Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Why is the market still going up?
- This topic has 80 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 11 months ago by maktbone.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 14, 2010 at 9:06 AM #16910January 14, 2010 at 10:08 AM #502115XBoxBoyParticipant
Threadkiller, you seem to be suffering from the misconception that prices of stocks are linked to the underlying fundamentals of the company. While that may seem like a reasonable idea, it just isn’t so. And before you venture into the world of wall street trading I highly recommend that you get past this line of thinking.
Stock prices instead are based on what traders think other traders will pay for the stock in the near future. Typically, when a company buys another company and then lays off a bunch of workers, that stock will bounce. I’ll leave it to others to argue if this makes business sense or not, but to me it doesn’t matter. This is what is routine and so this is what happens.
XBoxBoy
January 14, 2010 at 10:08 AM #503006XBoxBoyParticipantThreadkiller, you seem to be suffering from the misconception that prices of stocks are linked to the underlying fundamentals of the company. While that may seem like a reasonable idea, it just isn’t so. And before you venture into the world of wall street trading I highly recommend that you get past this line of thinking.
Stock prices instead are based on what traders think other traders will pay for the stock in the near future. Typically, when a company buys another company and then lays off a bunch of workers, that stock will bounce. I’ll leave it to others to argue if this makes business sense or not, but to me it doesn’t matter. This is what is routine and so this is what happens.
XBoxBoy
January 14, 2010 at 10:08 AM #502755XBoxBoyParticipantThreadkiller, you seem to be suffering from the misconception that prices of stocks are linked to the underlying fundamentals of the company. While that may seem like a reasonable idea, it just isn’t so. And before you venture into the world of wall street trading I highly recommend that you get past this line of thinking.
Stock prices instead are based on what traders think other traders will pay for the stock in the near future. Typically, when a company buys another company and then lays off a bunch of workers, that stock will bounce. I’ll leave it to others to argue if this makes business sense or not, but to me it doesn’t matter. This is what is routine and so this is what happens.
XBoxBoy
January 14, 2010 at 10:08 AM #502662XBoxBoyParticipantThreadkiller, you seem to be suffering from the misconception that prices of stocks are linked to the underlying fundamentals of the company. While that may seem like a reasonable idea, it just isn’t so. And before you venture into the world of wall street trading I highly recommend that you get past this line of thinking.
Stock prices instead are based on what traders think other traders will pay for the stock in the near future. Typically, when a company buys another company and then lays off a bunch of workers, that stock will bounce. I’ll leave it to others to argue if this makes business sense or not, but to me it doesn’t matter. This is what is routine and so this is what happens.
XBoxBoy
January 14, 2010 at 10:08 AM #502261XBoxBoyParticipantThreadkiller, you seem to be suffering from the misconception that prices of stocks are linked to the underlying fundamentals of the company. While that may seem like a reasonable idea, it just isn’t so. And before you venture into the world of wall street trading I highly recommend that you get past this line of thinking.
Stock prices instead are based on what traders think other traders will pay for the stock in the near future. Typically, when a company buys another company and then lays off a bunch of workers, that stock will bounce. I’ll leave it to others to argue if this makes business sense or not, but to me it doesn’t matter. This is what is routine and so this is what happens.
XBoxBoy
January 14, 2010 at 10:12 AM #502760CoronitaParticipantWell, the other angle is “cost-cutting” to drive up short term profits is
a)bad news for employees
b)good news for shareholders
If in doubt, just look at HP and talk to some former employees there.
However, cost-cutting because company is totally foobared/screwed after posting hefty losses generally is not good news for anyone….
Also, short term stock movements appear to be more sentiment driven than any other rationale.
Anyone want to bet today Intel’s going to report good profits, but wall street will be disappointed because although they probably will beat estimates, they didn’t beat “whisper” numbers or some B.S. like that. Me thinks the run-up in the chip sector is about over, short of something spectacular from intel
January 14, 2010 at 10:12 AM #502266CoronitaParticipantWell, the other angle is “cost-cutting” to drive up short term profits is
a)bad news for employees
b)good news for shareholders
If in doubt, just look at HP and talk to some former employees there.
