price-to-earnings ratios and fundamental analysis

11 views
Skip to first unread message

kent...@hotmail.com

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 2:57:17 PM3/26/05
to
What is the formal economic theory of price-to-earnings ratios and
fundamental analysis?

This new academic paper is available for free download (PDF file) from
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=667781#PaperDownload

Roderick K.

Uncle Al

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 4:01:09 PM3/26/05
to
kent...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> What is the formal economic theory of price-to-earnings ratios and
> fundamental analysis?
[snip]

Insider trading is reserved for the ruling class as it has been since
the days of Joseph Kennedy. The broker makes his commission no matter
which way your investments slide. Uncle Al has never met a stock
broker who invested in stocks.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

CWatters

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 4:27:42 PM3/26/05
to

"Uncle Al" <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:4245CD95...@hate.spam.net...

> kent...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > What is the formal economic theory of price-to-earnings ratios and
> > fundamental analysis?
> [snip]
>
> Insider trading is reserved for the ruling class as it has been since
> the days of Joseph Kennedy. The broker makes his commission no matter
> which way your investments slide. Uncle Al has never met a stock
> broker who invested in stocks.

Well that's a load of twaddle. Even brokers have pensions.


OsherD

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 4:28:02 PM3/26/05
to
>From Osher Doctorow

I don't invest in stocks either, but the mathematics has resulted in
some important statistical and probabilistic discoveries. Criminology
also yields knowledge usable in other places. Should we stop studying
atomic explosion physics because Iran may develop nuclear weapons?

Osher Doctorow

Schoenfeld

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 7:52:29 PM3/26/05
to

kent...@hotmail.com wrote:
> What is the formal economic theory of price-to-earnings ratios and
> fundamental analysis?

The status quo is maintained by politics, not economics. PE ratios are
meaningless re GOOG. If you wanted my advice I would say to you that
you would not want to be in the stock market (except maybe gold) at
this point in time as catastrophic correction is imminent. Why? Well
fundamentally, the current account deficit is *NOT* factored into the
market. Just look at the share turn over - almost all of them every
month. A cursory glance at gold which has historically served as an
insurance policy for the ruling class and as a fear index trivially
reveals this. It'll all go down with Oil, which is extremely volatile
right now. When OPEC announces oil trades in Euro's, that's the end.

> This new academic paper is available for free download (PDF file)
from
>
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=667781#PaperDownload

Economics theory is a hidden variable theory.

> Roderick K.

Schoenfeld

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 7:54:40 PM3/26/05
to

Yeah, Gold Bullion.

ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 8:06:30 PM3/26/05
to

> Yeah, Gold Bullion.

And it would be a piss poor investment since the average price of gold
shows a general downward trend since the late 70's.

An ordinary passbook savings account would be a better investment many
times over.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove -spam-sux to reply.

schoe...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 8:36:09 PM3/26/05
to

ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com wrote:
> In sci.physics Schoenfeld <schoe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > CWatters wrote:
> > > "Uncle Al" <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
> > > news:4245CD95...@hate.spam.net...
> > > > kent...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > What is the formal economic theory of price-to-earnings
ratios
> > and
> > > > > fundamental analysis?
> > > > [snip]
> > > >
> > > > Insider trading is reserved for the ruling class as it has been
> > since
> > > > the days of Joseph Kennedy. The broker makes his commission no
> > matter
> > > > which way your investments slide. Uncle Al has never met a
stock
> > > > broker who invested in stocks.
> > >
> > > Well that's a load of twaddle. Even brokers have pensions.
>
> > Yeah, Gold Bullion.
>
> And it would be a piss poor investment since the average price of
gold
> shows a general downward trend since the late 70's.

The hidden variables of economics is politics. Things beneficial to
western oligarchs happened during those times. Had you been on the
other side, Gold investments would've withstood massive inflation and
comprehensive economic collapse. You're on that side now.

> An ordinary passbook savings account would be a better investment
many
> times over.

It's not quite that simple.

ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 9:57:56 PM3/26/05
to
In sci.physics schoe...@gmail.com wrote:

> ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com wrote:
> > In sci.physics Schoenfeld <schoe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >

<snip> <- Learn to do this.

