[temeculaguy]

[quote=desmond][quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=temeculaguy]
If I predict that the house you are in will burn down and tell you to run to your neighbors house to be safe, then both your house and the neighbors house burn down, am I genius?[/quote]

Well said ![/quote]

Without all the government intervention he would have been right now, he will be right later.[/quote]

Desmond, that doesn’t make any sense. Government intervention prevented Peter from being right? Do you understand what the analogy was in reference to. Blaming governemnt intervention has become bear mantra that it used as an excuse for anything that doesn’t go as predicted. It is becoming as tired as “real estate never goes down” did during the boom, repeating cliches and plattitudes is not an argument.

Here in a nutshell is what Peter said:

Sell all your U.S. stocks and get rid of all your U.S. real estate and cash. Buy European and Asian stocks and currency because the U.S. will “decouple” from the rest of the world. The U.S. will have a recession while the rest of the world will not, the world doesn’t need the U.S.

Because a component of that thesis was correct doesn’t make it a good plan. It turned out the world went down with us, converting your holdings got you nowhere, the link to mich’s column showed that it actually did worse. In another analogy, someone predicted that ford stock would tank so they told you to sell your ford and buy Gm, turns out they both tanked and gm tanked worse, so you get no brownie points for calling the demise of ford stock because your advice offered no better and in some respects a worse return.

Now how did the government intervention tank the decoupling theory. Did Obama make the asian and euro markets go down?

[temeculaguy]

[quote=desmond][quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=temeculaguy]
If I predict that the house you are in will burn down and tell you to run to your neighbors house to be safe, then both your house and the neighbors house burn down, am I genius?[/quote]

Well said ![/quote]

Without all the government intervention he would have been right now, he will be right later.[/quote]

Desmond, that doesn’t make any sense. Government intervention prevented Peter from being right? Do you understand what the analogy was in reference to. Blaming governemnt intervention has become bear mantra that it used as an excuse for anything that doesn’t go as predicted. It is becoming as tired as “real estate never goes down” did during the boom, repeating cliches and plattitudes is not an argument.

Here in a nutshell is what Peter said:

Sell all your U.S. stocks and get rid of all your U.S. real estate and cash. Buy European and Asian stocks and currency because the U.S. will “decouple” from the rest of the world. The U.S. will have a recession while the rest of the world will not, the world doesn’t need the U.S.

Because a component of that thesis was correct doesn’t make it a good plan. It turned out the world went down with us, converting your holdings got you nowhere, the link to mich’s column showed that it actually did worse. In another analogy, someone predicted that ford stock would tank so they told you to sell your ford and buy Gm, turns out they both tanked and gm tanked worse, so you get no brownie points for calling the demise of ford stock because your advice offered no better and in some respects a worse return.

Now how did the government intervention tank the decoupling theory. Did Obama make the asian and euro markets go down?

[temeculaguy]

[quote=desmond][quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=temeculaguy]
If I predict that the house you are in will burn down and tell you to run to your neighbors house to be safe, then both your house and the neighbors house burn down, am I genius?[/quote]

Well said ![/quote]

Without all the government intervention he would have been right now, he will be right later.[/quote]

Desmond, that doesn’t make any sense. Government intervention prevented Peter from being right? Do you understand what the analogy was in reference to. Blaming governemnt intervention has become bear mantra that it used as an excuse for anything that doesn’t go as predicted. It is becoming as tired as “real estate never goes down” did during the boom, repeating cliches and plattitudes is not an argument.

Here in a nutshell is what Peter said:

Sell all your U.S. stocks and get rid of all your U.S. real estate and cash. Buy European and Asian stocks and currency because the U.S. will “decouple” from the rest of the world. The U.S. will have a recession while the rest of the world will not, the world doesn’t need the U.S.

Because a component of that thesis was correct doesn’t make it a good plan. It turned out the world went down with us, converting your holdings got you nowhere, the link to mich’s column showed that it actually did worse. In another analogy, someone predicted that ford stock would tank so they told you to sell your ford and buy Gm, turns out they both tanked and gm tanked worse, so you get no brownie points for calling the demise of ford stock because your advice offered no better and in some respects a worse return.

Now how did the government intervention tank the decoupling theory. Did Obama make the asian and euro markets go down?

[temeculaguy]

[quote=desmond][quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=temeculaguy]
If I predict that the house you are in will burn down and tell you to run to your neighbors house to be safe, then both your house and the neighbors house burn down, am I genius?[/quote]

Well said ![/quote]

Without all the government intervention he would have been right now, he will be right later.[/quote]

Desmond, that doesn’t make any sense. Government intervention prevented Peter from being right? Do you understand what the analogy was in reference to. Blaming governemnt intervention has become bear mantra that it used as an excuse for anything that doesn’t go as predicted. It is becoming as tired as “real estate never goes down” did during the boom, repeating cliches and plattitudes is not an argument.