However, cost-cutting because company is totally foobared/screwed after posting hefty losses generally is not good news for anyone….
Also, short term stock movements appear to be more sentiment driven than any other rationale.
Anyone want to bet today Intel’s going to report good profits, but wall street will be disappointed because although they probably will beat estimates, they didn’t beat “whisper” numbers or some B.S. like that. Me thinks the run-up in the chip sector is about over, short of something spectacular from intel
January 14, 2010 at 10:12 AM #502119CoronitaParticipantWell, the other angle is “cost-cutting” to drive up short term profits is
a)bad news for employees
b)good news for shareholders
If in doubt, just look at HP and talk to some former employees there.
However, cost-cutting because company is totally foobared/screwed after posting hefty losses generally is not good news for anyone….
Also, short term stock movements appear to be more sentiment driven than any other rationale.
Anyone want to bet today Intel’s going to report good profits, but wall street will be disappointed because although they probably will beat estimates, they didn’t beat “whisper” numbers or some B.S. like that. Me thinks the run-up in the chip sector is about over, short of something spectacular from intel
January 14, 2010 at 10:12 AM #502667CoronitaParticipantWell, the other angle is “cost-cutting” to drive up short term profits is
a)bad news for employees
b)good news for shareholders
If in doubt, just look at HP and talk to some former employees there.
However, cost-cutting because company is totally foobared/screwed after posting hefty losses generally is not good news for anyone….
Also, short term stock movements appear to be more sentiment driven than any other rationale.
Anyone want to bet today Intel’s going to report good profits, but wall street will be disappointed because although they probably will beat estimates, they didn’t beat “whisper” numbers or some B.S. like that. Me thinks the run-up in the chip sector is about over, short of something spectacular from intel
January 14, 2010 at 10:12 AM #503011CoronitaParticipantWell, the other angle is “cost-cutting” to drive up short term profits is
a)bad news for employees
b)good news for shareholders
If in doubt, just look at HP and talk to some former employees there.
However, cost-cutting because company is totally foobared/screwed after posting hefty losses generally is not good news for anyone….
Also, short term stock movements appear to be more sentiment driven than any other rationale.
Anyone want to bet today Intel’s going to report good profits, but wall street will be disappointed because although they probably will beat estimates, they didn’t beat “whisper” numbers or some B.S. like that. Me thinks the run-up in the chip sector is about over, short of something spectacular from intel
January 14, 2010 at 10:13 AM #502129DataAgentParticipantWhen Company A buys Company B, people costs are reduced ie. no need for two accounting depts. This cost reduction usually results in increased profit. And increased profit will usually increase share price.
If you like dividend-paying companies that are currently hiring people, look at utility companies. Sempra Energy – Ticker: SRE (parent of San Diego Gas & Electric) is a utility company.
January 14, 2010 at 10:13 AM #502276DataAgentParticipantWhen Company A buys Company B, people costs are reduced ie. no need for two accounting depts. This cost reduction usually results in increased profit. And increased profit will usually increase share price.
If you like dividend-paying companies that are currently hiring people, look at utility companies. Sempra Energy – Ticker: SRE (parent of San Diego Gas & Electric) is a utility company.
January 14, 2010 at 10:13 AM #502770DataAgentParticipantWhen Company A buys Company B, people costs are reduced ie. no need for two accounting depts. This cost reduction usually results in increased profit. And increased profit will usually increase share price.
If you like dividend-paying companies that are currently hiring people, look at utility companies. Sempra Energy – Ticker: SRE (parent of San Diego Gas & Electric) is a utility company.
January 14, 2010 at 10:13 AM #502677DataAgentParticipantWhen Company A buys Company B, people costs are reduced ie. no need for two accounting depts. This cost reduction usually results in increased profit. And increased profit will usually increase share price.
If you like dividend-paying companies that are currently hiring people, look at utility companies. Sempra Energy – Ticker: SRE (parent of San Diego Gas & Electric) is a utility company.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.