> > > Yeah, Gold Bullion.
> >
> > And it would be a piss poor investment since the average price of
> gold
> > shows a general downward trend since the late 70's.

> The hidden variables of economics is politics. Things beneficial to
> western oligarchs happened during those times. Had you been on the
> other side, Gold investments would've withstood massive inflation and
> comprehensive economic collapse. You're on that side now.

Bunch of babble.

The price of gold was flat for almost 200 years.

The price started to rise in the early 70's, spiked in the late 70's,
and has been generally downward ever since.

Anyone who bought gold as a long term investment after about 1976 has
lost money.

If you wanted to make money on metals in this century, thallium or
rubidium would have been the smart buy; even copper would have been
better than gold.

> > An ordinary passbook savings account would be a better investment
> many
> > times over.

> It's not quite that simple.

Sure it is, but not to those that believe there is some magic to gold.

schoe...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 10:47:37 PM3/26/05
to

ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com wrote:
> In sci.physics schoe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com wrote:
> > > In sci.physics Schoenfeld <schoe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
>
> <snip> <- Learn to do this.
>
> > > > Yeah, Gold Bullion.
> > >
> > > And it would be a piss poor investment since the average price of
> > gold
> > > shows a general downward trend since the late 70's.
>
> > The hidden variables of economics is politics. Things beneficial to
> > western oligarchs happened during those times. Had you been on the
> > other side, Gold investments would've withstood massive inflation
and
> > comprehensive economic collapse. You're on that side now.
>
> Bunch of babble.
>
> The price of gold was flat for almost 200 years.

Paper money was denominated in gold back then.

> The price started to rise in the early 70's, spiked in the late 70's,
> and has been generally downward ever since.
>
> Anyone who bought gold as a long term investment after about 1976 has
> lost money.

I'm not speaking within the strict context of the US economy. For
example, were you an Argentinian Gold investor just 5 years ago, your
holdings wouldn't have suffered massive inflation or been subject to
liquidation restrictions from American banks. In fact, an Argentinian
gold investor would've become exponentially wealthier since his
liquidation value relative to the remainder of the populace would have
higher disparity.


> If you wanted to make money on metals in this century, thallium or
> rubidium would have been the smart buy; even copper would have been
> better than gold.

Gold is not about making money, it's about maintaing money's value.

ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com

unread,
Mar 26, 2005, 11:11:33 PM3/26/05
to
In sci.physics schoe...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip> <-- learn how to do this.


> Gold is not about making money, it's about maintaing money's value.

Then it is a big loser in modern times.

The old adage was that an ounce of gold will buy a really good man's
suit.

This was in fact true from the time of Shakespeare up until the 1980's.

Today, a really good man's suit can easily cost 4 ounces of gold.

So much for maintaing value.

<snip remaining>

ro...@telus.net

unread,
Mar 27, 2005, 12:17:52 PM3/27/05
to
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:01:09 -0800, Uncle Al <Uncl...@hate.spam.net>
wrote:

>Uncle Al has never met a stock
>broker who invested in stocks.

There is a lot of truth in this observation. And I have never met one
who didn't own land.

-- Roy L

Big Dog

unread,
Mar 27, 2005, 1:15:32 PM3/27/05
to
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:01:09 -0800, Uncle Al <Uncl...@hate.spam.net>
wrote:

>kent...@hotmail.com wrote:


>>
>> What is the formal economic theory of price-to-earnings ratios and
>> fundamental analysis?
>[snip]
>
>Insider trading is reserved for the ruling class as it has been since
>the days of Joseph Kennedy. The broker makes his commission no matter
>which way your investments slide. Uncle Al has never met a stock
>broker who invested in stocks.

Insider trading is illegal, and can get you years in jail if caught.
Even people who donate large sums of money to politicians can end up
in jail.

It is unfortunate, since, if allowed, insider trading would be a clear
signal of the fiscal health of a company.

Thanks,
Big Dog


schoe...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 27, 2005, 6:01:26 PM3/27/05
to
Big Dog wrote:
> It is unfortunate, since, if allowed, insider trading would be a
clear
> signal of the fiscal health of a company.