Here in a nutshell is what Peter said:

Sell all your U.S. stocks and get rid of all your U.S. real estate and cash. Buy European and Asian stocks and currency because the U.S. will “decouple” from the rest of the world. The U.S. will have a recession while the rest of the world will not, the world doesn’t need the U.S.

Because a component of that thesis was correct doesn’t make it a good plan. It turned out the world went down with us, converting your holdings got you nowhere, the link to mich’s column showed that it actually did worse. In another analogy, someone predicted that ford stock would tank so they told you to sell your ford and buy Gm, turns out they both tanked and gm tanked worse, so you get no brownie points for calling the demise of ford stock because your advice offered no better and in some respects a worse return.

Now how did the government intervention tank the decoupling theory. Did Obama make the asian and euro markets go down?

[temeculaguy]

We didn’t stop listening to him because he is sound, we stopped listening because he was mostly wrong. He got the housing and banking collapse correct (but he was not the first) yet he failed miserably in telling you where to put your money instead, decoupling never happened. A dow index fund would have beat his advice, if you can’t beat the monkey, your words begin to sound like charlie brown’s teacher to me.

Here’s Mish ripping him http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/01/peter-schiff-was-wrong.html

Now that he is running for political office, he becomes even less credible.

If I predict that the house you are in will burn down and tell you to run to your neighbors house to be safe, then both your house and the neighbors house burn down, am I genius?

[temeculaguy]

We didn’t stop listening to him because he is sound, we stopped listening because he was mostly wrong. He got the housing and banking collapse correct (but he was not the first) yet he failed miserably in telling you where to put your money instead, decoupling never happened. A dow index fund would have beat his advice, if you can’t beat the monkey, your words begin to sound like charlie brown’s teacher to me.

Here’s Mish ripping him http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/01/peter-schiff-was-wrong.html

Now that he is running for political office, he becomes even less credible.

If I predict that the house you are in will burn down and tell you to run to your neighbors house to be safe, then both your house and the neighbors house burn down, am I genius?

[temeculaguy]

We didn’t stop listening to him because he is sound, we stopped listening because he was mostly wrong. He got the housing and banking collapse correct (but he was not the first) yet he failed miserably in telling you where to put your money instead, decoupling never happened. A dow index fund would have beat his advice, if you can’t beat the monkey, your words begin to sound like charlie brown’s teacher to me.

Here’s Mish ripping him http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/01/peter-schiff-was-wrong.html

Now that he is running for political office, he becomes even less credible.

If I predict that the house you are in will burn down and tell you to run to your neighbors house to be safe, then both your house and the neighbors house burn down, am I genius?

[temeculaguy]

We didn’t stop listening to him because he is sound, we stopped listening because he was mostly wrong. He got the housing and banking collapse correct (but he was not the first) yet he failed miserably in telling you where to put your money instead, decoupling never happened. A dow index fund would have beat his advice, if you can’t beat the monkey, your words begin to sound like charlie brown’s teacher to me.

Here’s Mish ripping him http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/01/peter-schiff-was-wrong.html

Now that he is running for political office, he becomes even less credible.

If I predict that the house you are in will burn down and tell you to run to your neighbors house to be safe, then both your house and the neighbors house burn down, am I genius?

[temeculaguy]

We didn’t stop listening to him because he is sound, we stopped listening because he was mostly wrong. He got the housing and banking collapse correct (but he was not the first) yet he failed miserably in telling you where to put your money instead, decoupling never happened. A dow index fund would have beat his advice, if you can’t beat the monkey, your words begin to sound like charlie brown’s teacher to me.

Here’s Mish ripping him http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/01/peter-schiff-was-wrong.html

Now that he is running for political office, he becomes even less credible.

If I predict that the house you are in will burn down and tell you to run to your neighbors house to be safe, then both your house and the neighbors house burn down, am I genius?

[temeculaguy]

The problem with the question is that there is no answer. If you asked me how long do you have to date a woman before she sleeps with you, I’d give you same answer as to how long it takes to foreclose…..it varies. I’ve seen people go 6 months from missed payment to curbside and others sitting there twelve months without a notice of trustee sale or extensions, while some don’t get an extension. The ones I know of that have lasted longer just got lucky, their lender went under and after being seized by the fdic, another bank bought them, so the paper trail was probably a nightmare. We’ve had posters show up on the boards who are angry they are being tossed out in 4 or 5 months, that they aren’t getting the free year they thought they would, some even wondered if the had some recourse for getting jipped.

I even know a guy who lost his job and owned two houses, stopped paying for both on the same day, but they were with two different lenders. One was taken back inside of six months (credit union), he still doesn’t have a notice of default on the other and it is nearing 10 months without a payment (subprime lender now defunct). Same guy, same scenario, same start day for missing payments, different banks, wildly different results.

My guess is that the lenders that took over some of the failed lenders are the ones with the more difficult task and are likely the slower ones to foreclose.

