall market and its daily gyrations and focuses on individual investments and price (value).
Buffett drew plenty of attention this week when he invested $3 billion dollars in General Electric (NYSE: GE) preferred shares set at a permanent 10% return with a buyout clause allowing GE to get them back at a 10% premium. In addition Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A) received warrants to buy an additional $3 billion worth of stock anytime in the next five years at a strike price of $22.50.
The company recently announced that it would curtail its stock buyback plan in favor of maintaining its dividend and its rare Triple-A financial rating. Given the vote of confidence expressed by Buffett (he got a great deal again) and the dividend yield of about 5% this stock is just screaming at me to buy more, but at what price.
Well, I have no crystal ball, but if you can buy GE at something less then the BRK.A warrant price and below its ten- year price you have to at least give it consideration.
Even though GE warned that earnings would fall below expectations for the quarter, (they report October 10, 2008, in one week), they are still earning more than they were the last time they were at this price. As a matter of fact, the metrics are far better now than they have been, according to this weeks Barron's recent follow-up story dated September 29, 2008.
They report that revenue has gone from $13 per share in 2000 to $19 now; cash-flow has increased from $2.00 to $3.30; earnings are up from $1.29 a share to $2.00 and the dividend has escalated to $1.25 from $0.57, yet the stock is 50% off recent highs.
As I have stated many times in other stories, if you are looking for an alternative to bonds or low paying treasuries that will give you a very healthy yield and the potential of sizable appreciation GE is a place to look. And now you can call Warren Buffett partner...sort of.
UPDATE: GE closed today at $21.57. Disclosure: We bought in at $22.00.
Sheldon Liber is the CEO of a small private investment company and the principal for design and research at an architecture & planning firm. He writes the columns Chasing Value and Serious Money. Disclosure: I own shares of BRK.B & GE.
The Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffett, of Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A) spent a few moments on CNN answering some key questions about the economy at a Fortune Magazine Forum. He was asked where he would place the blame for the current financial crises being played out on the world stage, and he said he is not one to point fingers. There is plenty of blame to go around.
Initially Buffett quipped that "every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future." He went on to say that the everyone participated in the creation of the housing bubble with the unrealistic expectation that prices would continue to rise.
He summarized that home ownership is worshiped in the United States, and once cheap funding became available and prices started to rise there became the feeling that if you did not buy a home now you would be facing higher prices next year and perhaps less favorable interest rates as well.
Offering advice to Congress by phone, Warren Buffett had a message for lawmakers: act decisively now or face "the biggest financial meltdown in American history."
With all due respect to Warren Buffett, it seems a little bit self-serving. When he invested $5 billion in shares of Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) last week, Buffett told reporters that the investment was partly motivated by a belief that Washington would act quickly to allow Wall Street firms to dump their bad assets on taxpayers.
Therein lies the problem: the bailout will be a huge boon to equity holders in investment banks, and that's wrong. If a bailout is needed to save the economy from a depression, that's one thing, but it shouldn't be used to pump up share prices. As much as I love and respect Warren Buffett, I'm a little bit bothered by the fact that he stands to make billions from a bailout -- aren't there people more deserving of welfare? Of course, I don't blame him, but I do blame lawmakers for not pushing for huge equity stakes in the companies being offered cash for crap as part of the $700 billion plan.
Another question, one that I've raised before: if these "illiquid assets" are such a great deal, why is Warren buying stock in anticipation of a bailout instead of buying the bad mortgages?
Any smart gambler, amateur or professional, knows that you only risk what you can afford to lose. That may be $1, $100, $500, or even a million dollars in a real estate or other major transaction. But only a fool bets the farm. Only a fool risks all.
What made so many bright minds all around the world foolishly bet the farm? One after another, that is what they did. Now we are all paying for it, some more than others. It was not just greed. It was something else.
How did this happen? I call it 'The Great Disconnect'.
When the managers of public companies do not suffer the same fate or consequences as their shareholders you have a disconnect! When politicians give lip service to understanding the pain of their constituencies but accept huge contributions from the enterprises they are supposed to regulate and oversee creating gargantuan conflicts of interest, you have a great disconnect.
When investment houses create financial instruments that are so complex that they cannot fathom the risk and the ratings agencies put candy coated frosting on them, you have a great disconnect!
As Wall Street melts down, the world's richest go bargain shopping. They include Warren Buffett who just invested $5 billion in Goldman Sachs and Stephen Spielberg & Anil Ambani who are investing in American film industry.
With shares of Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) rallying on the news that Warren Buffett is investing $5 billion in the company, it's a good time to reexamine some of the conventional wisdom about the bailout.
The theory behind the need for $700 billion of your money to buy mortgage assets from the big banks is the notion that the market is illiquid and that the securities are not trading at rational prices. The banks are short of capital and if they were to liquidate those assets now, they'd be forced to accept fire sale prices, gravely threatening their ability to continue as going concerns.
So here's my question: if the market for subprime debt is so irrationally pessimistic, why doesn't Buffett take his $5 billion and go hunting there? Either Buffett doesn't think those assets are a good deal or he's stupid. I'll take a guess: Buffett isn't stupid. He's uncomfortable with the level of uncertainty surrounding those dog crap assets, and so is any other rational investor. So the banks can't sell them for what they need to, scream "illiquid market!", and Uncle Sam rushes in with the pacifier.
Here's what's so despicable about this plan: the $700 billion of taxpayer money will shore up the financials enough to allow one of the world's richest men to line his pockets even further. Warren Buffett has no greater fan than myself, but I don't think that we should be bailing out the financials for the benefit of people on the Forbes list.
It looks like Berkshire Hathaway Inc (NYSE: BRK.A) CEO Warren Buffett needs another bite of the big apple. Bloomberg News reports that last night Buffett bought a stake in The Goldman Sachs Group (NYSE: GS). Let's hope he has better luck with this investment than the last time he ventured into New York to buy an investment bank -- his 1987 buy of a stake in bond trader, Salomon Brothers. Back then, Buffett doubled his money in a decade -- and went through nine months of misery cleaning it up after a bond trading scandal.
But let's get back to the present -- what exactly did Buffet do with Goldman? He bought "$5 billion of perpetual preferred stock with a 10 percent dividend. Berkshire also gets warrants to buy $5 billion of common stock at $115 a share at any time in the next five years," according to Bloomberg. Goldman can buy Berkshire's preferred stock in Goldman "at any time at a 10 percent premium" and it yields a "10 percent dividend," according to Bloomberg.
Will this work out better for Buffett than his ill-fated Salomon Brothers deal? in September 1987, 21 years ago, Buffett bought "$700 million of Salomon convertible preferred stock -- pay[ing] 9% and convertible after three years into Salomon common stock at $38 a share--against the $30 for which the stock had been selling. This equated to a 12% stake in the company," according to Carol Loomis.
Consumers have plenty to worry about during a challenging economy, and making a wrong move in personal finances could make a bad situation worse. Obtaining cash through credit cards, retirement plans and home equity could end up being a costly quick fix. And complacency over personal investments and looming college costs could lead to missed opportunities for keeping hard-earned dollars. Here's how to avoid some common pitfalls during an economic downturn.
The market has been waiting for billionaire investor Warren Buffet's investment company Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A) to invest in a financial firm, and Buffet announced yesterday that he would invest $5 billion inGoldman Sachs (NYSE: GS).
The $5 billion will be used to purchase perpetual preferred stock bearing a 10 percent annual interest rate.
The move comes as Goldman is looking to raise $7.5 billion worth of fresh assets. In addition to the initial $5 billion investment, Berkshire also will be receive warrants to purchase an additional $5 billion worth of common stock in the company for $115 a share. The stock closed yesterday's trading at $125.05, and has jumped nearly 7% in after hours trading following this afternoon's announcement.
In the current market, it's certainly nice to be Warren Buffett. Many companies are looking for cash infusions, and of course, are making calls to the dealmaking guru.
So, recently Buffett reached a deal to purchase Constellation Energy Group (NYSE: CEG), which operates a variety of energy assets such as nuclear power plants, for $4.7 billion. To do this deal, Buffett used his MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co. vehicle, of which Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A) owns 80.5% of the common stock.
As should be no surprise, Buffett wasn't the only player interested in the deal. In fact, KKR, TPG and Electricité de France (EdF) made a bid for Constellation as well and were actually willing to offer 32% more.
But Constellation rejected the bid.
Not long ago this would have been an attractive bid, but in light of the credit crunch and botched deals, private equity firms have gotten a black eye.
Regulatory approval is also problematic, especially with the involvement of French based EdF. Although, Buffett has a track record as a long-term investor, which should allay fears.
Besides, Buffett quickly invested $1 billion into Constellation so as to stabilize things as the recent financial turmoil wreaked havoc on the company. In other words, he has a lot of leverage in this deal – even if rivals put together much higher bids.
This is my 800th post, so I thought I would have to mark the occasion with something very serious, and R. P. Overmyer once again supplied the kindling for my fire.
Many comments we receive ask why George W. Bush should be blamed for the dire state of the economy; that the President is just one more victim of circumstance. Others think the legislature should take the blame, or that it's a Democratic vs. Republican dilemma.
As I have tried to do in each of my posts that stray into politics, I will try my best to focus on the financial issues. If anyone cares, I tend to vote independent of party affiliation and tend to follow a moderate path. Interestingly each party tries to paint the other as more extremist in an attempt to get my vote.
The easy things first; the Republicans controlled the executive and legislative branches of government for the majority of GWB's term. It is true that the Democrats were less than cooperative these last 20 months and all too eager to watch Bush boil in his own stew, but for half that time everyone has been cooperating to make sure the financial markets do not collapse. All the blame should not fall on Bush or the Republicans, but I think it is not a hard case to make that the leadership and opportunity was theirs this go round and they screwed up -- he screwed up!
The world's wealthiest man threw a baseball to the most respected CEO of his generation. And it all happened last night in Boston, home of the 2007 World Champion Red Sox, according to CNBC.com.
CNBC reports that the pitch "was 'a little high and outside,' but it certainly didn't bounce four or five times before reaching the plate, as [CNBC thought he predicted] when he first told [CNBC] he'd be making his Fenway debut."
No comment was available on Welch's catching skills.
My colleague (sort of) James Cramer has suddenly turned into a giant, growling bear. He has been moving in that direction for a few months and now he thinks we all should go into hibernation for five years. He is so wrong! 
There is a lot of bad news affecting the stock market and prices are falling for some very important reasons. These include reduced expectations for earnings, higher unemployment, a lack of liquidity, a housing market that has not bottomed yet, federal spending gone wild, and the collapse of some venerable financial institutions to name a select few.
The market is bouncing around with every bit of news leaked from the Congress as well as company warnings and Federal reports. 'My pal Warren' is frequently being asked his opinion about the stock market and his 'stock answer' is that he ignores the overall market and its daily gyrations and focuses on individual investments and price (value).
The Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffett, of 
Any smart gambler, amateur or professional, knows that you only risk what you can afford to lose. That may be $1, $100, $500, or even a million dollars in a real estate or other major transaction. But only a fool bets the farm. Only a fool risks all.
With shares of 
It looks like 
The market has been waiting for billionaire investor Warren Buffet's investment company 
In the current market, it's certainly nice to be Warren Buffett. Many companies are looking for cash infusions, and of course, are making calls to the dealmaking guru.
and 
. He is also the founder of 
This is my 800th post, so I thought I would have to mark the occasion with something very serious, and R. P. Overmyer once again supplied the kindling for my fire.
The week in preview: Mulling over techs, financials
'Crash-and-burn economy?' 'Bailout beer bust?' What should we call America's economic disaster?
Yogi is right: Ninety percent of this (economics) game is half-mental