You are the perfect idiot.

schoe...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 27, 2005, 6:04:19 PM3/27/05
to

ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com wrote:
> In sci.physics schoe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip> <-- learn how to do this.
>
>
> > Gold is not about making money, it's about maintaing money's value.
>
> Then it is a big loser in modern times.
>
> The old adage was that an ounce of gold will buy a really good man's
> suit.
>
> This was in fact true from the time of Shakespeare up until the
1980's.
>
> Today, a really good man's suit can easily cost 4 ounces of gold.
>
> So much for maintaing value.

Have you considered investing in Diamond?

ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com

unread,
Mar 27, 2005, 6:43:25 PM3/27/05
to
In sci.physics schoe...@gmail.com wrote:

> ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com wrote:
> > In sci.physics schoe...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > <snip> <-- learn how to do this.
> >
> >
> > > Gold is not about making money, it's about maintaing money's value.
> >
> > Then it is a big loser in modern times.
> >
> > The old adage was that an ounce of gold will buy a really good man's
> > suit.
> >
> > This was in fact true from the time of Shakespeare up until the
> 1980's.
> >
> > Today, a really good man's suit can easily cost 4 ounces of gold.
> >
> > So much for maintaing value.

> Have you considered investing in Diamond?

Not a snowball's chance in hell; Clorox, Procter & Gamble, Aqua America Inc.

Schoenfeld

unread,
Mar 27, 2005, 8:00:23 PM3/27/05
to

idiot

markde...@hotmail.com

unread,
Mar 27, 2005, 8:01:09 PM3/27/05
to
G.E. Ivey wrote:
> > > What is the formal economic theory of
> > price-to-earnings ratios and
> > > fundamental analysis?
> This new academic paper is available for free download (PDF file)
from
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=667781#PaperDownload

Look at Warren Buffett's shareholder's newsletter. Doesn't he do
fundamental analysis also, and
very successfully I might add.
Marky Mark D.

markde...@hotmail.com

unread,
Mar 27, 2005, 8:02:54 PM3/27/05
to

Schoenfeld wrote:
> The status quo is maintained by politics, not economics. PE ratios
are
> meaningless re GOOG.
> This new academic paper is available for free download (PDF file)
> from
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=667781#PaperDownload

If it's politics, why doesn't Bush just MANDATE by law that stock
prices can only go up? Make
it illegal to sell at anything but the same or a higher price! Then
stock market will go up up up,
contrary to the paper in question.

ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com

unread,
Mar 27, 2005, 9:17:52 PM3/27/05
to
In sci.physics Schoenfeld <schoe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com wrote:
> > In sci.physics schoe...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip> <-- Learn how to do this

> > > Have you considered investing in Diamond?
> >
> > Not a snowball's chance in hell; Clorox, Procter & Gamble, Aqua
> America Inc.
> >
> > --
> > Jim Pennino
> >
> > Remove -spam-sux to reply.

> idiot

After you go look up the historical prices of those stocks and the
dividends they have returned, you may come back and humbly apologize
for that comment.

cnctu...@wmconnect.com

unread,
Mar 27, 2005, 11:56:49 PM3/27/05
to
Tuts comments on gold--

I came home one day years ago and my young wife said--"Honey, I've been
watching the Phil Donahue show and he has convinced me 'now' is the
time to buy gold--let's buy some." "No" I said--"please, please" she
said. So we bought a ton--it was one of my greatest investments ever!
Never made a penny, mind you, but after about a year of watching her
golds value drop, my beautiful wife saw the light, became a
compassionate conservative, and never watched that jackass Phil Donahue
again.

OsherD

unread,
Mar 28, 2005, 12:33:53 AM3/28/05
to
>From Osher Doctorow

cnctutwi (Tut/Tuts) wrote:

>Never made a penny, mind you, but after about a >year of watching her
>golds value drop, my beautiful wife saw the light, >became a
>compassionate conservative, and never watched that >jackass Phil
Donahue
>again.


A wise choice at least during this War. However, I hope that the next
President will have more Creative Genius in the Military field for
simultaneous attacks instead of doing one nation at a time. Imagine if
a karate black belt defended himself against only one of a dozen
opponents! He'd be an ex-champion pronto.
Right now, as before, we sorely need to knock out Iran, Syria, Saudi
Arabia, and either put back-breaking pressure on Pakistan or bomb them
into the stone age, and "Palestine" should be No-Mans-Land, while Egypt
should at least get strong enough pressure to send them back to the
Sphynx. As for Compassion, I'm compassionate for Victims, not
Victimizers.

