A few weeks ago I mentioned in passing that I felt sorry for young investors just getting starting who listen to CNBC and read Yahoo!Finance to get a feel for the market. Wow, it's my impression that they, especially CNBC, consistently try to "talk the market down ... asking over and over what could "hurt the market.
I saw that again yesterday afternoon. Thirty minutes before the close the Dow had a 210-point swing, going from minus 40 to plus 170. Anyone paying attention knew a) the short term explanation; and, b) the long term implications -- both huge bullish signs. And yet, CNBC continued to try to talk the market down, suggesting this was a one-off. I was eagerly waiting to see what Jim Cramer would say. Surprisingly, he didn't mention a thing for rhe first ten minutes. I turned him off and went back to reading.
Then this on Finance!Yahoo which was posted in response to the 210-point swing, again, scaring novice investors, suggesting that the 210-point swing was reason for more caution, now more than ever:
Up, NASDAQ and S&P 500 are down after a great day yesterday -- not surprisng to see some profit-taking, but the Dow -- even if it is irrelevant as ever -- is up over 50 points in pre-market trading.
Yes, NASDAQ = tech, but I can't get too excited based on what I'm seeing in pre-market trading. By the way, XLNX -- a tech stock -- specialty chips -- see above -- was up almost 8% when Yahoo!Finance warned investors about tech today. In pre-market trading now, XLNX is up 6.66% -- oh, oh -- the sign of the beast. LOL.
Yahoo!Finance suggests troubles at Facebook (down 24% yesterday) -- and stable this morning -- will mean the same for the rest of the tech industry. I won't argue that Facebook fits in this space, but to me, Facebook is "social media," not "tech."
Disclaimer: this is not an investment site. Do not make any investment, financial, job, travel, or relationship decisions based on what you read here or what you think you may have read here.
A Note For My Wife
This is pretty funny, sent to me by a reader, based on recent conversations and notes on the blog.
We were talking about primogeniture.
My wif'e's current heartthrob -- okay, he competes with David Muir (ABC News) for that "right of honor -- is Benedict Cumberbatch. From wiki:
As a legitimated grandson of the sovereign, John Beaufort bore the arms of the kingdom, differenced by a bordure gobony argent and azure [border panels of silver and blue].
The family emblem featuring the portcullis was shown on the reverse of British pennies minted between 1971 and 2008. According to genealogists, a few of Beaufort's notable descendants include British actor Benedict Cumberbatch and codebreaker Alan Turing.
Coincidentally, Cumberbatch portrayed Turing in the film The Imitation Game.Don't get me started.
Benedict Cumberbatch made his mark in of my favorite movies, one I re-watch several times a year, sometimes several times a month: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, perhaps the greatest love story of all time.
Both my wife and I enjoyed The Imitation Game. She enjoyed it more than I but that was probably because not only was it a great story/movie, but it starred her heartthrob.
The Beauforts figured frequently into the royal histories portrayed by William Shakespeare, and will eventually lead one to the "real" William Shakespeare.
I've read much on this Shakespearian history -- most of my notes are off-line but one note that I never got around to finishing is here: "Blood Sisters: The Women Behind the Wars of Roses."
"The arms of the kingdom" also plays a key part in Shakespearian histories. Shakespeare knew more about cannon and the making of cannon than anyone -- other than those actually involved in the art and industry of cannon-making.