[temeculaguy]

The problem with the question is that there is no answer. If you asked me how long do you have to date a woman before she sleeps with you, I’d give you same answer as to how long it takes to foreclose…..it varies. I’ve seen people go 6 months from missed payment to curbside and others sitting there twelve months without a notice of trustee sale or extensions, while some don’t get an extension. The ones I know of that have lasted longer just got lucky, their lender went under and after being seized by the fdic, another bank bought them, so the paper trail was probably a nightmare. We’ve had posters show up on the boards who are angry they are being tossed out in 4 or 5 months, that they aren’t getting the free year they thought they would, some even wondered if the had some recourse for getting jipped.

I even know a guy who lost his job and owned two houses, stopped paying for both on the same day, but they were with two different lenders. One was taken back inside of six months (credit union), he still doesn’t have a notice of default on the other and it is nearing 10 months without a payment (subprime lender now defunct). Same guy, same scenario, same start day for missing payments, different banks, wildly different results.

My guess is that the lenders that took over some of the failed lenders are the ones with the more difficult task and are likely the slower ones to foreclose.

[temeculaguy]

The problem with the question is that there is no answer. If you asked me how long do you have to date a woman before she sleeps with you, I’d give you same answer as to how long it takes to foreclose…..it varies. I’ve seen people go 6 months from missed payment to curbside and others sitting there twelve months without a notice of trustee sale or extensions, while some don’t get an extension. The ones I know of that have lasted longer just got lucky, their lender went under and after being seized by the fdic, another bank bought them, so the paper trail was probably a nightmare. We’ve had posters show up on the boards who are angry they are being tossed out in 4 or 5 months, that they aren’t getting the free year they thought they would, some even wondered if the had some recourse for getting jipped.

I even know a guy who lost his job and owned two houses, stopped paying for both on the same day, but they were with two different lenders. One was taken back inside of six months (credit union), he still doesn’t have a notice of default on the other and it is nearing 10 months without a payment (subprime lender now defunct). Same guy, same scenario, same start day for missing payments, different banks, wildly different results.

My guess is that the lenders that took over some of the failed lenders are the ones with the more difficult task and are likely the slower ones to foreclose.

[temeculaguy]

The problem with the question is that there is no answer. If you asked me how long do you have to date a woman before she sleeps with you, I’d give you same answer as to how long it takes to foreclose…..it varies. I’ve seen people go 6 months from missed payment to curbside and others sitting there twelve months without a notice of trustee sale or extensions, while some don’t get an extension. The ones I know of that have lasted longer just got lucky, their lender went under and after being seized by the fdic, another bank bought them, so the paper trail was probably a nightmare. We’ve had posters show up on the boards who are angry they are being tossed out in 4 or 5 months, that they aren’t getting the free year they thought they would, some even wondered if the had some recourse for getting jipped.

I even know a guy who lost his job and owned two houses, stopped paying for both on the same day, but they were with two different lenders. One was taken back inside of six months (credit union), he still doesn’t have a notice of default on the other and it is nearing 10 months without a payment (subprime lender now defunct). Same guy, same scenario, same start day for missing payments, different banks, wildly different results.

My guess is that the lenders that took over some of the failed lenders are the ones with the more difficult task and are likely the slower ones to foreclose.

[temeculaguy]

The problem with the question is that there is no answer. If you asked me how long do you have to date a woman before she sleeps with you, I’d give you same answer as to how long it takes to foreclose…..it varies. I’ve seen people go 6 months from missed payment to curbside and others sitting there twelve months without a notice of trustee sale or extensions, while some don’t get an extension. The ones I know of that have lasted longer just got lucky, their lender went under and after being seized by the fdic, another bank bought them, so the paper trail was probably a nightmare. We’ve had posters show up on the boards who are angry they are being tossed out in 4 or 5 months, that they aren’t getting the free year they thought they would, some even wondered if the had some recourse for getting jipped.

I even know a guy who lost his job and owned two houses, stopped paying for both on the same day, but they were with two different lenders. One was taken back inside of six months (credit union), he still doesn’t have a notice of default on the other and it is nearing 10 months without a payment (subprime lender now defunct). Same guy, same scenario, same start day for missing payments, different banks, wildly different results.

My guess is that the lenders that took over some of the failed lenders are the ones with the more difficult task and are likely the slower ones to foreclose.

[temeculaguy]

I am not exactly sure because the $15-$20 stuff doesn’t really hold back very long, usually it’s about two years old when it hits the shelf at those prices. It was December 2007 when I first had it, so maybe a 2005 + or – one year?? more than likely you can only get 07’s right now, it’s not the kind of stuff that gets held by dealers or is designed to age. I’ve had some recently, still to my liking but not as good as when I first had it, but that happens with more things than just wine. In that price point, wines are triangle tasted and blended to match prior vintages pretty closely, as you go up in price the vintage matters more and the quality swing is greater.

Why, are you going to a blind tasting party? If you are, let me know how it does.

[Author]

Posts