Osher

cnctu...@wmconnect.com

unread,
Mar 28, 2005, 1:55:26 AM3/28/05
to

It's called diplomacy--you "bitch slap" a couple countries first and
see if the others get the idea.

schoe...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 28, 2005, 2:47:30 AM3/28/05
to

Diamond is worthless.

schoe...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 28, 2005, 2:56:10 AM3/28/05
to

US would go bankrupt in a week.

> Osher

ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com

unread,
Mar 28, 2005, 10:29:57 AM3/28/05
to
In sci.physics schoe...@gmail.com wrote:

> ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com wrote:
> > In sci.physics Schoenfeld <schoe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com wrote:
> > > > In sci.physics schoe...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > <snip> <-- Learn how to do this
> >
> > > > > Have you considered investing in Diamond?
> > > >
> > > > Not a snowball's chance in hell; Clorox, Procter & Gamble, Aqua
> > > America Inc.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jim Pennino
> > > >
> > > > Remove -spam-sux to reply.
> >
> > > idiot
> >
> > After you go look up the historical prices of those stocks and the
> > dividends they have returned, you may come back and humbly apologize
> > for that comment.

> Diamond is worthless.

Are you trying to do a bad Amos and Andy impression?

markde...@hotmail.com

unread,
Mar 28, 2005, 10:02:35 PM3/28/05
to

she...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 29, 2005, 1:11:56 PM3/29/05
to

OsherD wrote:
> >From Osher Doctorow
>
> cnctutwi (Tut/Tuts) wrote:
>
> >[..]

>
> Right now, as before, we sorely need to knock out Iran, Syria, Saudi
> Arabia, and either put back-breaking pressure on Pakistan or bomb
them
> into the stone age, and "Palestine" should be No-Mans-Land, while
Egypt
> should at least get strong enough pressure to send them back to the
> Sphynx.

Go back to your electron feeding tube, and start posting to your
friends at alt.communist instead of wasting my time with your
child-trauma induced worship of death.

markde...@hotmail.com

unread,
Mar 29, 2005, 9:18:54 PM3/29/05
to
I wish to invite all the georgeous and wealthy posters on this thread
to join
my google group "equityvalue", a group to discuss fundamental
investment ideas.
Click on this google link:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/equityvalue

Big Dog

unread,
Mar 30, 2005, 9:24:03 PM3/30/05
to

Thank you. It is a signal honor to be a perfect anything.

In the interim, I notice you have no argument but name calling. Maybe
that impress your peers in the grammar school, but even seventh
graders usually need a reason (at least, mine did, but maybe they were
advanced, compared to you, anyway).

Thanks,
Big Dog


markde...@hotmail.com

unread,
Mar 31, 2005, 2:57:26 PM3/31/05
to
I never met a stock broker who was rich.

Giuseppe Bilotta

unread,
Mar 31, 2005, 5:19:06 PM3/31/05
to
On 31 Mar 2005 11:57:26 -0800, markde...@hotmail.com wrote:

> I never met a stock broker who was rich.

There is a reason why they are called stock *brokers*

--
Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta

Hic manebimus optime

ro...@telus.net

unread,
Apr 1, 2005, 2:05:35 AM4/1/05
to
On 31 Mar 2005 11:57:26 -0800, markde...@hotmail.com wrote:

>I never met a stock broker who was rich.

I have.

-- Roy L

markde...@hotmail.com

unread,
Apr 1, 2005, 11:43:31 PM4/1/05
to
How about if we mandate stock prices will go up under private security?

markde...@hotmail.com

unread,
Apr 1, 2005, 11:45:17 PM4/1/05
to
I never met a poster on the board who was rich.

markde...@hotmail.com

unread,
Apr 3, 2005, 6:23:56 AM4/3/05
to
dancing queen, feel the beat from the jamborine, oh yeah!
you can dance, you can dance,
Having the time of your life,
See that girl,
Watch that scene,
Digging the dancing queen.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages