October - 2016
 S&P -7.20
 USB -0.03
 S&P -8.50
 USB -1.20
 S&P +8.60
 USB -0.23
 S&P +3.20
 USB -0.21
 S&P -10.00
 USB -0.05
 S&P +12.60
 USB -0.24
 S&P -24.70
 USB +0.06
 S&P -2.90
 USB -0.08
 S&P -5.20
 USB +0.28
 S&P +0.60
 USB -1.24
 S&P -3.80
 USB +0.23
 S&P +8.80
 USB +0.11
 S&P +6.20
 USB -0.02
 S&P -1.00
 USB +0.14
 S&P -2.40
 USB +0.05
 S&P +9.60
 USB -0.16



 A symptom of what's wrong with America, economics, and the cattle trader's economics is this sentence in Robert Gordon The Rise and Fall of American Growth. If the stock market continues to advance, we know that inequality will increase, for capital gains on equities accrue disproportionately to the top income brackets". The book predicts that "the outlook for future growth in the standard of living is not promising" because of this predicted inequality (and slowing innovation, the baby boom, increased debt, and poor education). "We face headwinds that are stronger barriers to continued growth than were faced by our ancestors a century or two ago". Yes, the barriers are economists like Gordon and policies like those of the cattle trader. A totally flawed book suffering from the English and Pickety disease that could have been great if not suffused by collectivist fallacies.

Jim Sogi writes: 

Take a look at the Nikkei chart for the last 50 years. They had decades of tremendous growth. In 1989 it peaked, and crashed. Then for the next 25 years until now, its been in a range. Their population is declining. Young Japanese people, increasingly, are not attracted to the opposite sex. When you go to Japan, you really notice a lot of 60 year olds. There is a big population bulge at that age. Those are their boomers. There are no immigrants. There is no diversity. Diversity causes innovation.

Technology has a hard time increasing productivity in the face of large demographic shifts. The cell phone brought huge increases in productivity, but there is a plateauing zombie effect going on with increasing screen addiction.

Both the above are presented in support of my theory about long term market ranges.

Alex Castaldo writes:

Sogi-san's idea about the importance of demographic trends finds some support in a recent paper by Fed economists:

The United States, like other advanced economies, is undergoing a dramatic demographic transition related to the unfolding of the post-war baby boom. As a consequence, the growth rate of the labor force has declined and should remain low for the foreseeable future. In this paper, we investigate the extent to which demographic changes, especially those related to the baby boom, can explain the currently low levels of real interest rates and GDP growth.

We build an overlapping generation (OG) model that is consistent with observed and projected changes in fertility, labor supply, life expectancy, family composition, and international migration. The model allows us to explore the extent to which demographic changes, in and of themselves, can explain the timing and magnitude of movements in real interest rates and real GDP growth during the post-war period and beyond. […].

We find that demographic factors alone can account for a 1.25 percentage-point decline in the equilibrium real interest rate in the model since 1980 - much, if not all, of the permanent decline in real interest rates over that period according to some recent time-series estimates, such as Johannsen and Mertens (2016b) and Holston et al. (2016). The model is also consistent with demographics having lowered real GDP growth 1.25 percentage points since 1980, primarily through lower growth in the labor supply; this decline is in line with changes in estimates of the trend of GDP growth over that period. Interestingly, the model also implies that these declines have been most pronounced since the early 2000s, so that downward pressures on interest rates and GDP growth due to demographics could be easily misinterpreted as persistent but ultimately temporary influences of the global financial crisis.

Larry Williams comments: 

Amen! Especially now that everyone owns stocks in one form (retirement programs,etc) or another.

Like JFK said, "a rising tide lifts all ships".

John Floyd comments: 

I first arrived in Japan in 1985 in the midst of the boom. Reservations were necessary well in advance to have a sit down lunch anywhere and the likes of Maiko Kawakami were more than willing to pay me $40 an hour to teach them, English. But after many years of a palpable buzz that included the Plaza Accord, expanding money supply, real estate price increases, etc. came the arrival of a new BOJ Governor Mieno in December 1989. Mieno believed the gains in asset prices was a bubble and "undermined the stability…of Japanese society by weakening the ethos of labor…" and immediately began tightening monetary policy. Equity markets began a decline and with a lag of a year or so did real estate prices.

In thinking about Japan I would consider some of the following, Further I would consider how it relates to what is happening in Europe, US, and China at the moment, to name a few.

Why has the "great hedge fund trade" that began in the mid 1990's of shorting Japanese bonds not worked?

Is there something inherent in Japanese culture that has prevented the open restructuring of debt that is more prevalent in Western societies? Why can you drop $1,000 of your English teaching money in a restaurant and have someone return it to you the next day gift wrapped?

Does an aging population save or spend more and what might that influence be on the economy and markets?

How does the rise in China debt levels over the past few years compare to both the Japanese(circa 1980 area) and US debt (circa 2000 area) expansions?

Do you believe the Japanese will stick on the path of the 3 arrows which have been partially successful? Might they expand their arsenal?

What is happening to the stock of JGB's and the ownership there of and thus the subsequent interest rates demanded?

What about this new 10 year yield target and how does it square with inflation and the Yen?

Is there a debt write off as that is the ultimate solution? General government gross debt has gone from about 50% of GDP in the late 80's to about 250% now.

What happens to the JPY, stocks, and bonds if debt is restructured given the impact on growth, inflation, etc.? I was last in Japan a few years ago and remarkably the prices had not changed much since the 1980's for hotels, noodles, beer, coffee, etc. But, alas I did not price out the demand for young English teachers.



 The cast of characters that goes along with the Zacharian "your own man" and the proverbial "useful idiot" is large in our field. I see "the captain", "the pessimist" (perhaps the bearometer), "the cheat" (perhaps a bio executive from Boston), "the complainer" (perhaps Steve Jobs), "the sanctimonious scoundrel" (from Nebraska). I am seeing the boy (market) who plays "lady I did it" with a big spike overnight then a return to unchanged at the open. What other characters from the playground do you see? Do you feel this is a useful type of thinking?



 I am quite certain stocks lift off here, immediately, and the beneficiaries are those who are long before the election should she win. It's going to be very hard to step into it once it goes for most who aren't in beforehand. We're on the long road to 1% long rates and similar numbers for unemployment according to my calculations.

As for the election, Trump lived to fight another day when everyone reacted in seeming horror to what he said about accepting the election results. He was so pathetic at the last debate, and the spotlight shifted, to his fortune, as a result of his "horrifying(?)" statement. As Pat Buchanan, who bears the furrowed brow I recognize and expect of all those who have tortured by Jesuits, puts so poignantly in his most recent column:

"The establishment is horrified at the Donald's defiance because, deep within its soul, it fears that the people for whom Trump speaks no longer accept its political legitimacy or moral authority."

I don't think this election is a foregone conclusion or can be measured anymore than we can know what a jury's verdict will be at this point. As difficult to predict as the market may be, it is a much simpler calculus than this election.



 You all will be saved from any future lectures about Ulysses Grant next week. That is when Ron White's biography becomes available on Amazon. It is, by far, the best ever written.

Apologies for not adding the appropriate "but". White comes closest among all the biographers to understanding who Grant was, but he still falls far short of understanding what he thought. The biography's treatment of Grant's economic ideas avoids repeating Henry Adams' lies; but it falls far short of understanding why Grant's pushing through Resumption was the key to the United States' extraordinary rise to wealth and power after for the last century and a half. That part of the story still remains to be written.

P.S. The best single modern volume on Grant, though not a full biography, is Mark Perry's book on Mark Twain and the man he admired more than any other.



On this date in 1775 the Second Continental Congress adopted, with modification, the motion that Edward Rutledge had first proposed in July. Rutledge had been appalled that the Continental Army and its predecessor the New England Army had black-skinned soldiers. (Under the Crown "blacks" had been excluded from all formally-established state militias, but the rebellious colonists in Massachusetts had accepted all comers.) Rutledge moved that all negroes be immediately discharged from the Army; the Congress, with its usual talent for Paul Ryan spreadsheet logic, decided that it would not discharge serving soldiers who were black-skinned but would not recruit any new "blacks".

The British responded immediately by publishing what became known as Dunmore's Proclamation, offering freedom to slaves who agreed to fight for the British. On November 12, 1775 General Washington had entered in the Army's Orderly Book Congress' formal instruction that negroes no longer be enlisted in the army. He then wrote to Congress to tell them what they had done: "the free negroes who have served in this army are very much dissatisfied at being discarded . . . it is to be apprehended that they may seek employ in the Ministerial [British] Army."

Simon Schama, who hates Americans almost as much as he despises Israelis, claims that as many as 100,000 slaves ran away from plantations as the result of Dunmore's Proclamation. (General query: What is it about this particular number that makes it a source of rhetorical magic? One is reminded of the first President Clinton's 100,000 cops, for example.)

The number was, according to the one scholar who has tried to do the actual counting, somewhere between 800 and 2,000. Roughly 250 of these became members of the Ethiopian Regiment. Another 300 embarked with Dunmore in 1776 when he fled Williamsburg. There is, with all of this, the usual irony. Like every man of property in the colonies, except for Quakers and the odd free-thinker, Dunmore himself was a slave owner.

People with extra melanin did continue to fight in the War for Independence. As the war dragged on, the "manpower shortage" (lovely phrase that only perfumed princes can use without gagging) forced even Virginia to accept negroes and mulattoes, when necessary.

The best summary of the full story is here.

Its author, Noel Poirier, now runs the National Watch and Clock Museum, which a wonderful antidote to all the worship of the dead at Gettysburg, if you find yourself in that part of the world.



The greatest single demographic change of the last 20 years among people born in the United States has been the collapse in the relative rate of growth of the "black" and Asian populations. (The growth rate for Hispanics born in the United States has not changed from what it has been for the last 50 years; what catches people's attention are the numbers that come from steady compounding.)

Sometime in the 1990s the production of new "white" people who do not have Hispanic surnames and new "black" and became the same; and the birth rate for new "Asian" people fell below that of non-Hispanic whites. The nomination of Barack Obama in 2008 did a great deal to hide this fact because registration and voting - turnout - by black people surged; that higher level of participation continued in 2012, even though there was no further increase.

The best evidence for this is the shameless weighting of the current political polls. No public pollster offers racial breakdowns of their party weightings. They tell you how many Democrats and Republicans and Independents they have but not how many members of each Census racial category make up the partisan groupings. If, as the networks clearly do, you want Mrs. Clinton's numbers to be up, you can do what I explained in my piece about ESPN polling: you can overweight Democrats slightly in relation to Republicans and then dramatically underweight Independents. You can then double down by overweighting the number of black and Asian Democrats and underweighting Hispanic and non-Hispanic white ones. (Note: Asians have replaced Jews as the second most reliable Census category of Democratic voters; it is the historical gift of Earl Warren that keeps on giving.)

Those of us who still profit shamelessly from selling services to "the media" are amused by the hand-wringing over the decline in the NFL's ratings. Your most popular player retires, and his famous rival is suspended and you wonder that your ratings go DOWN? Yet, the grieving and lamentation in network TV land may also be the recognition of the fact that, in terms of present and future ratings, neither blacks nor Asians now offer the prospect of more and more eyeballs. Soccer - i.e. the "real" football - anyone?



Rate Hike?

The trend has been for lower rates since the early 80s. It is precisely the "zirp minus" world that is one of the factors (the biggest factor) that will drive things farther and longer than anyone dreams. This condition has persisted far longer than anyone ever expected, and as I;ve said before, all money must now seek risk - and that exists in equities, private and public, real estate and "wild things" (art, sports teams, etc).

The world has been soaked in cash, so much so that there is seemingly no demand for it, and the pensions hunger grows evermore desperate each year.

What is too high a PE when the alternative is a certain loss? The world has changed, profoundly, as a result of this, and I would speculate it may get even stranger. For example, to be long equities is to be short volatility, and vice versa, and that relationship too, is not as cast as the sun rising in the East. That relationship too could flip.

Adaptation is the first rule of survival. Look at the hedge fund industry.



 One is thinking of retiring and setting up a radio flyer wagon on Wall Street, and selling guidance on markets for 5 bucks a query. One has given up studying the factors that determine the bull or bear of individual stocks., especially since no studies are valid unless they use a compustat as is file and according to Andy Lo, even those are adjusted. One wonders if there is any systematic way of dividing stocks into good and bad that works these days? A related query is whether the Value Line rankings of stocks into group 1-5 have held up now that the great Sam Eisenstat has been eased out. Do you think I could be as good as Kramer?

Jim Sogi writes: 

Years and years ago I read Value Line regularly in the binders at the brokers office and generally followed it during the bull market. It did well. Later, I subscribed, but found that by the time I got my issue, first by mail, then electronically, that the chosen No 1 stocks already had made their move making it impossible for me to get in with any hope of profit. I always wondered how that worked.

Larry Williams writes:

We tested value line ranking is Q&A software (Thompson/Reuters) about 2006-2009 time frame and were not able to come up with much that rolled into/out of top ones or bought and held for 6 to 9 months. Maybe need a long hold time. 



In a rather simplistic and limited analysis this is the first time after a debate or "election news/event" that was deemed to favor the Dems that the Mexican Peso is lower on the day.



On the way to the office today I was blasted by Bloomberg from so many angles and reporters about Trumps "I will keep you in suspense".

A little context to remember is that during the Republican primary debate, all of Trump's opponents solemnly raised their right arm to pledge to support the Republican nominee, whoever it might be. Trump was the lone holdout, and he took heat for it.

Then more than half of them reneged on their pledges, including Jeb! Bush and St. John Kasich.

The truth is that if any candidate seriously suspected fraud, or a miscount, or whatever, they would field an army of litigatin' lawyers, as did Al Gore. Trump's the only one honest enough to acknowledge that.

Rudolf Hauser writes: 

You may recall that Nixon did not do that in 1960 despite the likelihood that the Chicago vote was rigged and that winning Illinois would have given him the presidency. He did not want to put the nation through such a crisis.

Stefan Jovanovich writes: 

It is a nice story, which Nixon did his best to promote; but the numbers do not support RH's assertion. Nixon only got 219 votes; adding Illinois and its 27 would have left him 24 short. Subtracting those votes from Kennedy's total of 303 would have left him with 276, 6 more than he needed. What few people mention about the election is that it was the last time a 3rd candidate won electoral votes. Harry Byrd won 15.



Who are the most resonant useful idiots in our day that can always be counted on to say something idiotic? I find it useful to look at El Erian and Gross, as both are never bullish on stocks.

Steve Ellison writes: 

Anything on zerohedge



Fairness, from anonymous

October 20, 2016 | 1 Comment

 My daughter Eddy used to be interested in the question of Fairness. Not any more. "Since it is not a question of whether but only one of where and when, why bother?"

But we do still talk about it with regard to taxes. We still laugh over her reaction to her first paycheck (issued for cleaning the animal cages at the local vet's office on the graveyard shift). "Who is this bitch FICA and why is she getting my money?"

The best that the two of us have come up with for a "fair" tax system is our own variation of the Major League Baseball "luxury tax" and revenue sharing model. Under the collective bargaining agreement that expires this year, each team in MLB puts roughly 1/3rd of its own revenues into a pool. The money in the pool is then divided up and distributed equally to each team. In 2016 the richest teams (those in the 15 largest markets) no longer received their share as a payout but instead received a credit against their revenue share to be paid the following year. (This was, IMHO, an artful way of assuring that the rich teams would agree to have revenue sharing as part of the next CBA.)

The Eddy and I conclude that FDR's unerring political instincts were wise policy. (When his Marxist academic advisers wanted Social Security to be means-tested, he told them to get real. The American people would only support a program that had a fundamental equality; if you paid into the system, you got something out of it.) We would like to see all government benefits to have the same recognition of the Constitution and its equal protection clause; if a benefit is paid to someone simply for breathing, then everyone gets it. If the government collects taxes, then everyone pays the same rate.

Eddy's final word: "Never going to happen, Dad. Too simple and too fair."

Alston Mabry writes: 

This reminds me to recommend an excellent recent EconTalk:

How are those in favor of bigger government and those who want smaller government like a couple stuck in a bad marriage? Economist John Cochraneof Stanford University's Hoover Institution talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about how to take a different approach to the standard policy arguments. Cochrane wants to get away from the stale big government/small government arguments which he likens to a couple who have gotten stuck in a rut making the same ineffective arguments over and over. Cochrane argues for a fresh approach to economic policy including applications to growth, taxes and financial regulation.



 We are listening to Rigoletto here, and it occurs that the theme of 90% of the operas before 1870 are with Trump like rich men taking advantage of poor beautiful women before receiving their retribution. Would that be correct?

Stefanie Harvey replies: 

This is also a war rallying theme. I just finished SPQR: A History of Ancient Rome by Mary Beard. Many a campaign began after a rape or attempted rape of an elite or community of women.

Short book review: a bit of slog due to excessive detail but wonderful humor and a light tone in writing.



 Many full moons ago Mr. Bollinger asked me if I could find the source for the remark about Joplin that I quoted. I don't remember what I wrote then, but the gist of it was that Joplin was the only one of the ragtime players who had the guts to write down what he had improvised the night before on the piano. I still have not found the source of the remark; but I have no doubt that it was true.

I also have no doubt that we are not going to be seeing Bollinger and Joplin's kind of candor about methods of thinking - where "public opinion" is concerned. The current response rate for telephone polling is - allegedly - 9%. That is the number the Pew people disclosed about their own polling in 2012; and it is now taken as current gospel. In 1997 when the Pew people also disclosed their response rate, the number was 37%. It is likely that the actual response rate now is roughly 1 in 20; but that is a mere guess. The actual polling may be even less.

But, have no fear, the Pew people assure us that their numbers are still good because the results track with the data acquired by the government in its census and other surveys, where the response rate is unquestionably high enough to be accurate. "Pew Research Center devotes considerable effort to ensuring that our surveys are representative of the general population. For individual surveys, this involves making numerous callbacks over several days in order to maximize the chances of reaching respondents and making sure that an appropriate share of our sample are interviewed on cellphones. We carefully weight our surveys to match the general population demographically."

Thurston Trowel III replies: 

What is your point on low response rate?

A low response rate merely means the polling outfit has to make more phone calls to get the requisite representative sample.

It does not reflect negatively on the scientific accuracy of a poll in any way, if this is what you were suggesting. No idea if that is the case but it seemed to be where you were going and apologies if wrong.

As to Joplin writing down improvised ideas, musicians everywhere for decades have recorded sketches as part of the creative process of developing ideas. I do this all the time. Whether one does so on paper, magnetic tape, hard drive or cell phone is largely irrelevant, and a matter of personal preference and convenience.

Stefan Jovanovich retorts: 

Dear Third Shovel: Joplin had the courage to share his method at a time when the people playing ragtime were selling it as magic. They were not sharing the tricks of their trade. Mr. Bollinger remains exceptional in much the same way. The solution you offer– the polling people just have to make more calls - sounds logical until you ask the question the broker posed to his client. Who are the new people going to be? The reliability of opinion polling has been founded on the assumption that the sample will be homogeneously responsive, that the response rates will not vary no matter what the respondents answers are. But that is no longer the case. Making greater effort becomes a statistical frontal assault; the added costs gain no ground. Then there is the further issue of outright bias. How do you know what the proper weighting should be if you choose to ignore the only data that you have– the results of the most recent elections before this one? 



 Like any relationship, correlations have life cycles which can vary over time; increasing, decreasing, or even disappearing, depending on the steady or changing market environment. There was a time when there was a positive relationship between yield movements and stock returns, especially when the 10 year treasury yield was below 5%. Rising rates were historically associated with rising stock prices; but when the 10 year yield was above 5% a negative relationship between yield movements and stock returns existed. Since '09 the S&P rallied from 666 to near 2200 while 10 year rates fell from ~4% down to ~1.3 due to central bank monetary policies. However, the Fed's actions may result in changing the correlation between treasuries and equities once again, ushering in a secular regime change where rates are rising and are positively correlated with rising equity returns.



 This is a fascinating book of 1848 by an exacting character who writes like Galton: "Eight Years' Wanderings in Ceylon" by Sir Samuel White Baker





 The cistern crouched beneath the creaking windmill in a slight breeze. It was a hot day out from Slab City, CA. An ancient lock prevented my refreshment.

An old desert lock is a cue to look for a 'dummy' latch because who keeps the key so long? The strap hinge on the cistern cover was bolted such that its nuts hand screwed loose!

The concrete cistern itself measured 10'x10' and who knows how deep it falls into the ground?

I lifted the 100-pound steel cover on its rusty hinge with a full body effort and peered down… The inside was a dripping cement cell, measuring 10'x10' and 6' deep with two feet of water at the bottom.

A pink stick – no, a 4.5' racer snake! had crawled in a crack of the cistern top and rested with its head on a protruding inch of rebar, while the rest of its slender body dangled underwater. The lifeless eyes were enlarged blue marbles like a Halloween mask. The thirsty serpent could have been there for weeks, as even October is a thirsty month.

I dropped a pebble and it sprang to life, swimming the perimeter of the cell again and again.

How to get it out, so I could go in for a drink and dunk? I talked to the snake bouncing my voice off the water for a few minutes, and as it calmed, reached and lowered a branch under its head and gently lifted it out onto the concrete top. Snakes don't have eyelids to blink; this one stared for a few seconds, and then slithered across the concrete top onto an overhanging limb, stretched out and air dried.

I jumped into the cement tank and splashed like a gleeful kid, and drank heartily.

In a few minutes, it was time to go and I peered up at the head high opening. Uh oh. I reached up but couldn't drag myself out the tank. So, I sat back down in the water and looked up through the 3' square at the snake on the branch.

We had traded positions. I yelled but received only echoes.

The significant thing at the moment that distinguished me from the snake was my shorts. I removed and stuffed them into a 3" opening in a side wall for a drain pipe that went off underground, and limited the water's rise.

In twenty minutes the water level climbed a half-inch. I could float to the ceiling in 32 hours, as long as the breeze kept up.

The water dripped from the hard-wearing windmill above into the cistern top.

The snake slithered off, and I was alone for the longest time. As the water rose, my eyes adapted to the dim and I spotted the rebar that had been the snake's hard pillow for so many days. I stood, and stuck one boot on it, and with the ceiling opening near its side wall, could boost myself up and out the watery crypt.

But the first step was to string an 8' length of abandoned hose in one corner of the cistern up from the water to the crack in the top that the snake had entered, and out into the sunlight.

Then with a big effort I leaped out.

Now I sip the memories of my escape from the cistern.



Joseph Garber Stadium

The best one-wall handball player in the world in 1940 was Joe Garber. He was drafted an Ace, and got killed flying in a Boeing B-17G over Munich on 21/7/1944. The Brighton Beach Baths, now Russian condos, built a handball stadium holding 500 in his honor. Artie Niederhoffer, my father, and I watched the handball sweeps every weekend from a perch in fourth tier. To add to excitement, Artie always sat next to Bookie, and they played a game of checkers as they watched the handball, often the notorious Uncle Howie teamed up with Hershkowitz against the runner Moey Orenstein and Mortie Alexander, who could kill the ball from 20 feet behind the long line. Bookie took bets on all the games, at 11-10. Pick em on Moey. Or Eisenberg, +3 against the Milkman. (That game was rained out, but that's another story.) It was hot in the concrete stadium and if the score got to 18-11 or some such in a game Bookie would pay out all the bets on the winning teams so that the winners could get a swim in the adjacent public ocean. Shades of Paddy Power paying out all the bets on the Cattle Trader.

Stefan Jovanovich comments:

Political bets are not really like athletic contests since there is no running tally. The polls issued throughout the election campaigns used to be a kind of pseudo-line score so you could use some of the techniques that the Brighton Beach bookies used for in-game sport betting. But that is now gone, like the Baths. The public polls are now so thoroughly corrupted (statistically, not morally) that you cannot think you are watching a game progress. Even if Vic had not decided that state polls' collective predictions for the Electoral College were an inappropriate intrusion of politics, I would have abandoned the daily score-keeping. The collapse in sampling that has occurred this year makes the fall-off in TV ratings for the NFL seem moderate by comparison; and there has been a quantum increase in the distortions in pollster's models. Those distortions are partly the result of the sampling problem but they are also from political bias. The models' partisan break-downs are completely inconsistent with anything seen in the actual elections last year and in 2014. The only information out there that is statistically valid are the longitudinal polls like the LA Times/USC poll - where the same people are repeatedly polled. Those continue to show a score that is 13-11, not 18-11. Nate Silver made the smart move over to ESPN just in time.



 Regardless of who wins this election, this market is going to rip to the upside — and I can be quite certain of that without even looking at the numbers, just the very tentative nature of nearly everyone around it. I've smelled this dish cooking before, and so have a lot of folks on this site. I don't know who is going to win this, but I do know that a 500 bln stop (not even flip) in the hemorrhage of balance of payments translates into an instant 3% GDP growth, and the multiplier effect on that puts us at 1965 growth, or even Truman-era growth. I was fortunate, in the 1980s and latter half of the 90s, anyone who showed up on time with their shoes on did pretty well. I had some lucky breaks too, which didn't hurt (and, as I have said repeatedly, and bears repetition for no one's sake other than my own perspective — "Anything that I may have has been given to me.").

But nothing has gone anywhere since the Spring of 2001. It would be wonderful to see growth in double digits, or just robust, 80s-90s style for the morass of all these millennials. People teasingly refer to them as "Snowflakes," but I have proactively and of my own volition gone out of my way in the past since 2007 to get into their heads, to work alongside them — not your typical snowflakes but snowflakes of all varieties. For all the negatives said about these kids (which I do not disagree with!), they are a much harder working, industrious, adaptable and far more pleasant gang than we boomers were. And for exactly them, I hope they get a break here and get the the change they deserve, and the economic growth they can use.

Stefan Martinek writes: 


The whole 2014, maybe the first part of 2015, you mentioned multiple times the issue of liquidity, the risk of a huge crash, structural liquidity problems, ETFs, etc. Do you consider all that is over? I always thought that the trend in equities (from 2009) will take some time to reverse, that there will be some chopping on the top before the next up move. I never tested this, but the chopping for another 1-2 years would look proportional, beautiful, expected… Of course growth will resume at some point. I thought that maybe market needs to take back some easy money generated in the last decade before going forward.

Jack Tierney, the President of the Old Speculator's Club writes in: 

A few observations on this thread.

First, perhaps because of its nature, Dailyspec tends to look for the cause of many social phenomena in financial terms. In our discussions, Mr. Haave suggested "that while the Southern states get more benefits those benefits go predominantly to the minority that votes democratic." Mr. Aiken's thoughts illustrate exactly why: "NY and IL are 'red states' outside of NYC and Chicago, respectively…" I can't speak for NY, but "ethnic demographics" are the key driver Big D majorities in IL…I have no idea how to quantify, or define, the effect of "cultural indices."

Mr. Hauser added a vital insight in suggesting that "many elderly move South in their retirement years" and, by extension, while their benefits add to the states' totals, it does not necessarily translate into democrat votes. I am one of those "expats" and can say with some certainty that we have had a marginal impact.

But several very important issues are either overlooked or avoided to explain why these states remain in the red column. First, and most important, many in the current (and, more than likely, continual regime) have quite boldly and heavy handedly attacked the religious foundations of many individuals in these states…certainly enough to swing the vote.

Second, gun control is no minor issue. Its rare to find a resident in my part of the state who doesn't own both a shotgun and a deer rifle…their purposes, though, are concentrated on bringing down consumable game and/or eliminating non-human varmints. Though many own pistols, their numbers are dwarfed by the many in our larger cities who use them for quite different purposes.

Third is education or, more specifically, the make-up of the curriculum and the content of the mandated text books. Many of today's parents and grandparents are now, after a significant amount of published and broadcast news, aware that they have received a less than adequate education. When school prayer was outlawed they were upset, but, over time, grudgingly came to accept it. However, when the study of Islam was made part of required courses, things became (and remain) a point of relentless debate.

Other points of contention which aren't appreciated outside the immediate area, but which lead many to the red side of the spectrum are the "elite" dictates discouraging, eliminating, or outlawing the Confederate flag, tobacco farming, soft drinks, fried food, salt, and "dipping."

Individually, these may seem to be trivial matters and, in many cases, "settled issues." Big mistake. Taken together, these represent stark examples of big government going well beyond its mandate. It took the Tea Party to underscore this and galvanize the voters…not just here but in other states as well. The current Democrat platform offers them nothing of substance and can do nothing to alter this situation.

Will things change? Sure they will. Despite a growing number of home schoolers and charters, an overwhelming majority of young students remain classroom captives in a system that has essentially replaced much that shaped western civ with new age agitprop.

But there will always be a remnant and as surely as all grand socialist experiments fail, this, too, shall pass.

Andy Aiken responds: 

It's tricky to quantify in toto, but consider a simple variable: married vs. unmarried. There is a stark difference in party ID and voting behavior between the two subgroups, all else being equal.



 The market has been in range mode for quite a while, then one day it breaks out/down into a new range where, in this theory, it will stay for a while. Sub atomic particles have a probability that the particle will be in a certain energy sphere, but not its specific location. In the market, there would be a probability that the price will be in a certain range, but one might not know the exact price. At some point due to energy input of some sort, the particle or price jumps to a different level. The ranges seem to have some regularity as do the jumps.

Peter Grieve writes: 

Very nice– the quantum theory of markets. Particles can also "tunnel" out of boxes which they shouldn't be able to leave under classical theories, and get into other boxes. There may be a market analogy here also.

I took a class from Feynman in my undergradute days (about a million years ago) and he was a powerhouse. He had tremendous intellectual integrity, and was a strong advocate of intellectual discipline. He said something like "the person you least want to fool is yourself, and you are the easiest one for you to fool".



 In every election since 1984 and in 19 of the 22 elections since the Composite Index was introduced in 1923, the S&P 500 Index has been the most reliable gauge of Presidential election results. If the Index on election day is higher than it was three months earlier, the incumbent party retains the White House. 2181 is the magic number; that was the close on August 8th. Back to life not lived through "the news"….

Andy Aiken writes: 

I am also low-news/high-information. I seek out primary sources, e.g. read the academic paper or CBO study instead of a journalism student's usually flawed interpretation of it. As Nietzsche said, "All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth." The major media in the US have been speaking power to truth for a long time.



The S&P 500 has been in backwardation continuously since October 17, 2008 as the dividend yield on the S&P 500 has exceeded the risk-free interest rate. Prior to that date, the S&P 500 was always in contango except for a few days in March 2008. I think the backwardation is bullish; Philip Carret said in 1931 in The Art of Speculation that "borrowed money is the lifeblood of speculation", and it is very bullish when "stocks carry themselves."



All these possibilities are quite analogous to those who like to fight the drift in the market. There are so many things that could go wrong. There are so many factors that people don't consider that could cause a big drop. Just in the last 4 days, there was the w.f. wagon, the Chinese trade, the alcoa signal, the Hillary speech. Every day there's some unaccounted for worry. My goodness, that's what the market takes into account, why it is where it is, where people put their money on it, and equilibrate taking into account all the positive and negative factors. That's how it is with the predictive markets. They take account of the turnouts, the prevalence of preference, the changes in votes as the election nears, the states, the coming news, the efforts to bring out the vote. If it gets too far out of line, money comes in to move it to the right direction. It's just like the market, and the reason that the best estimate of the market for the next period is always the drift.



 I tested the old Jewish trader axiom "Sell on Rosh Hashanah and buy back on Yom Kippur?".

Andy Aiken writes:

Historically, returns between the two holidays are negative, but not often enough so to be a reliable calendar trade. Average returns are distorted by 2008.

Year    SPX change (%)
2000    -2.40%
2001    -1.94%
2002    -0.32%
2003    3.76%
2004    -0.92%
2005    -4.06%
2006    1.26%
2007    3.68%
2008    -17.76%
2009    -0.50%
2010    2.43%
2011    0.38%
2012    -2.21%
2013    1.77%
2014    -2.03%
2015    0.31%

% negative      56.3%
average return  -1.16%
median return   -0.41%

A 2004 paper suggests that the negative returns during this period may be due to lower-than-usual volume.



One of the off-the-radar things we watch is the length of time various subsets of options are held. The flip side of that is the turnover rate of those options. Several years ago I put out a white paper on the concept, and about a year ago there was a small WSJ piece. There is evidence; it's not anecdotal.

The general gist is that those who are more conscious of attuning their options positions (i.e. greater turnover) tend to be correct. Conversely, those who are complacent tend to pay for their complacency. Whoever is longest in a position tends to be "wrongest". As of this evening it is the holders of call equity options who are the more complacent.

One beautiful thing about this indicator is that it appears to measure portfolio shifts rather than mere trading shifts. That is, there isn't much fluttering back and forth.

Disclosure: we have been out of our longs for about 2 months (on the strength of other indicators) and we don't ever short equities.



 As Cleese would say, "now for something completely different." And just in time for Halloween. Well certain species of trees and plants have already been used to clean up former landfills and contaminated soil areas but it would be very neat if a way were found to further modify them genetically to make them even more efficient at extracting contaminants ("enhanced phytoremediation"). Time is money and reduced cleanup times for impacted properties can save significant amounts of money!

'Mystery of 'ghost trees' unlocked?:

'Now a San Jose researcher is showing that these "ghosts of the forest" may be more than a biological novelty, perhaps solving a generations-old question. Zane Moore, a doctoral student at UC Davis, analyzed the needles of albino redwood leaves in a lab and found that they contain high levels of the toxic heavy metals nickel, copper and cadmium.

The phantom-like plants, which rarely grow more than 10 feet tall, appear to be drawing away and storing pollution, some of it occurring naturally in the soils — particularly shale soils — and some left from railroads, highways and other man-made sources that otherwise could degrade or kill redwoods.



 The thrill of coming home has never changed.

Homecoming is an annual tradition in the United States. People, towns, and particularly high schools come together, usually in early October, to welcome back alumni and former residents. It is built around a central event, such as a banquet, parade, and, most often, a game of football.

The field lights drew me from deep in the desert where I'd been hiking all day. I stared long and hard and was taken back to my last visit seven years ago at the Blythe, CA high school homecoming. I was a newly fired sub-teacher at the high school – the most treasured by the students and teachers echoed their evaluations – after dismissal for trying to stop a playground war. In California a teacher is expected to stand back and let kids clobber each other.

Why not? I drove toward the field lights. I was curious to discover how the rules of engagement had changed.

The last time, in about 2009, I had sat on the opposing side bleachers to avoid the embarrassment of the kids standing and cheering when I entered the barbed wire perimeter, way out by the cotton and cow pastures, onto the sidelines. It was 90 degrees at 7pm at the kickoff, and the opposing team bench warmers sat after the pledge of allegiance as the kicker teed up the ball. A hissing and chugging behind me drew my attention from the field, as the city insect fogging machine bumped along directly behind the rival team bleacher and fogged them with insecticide. Tackles and guards puked, a cheerleader fell to the ground in convulsions, and hot, dead bugs rained on the visiting families' hair like Briylcream.

By the time the visiting team recovered from the exterminator, they were down 13-0 and never recovered. The Blythe Yellow Jackets won the homecoming.

But now, seven years later, a new stadium had been built with a perimeter chain link fence that prevented the fogging truck from entering. Brawley high school, my new home, was the visiting team. Clear headed, the Wild Cats took the ball to the goal posts every time in the first quarter, holding the Yellow Jackets to zero yardage as the first quarter gun shot. Final score, as Brawley started substituting everyone but the water boy from the bench: Brawley 35 – Blythe 0.

Blythe had lost its cheating edge.

The student body had changed dramatically since I taught in every room on campus for almost ten years. They were overweight, listless, and lacked the usual spark in desert kids' eyes. They were soulless fans.

It was good to leave for my new home.



 It's somewhat relieving to know that one is not an automaton, a psychopath, or possessing low expectations because one is mostly indifferent when trading.

Abstract of study:

Trading experience modulates anterior insula to reduce the endowment effect. Trading experience has been shown to reduce the endowment effect, a decision-making bias that distorts market prices and reduces trade. Understanding the mechanisms underlying how experience changes this bias will provide important insights for developing interventions to improve market efficiency. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we show that market experience causes a reduction in right anterior insula activation during selling, which mediates a decrease in the endowment effect. These findings suggest that trading mitigates negative affective responses in the context of selling. People often demand a greater price when selling goods that they own than they would pay to purchase the same goods—a well-known economic bias called the endowment effect. The endowment effect has been found to be muted among experienced traders, but little is known about how trading experience reduces the endowment effect. We show that when selling, experienced traders exhibit lower right anterior insula activity, but no differences in nucleus accumbens or orbitofrontal activation, compared with inexperienced traders. Furthermore, insula activation mediates the effect of experience on the endowment effect. Similar results are obtained for inexperienced traders who are incentivized to gain trading experience. This finding indicates that frequent trading likely mitigates the endowment effect indirectly by modifying negative affective responses in the context of selling. 

There are basic summaries around the uchicago site.



 I have tried to learn from the poker players here, although I don't play myself. When somebody posits "seasonal weakness" (of which there has been precious little this year, except maybe in the last 2 hours), no matter what the supporting data is, my question is, who is the sucker at the table that will continue selling too low every year? A couple of decades ago, it was alleged to be mutual funds that were trying to avoid taxable distributions by dumping shares of companies in which they had losing positions.

anonymous writes: 

I was in Vegas recently, and although I wasn't a sucker, I had the second worst bad beat of my life. I was playing $10-20 NL hold'em at the Bellagio with six rocks (tight players) and a wild Asian woman. I was dealt Jh, Jd. The flop came out Qs, Js, Qd, giving me a nut full house. I raised to $300 and everybody else dropped out except the Asian lady who re-raised $600 which I called.

 The turn card was the Jc giving me quads. Her play all night was such that I made her to definitely have a Queen and either an Ace or a King and that she was betting on a strong set with a big kicker. From her style of play, I also knew she wasn't bluffing and would at least call whatever I bet within reason. I made a hesitant continuation bet of $600 which she promptly answered by going all in. It took me a millisecond to snap call. We turned over our cards showing my Jacks, and her Ad, Qh which gave her a set. I correctly called her hand and noticed that she had only one out that could beat me which was the Qc. Of course the river card was turned over and it was the Qc, and I subsequently lost the pot.

Things like that happen in poker, trading, in life. Since I played the the hand perfectly, there was no self flagellation. One can play a hand of poker perfectly and still lose so no sense getting upset things turn out badly. It's better to dust one's self off and keep playing the game as long as the edge is still there. In the markets, one can make a (perfect) trade with a 98% edge and still have it blow up in your face. In fact, those huge edge blowups seem to be more common than the numbers dictate. For what it's worth, the baddest, bad beat I ever had was getting a nut straight flush where my two cards were the low cards, and my opponent had the top two cards. No way would I ever lay down a straight flush.



 A very interesting article written by Lyft co-founder:

"The Third Transportation Revolution: Lyft’s Vision for the Next Ten Years and Beyond"

What are your thoughts? Any investment ideas in light of this?

One fact mentioned in the article is "The average vehicle is used only 4% of the time and parked the other 96%."

I guess it is tempting to fix this huge inefficiency, but unfortunately the 4% usage time is not arbitrary, probably 90% of people have concurrent usage time: to commute to/from work.

Jim Sogi writes: 

Not only that, but when it is used, only one person is in the car. Better to have a small form factor car.

David Lilienfeld writes: 

I keep thinking about the Segway. Wasn't it supposed to revolutionize transportation too?

Stefanie Harvey writes:

The issue I find with the Segway is battery life and time to become comfortable using it. I have a Ninebot mini Segway pro; it took two rides to get comfortable with it but I almost returned it after the first.

Navigating uneven roads and curbs are also a challenge. Weather is challenging and it's sufficiently heavy that carrying it on/off bus or train is suboptimal (heavier than a commuter bike.)

Jeff Watson writes:

My son and I were early adopters of hoverboards (a mini-Segway clone), a year before they got big. These days we don't ride them any more due to safety concerns, and quality issues. But then again, why would one ride a hoverboard, when one can ride a one wheel. My son and I got a couple of them in summer 2015 and haven't looked back. They will go anywhere, on any terrain, fast, dangerously fast. The boards are well made, fly like the wind, and one can even use them at the beach as long as they are not totally submerged. The battery charge lasts longer than one's legs. One Wheel's are seductively dangerous. My go to board that every day I ride around the neighborhood is still the boosted board. Expensive, but worth every penny.

Vincent Praver writes:

Many of the ideas in the blog post reflect common wisdom in the sector.

A recent presentation from morgan stanley's auto analyst [related link ] covers these ideas well.

Jim Sogi writes: 

I have 150 miles on my electric bike so far and now ride it everywhere under 10 miles. It does 25 mph and most of the roads around here are 25-30 mph so get there almost as fast as a car, and can maneuver in close, park at the door, and be out faster than a car. I can visit 4 places in the time it takes to park. It THE way to go. I put some grocery bags on the back. It has tail lights and headlights. Its great exercise and feels great to be in the out of doors. Mine has electric automatic continuously variable gears by Nuuvinci. I got the custom Moto wood laminate pedals with skateboard grip to ride in slippers. It has a 750W mid drive motor and a big battery.

The small factor electric vehicle is the wave of the future.

Vincent Paver elaborates: 

Three tidal waves of the future, breaking simultaneously:

electric vehicles

autonomous vehicles

shared vehicles

They are highly complementary to each other, empowered by software, and will fundamentally change transportation.

It's a question of when, not if. Will we substantively change in the next decade, or will it take 2 or 3 decades?



 "The Coming Anti-National Revolution" by Robert J. Shiller:

For the past several centuries, the world has experienced a sequence of intellectual revolutions against oppression of one sort or another. These revolutions operate in the minds of humans and are spread – eventually to most of the world – not by war (which tends to involve multiple causes), but by language and communications technology. Ultimately, the ideas they advance – unlike the causes of war – become noncontroversial.

I think the next such revolution, likely sometime in the twenty-first century, will challenge the economic implications of the nation-state. It will focus on the injustice that follows from the fact that, entirely by chance, some are born in poor countries and others in rich countries. As more people work for multinational firms and meet and get to know more people from other countries, our sense of justice is being affected.

Indeed a likely big wave in the comin' decades.  Any further thoughts?

Rocky Humbert writes: 

Shiller may have gotten this 100% backwards. If my perception of the global and popular mood is correct, then the pendulum may be about to start moving in the opposite direction. The Brexit/Trump meme is the instant when the acceleration of the globalist/intellectual elite/HYP is changing sign. (Stefan can elaborate–but I am unaware of any of these so-called revolutions being wholesale wealth transfers…without bullets flying.)

As a footnote, I am surprised that anyone claims to be surprised by the most recent lewd Trump video–it is entirely consistent with the persona that he projects. In my 30 years on Wall Street, I've heard and seen much much worse. Similarly, the Wiki document dump on Hillary's speeches confirmed the perceptions that her detractors have.

Lastly, someone posted an article about the wisdom of crowds and confidence. And that confident observers (as a group) make the best predictions. I have gone on record and remain confident that Trump will be the next president. I do not share Mark Cuban's belief that this will result in a stock market "crash" — but on the edges, none of this is particularly bullish. The most interesting question for me is whether when Trump wins and if the markets get turbulent, will the Fed blink in December? Given the number of HYP's there, and their collective beliefs…

Back to Shiller. The UN will be the first globalist institution to suffer Trumpture. (Trumpture is the rupture of a bubble by Trump. If the NY Post and Drudge pick this up, I will be most pleased.)

HYP=harvard/yale/princeton. For full disclosure, I'm a Yalie.



 What were significant real estate bubbles in history? What were the aftermaths of their popping?

Stefan Jovanovich writes: 

In U.S. History you can start with William Duer and the Ohio Company.

anonymous writes:

The book Manias, Panics and Crashes is good as is the book Devil Take The Hindmost



 Contagion and infections of new groups of susceptibles may work to create a landslide to throw the real estate promoter proud of stiffing thousands out of the race now with favorable impact on stocks, and lessened pressure on centrals to hold off from tapering and hawkish interest rate increase talk before election. Thus, while the hurricane theory that insurance companies will have to sell bonds to cover losses is off the table, the hawks may be let out of their cages.



 We're getting through the first week of October and just starting the post-season. But it wasn't always like that. The World Series was called the October Classic. These days, though, it's getting close to being the November Classic. But it wasn't always like that. These days, one has pitchers who go maybe 100 pitches ("oops, have to make a pitching change"). But it wasn't always like that.

Fifty years ago, on October 6, 1966, in game 2 of the October Classic, the Orioles were playing in Los Angeles against the Dodgers. The match up was Jimmy Palmer, just days away from his 21st birthday, vs Sandy Koufax, the Dodger ace pitcher. Koufax had had a series of seasons pitching that can perhaps best be described as incredible. Not only did he dominate the NL (if not all of baseball—and you had Whitey Ford and Bob Gibson playing at the time) with multiple Triple Crowns, he was also awarded not only the Cy Young but was also the MVP.

Back in 1965, Koufax had established a different reputation—he refused to pitch game 1 of the Series against the Twins (or Twinkies, if you prefer) because it was Yom Kippur. Across America, Jewish mothers who thought a squeeze play was something you did with an orange and that a hit and run was a type of car accident came to know about Sandy Koufax.

Back to 1966. It was Palmer vs Koufax. Palmer's first World Series game. Koufax's last. The Orioles had had just an OK first game, though they won it and I guess in the end that's all that mattered. But in the middle of game 1, the Birds' bullpen kicked into gear, and from the middle of that game through the rest of the Series, the Dodgers did not score a run. I think it still stands as a record. (Cal Ripken's wasn't the first baseball streak in Baltimore.)

Koufax had had another stunning season in 1966. 27 wins (he started 41—find someone with that kind of stamina today!). A 1.73 ERA. No surprise that he received his third Cy Young Award in 1966. (The story goes that in the 1963 World Series, NYY vs LAD, Yogi Berra (NYY catcher and the key to so many NYY pennants and World Series championships) and Maury Wills (Dodger shortstop) were watching Koufax warm up before the game. Berra said to Wills, "I understand how he won 25 games. What I don't understand is how he lost 5." To which Wills responded, "He didn't. We lost them for him." (1963 was Koufax's first CY Young Award, as well as MVP.)

Coming into that second game, it isn't hard to understand that Palmer may have been a bit intimidated. If so, he didn't show it. The game was a pitchers' duel through the 4th. In the 5th, though, Koufax's defense failed him (shades of Maury Wills from three years before). In that inning, the Orioles scored three times, with Dodger center fielder Willie Davis committing three error—in that inning! (The next day, in Baltimore, Davis was spoken of as the 10th Oriole.) Those runs would be all the Orioles needed. Palmer shut the door, becoming the youngest pitcher to throw a complete game shutout in the Series.

Koufax was pulled after the 6th inning, having given up an additional run. Davey Johnson, the O's second baseman, got the last hit off of Koufax. Andy Etchebarren, the O's catcher, was the last player to ever face Koufax. After the Dodgers lost the Series, Koufax hung up his cleats in an effort not to further injure his left elbow, already arthritic. Thirty years old and retired. Six years later, Koufax would be inducted in the Hall of Fame—the youngest such player, and I think either the least or second least number of wins for a pitcher. The induction, though, surprised no one. It had been well earned.

As for Palmer, over the years when he was announcing on radio/tv, he would occasionally talk about that game, one inning at a time, one inning per game announced (at most), ball by ball.

50 years ago today—Sandy Koufax's last game. Back from when pitchers weren't coddled, they started 40 games in a season, and they pitched complete games.



 It's been predicted that wave heights could be significantly above average due to Hurricane Matthew passing our region of the Atlantic Ocean around Thursday of this week. Some have said over 10 feet–perhaps with 30- 40 mph winds. An opportunity for very experienced surfers that does not come that often.

In Palm Beach the favorite spot is near the inlet and it is aligned with and called "Reef Road". Not a lot of public parking there but I imagine a ferry service will evolve to carry local surfers back and forth from this beautiful beach location. It's been said that due to a gap in the Bahamas chain of islands that our area enjoys increased wave amplitudes whenever a storm or hurricane tracks along the Bahamas. I imagine die hard surfers are beginning to monitor all of the technical information available online and start to look at potential treks along I-95 to maximize opportunities.

On another note a photographer in NE Florida near Jacksonville has photographed surfers with over 20 or so years of experience and they look to be a very happy lot. He calls them "Salty Dogs" which is also the name of an old college bar at UF.

Jeff Watson writes: 

Reef Road is very hard to access, as there is virtually no parking and the PB police love to ticket or tow cars parked illegally. I have a friend that lives on the north end of PB and he is very benevolent the few times a decade that we get over for huge swell. There is no place on the East Coast that can handle big waves (Hawaiian size) like Reef Road. It is the premier big wave break in all of Florida, and handles big waves even better than Montauk, NY. Thursday AM, the Surfline forecast is for 10'+ after Matthew has passed by and headed up north, which will be the best time to surf. One can expect that when the storm is parallel to the break that one might see 20'+ waves, but those big conditions will be like a washing machine, totally blown out, almost impossible to surf. I'm trying to put a bug in my wife's head to take the trip over, but the conditions are fluid as nobody has an accurate model of the path. Right now, I'm fixing a ding in my big gun, getting ready for what might be my last time surfing really big waves. To say that I'm stoked would be a very accurate assessment. 

Jim Sogi writes: 

Jeff, catch some good ones for me!

As even Market waves start increasing, it's good to be ready, in shape, and have good equipment. Have good timing by watching the wave sets for a while in advance, and let the daily pattern reveal itself. As Shane Dorian says: "trust your board and ride the wave". It's not good to bail prematurely as that is when you can get hurt. Ride it until the wave has spent its force. That's the safer time to bail or end the ride.



Can anyone point me to research regarding Futures settlement price vs closing price and subsequent returns in a volatile market environment? I would like to see if settlement is more important (due to margin) during periods of high volatility which I foresee over the next few weeks. I'll try some back of the envelope tests over the weekend.

Bill Rafter writes: 

We have tested many possible prices for importance with regard to generating signals (e.g. momentum, sentiment, etc.). In reality the only price you can guarantee for testing execution in retrospect is the settlement (subject to slippage), followed by the opening (greater slippage). But for signal-generating capability we tested highs, lows, midranges, etc. We also tested subsets, such as the ability of using lows to indicate up/down, vs. highs to indicate up/down. Nothing beats the settlement. Specific to your question, if the settlement differs from the last sale, take the settlement. "There's a reason why it is the settlement."

With regard to stocks we also tried VWAP. Same conclusion.

We also tested to see if the futures settlement influenced cash, or the opposite. In virtually all cases the futures dictated to cash. That conclusion suggests that cash can be manipulated by some clever futures transactions, which of course has happened. Certain markets were famous for it (eggs comes to mind). Anyone who has ever manipulated a market will tell you that you wait until the end of the day and pick your spots (i.e. low liquidity).

If however you are doing some "fuzzy" work, you might explore using something other than the settlement or close. That is, suppose you just needed a qualification as to whether a market was "up" or "down", without regard to actual changes. Consider the following: "The market was up all day, but closed slightly lower." Was it up or down and how do you code for that? This is not esoteric BS; it makes a difference.

The above is the benefit of our own testing. I am not aware of any academic work in this area. It seems too mundane a topic. A cash v. futures settlement thesis might be interesting but the conclusion would be anti-flexion and we know how that would be perceived.

Larry Williams writes: 

Hold on…

In reality data providers have something they call the closing price. That's what we get when the market closes and that stays in our data until about an hour and a half, sometimes two hours, after the markets open in the afternoon when they change the closing price to the settlement price.

You have to be very careful because there can be a wide difference between the closing price and the settlement price. Unfortunately we don't have the settlement price until after the market is open when we have already begun trading. So most trading systems are developed using the official settlement price because that's what is in the historic data but for signal tonight after the market closed we don't get the settlement price until after trading has begun.

Whoever said the life of a trader is an easy one did not look into closing prices.



I remember seeing some videos of the rough and tumble pit traders from Brooklyn back in the day. They had no college degrees, no charts. They got in there and what they watched was price levels and order flow. They had a little pad with some price levels. That was their strategy for the day. The strategy seems good in the current range this last couple weeks.



 I saw Queen of Katwe this weekend and highly recommend it as one of the best movies of the year. Lupita Nyongo will get awards. The movie is about a young girl living in the slums of Kampala Uganda who becomes a chess master. It is a feel good movie. It's actually filmed in the slums of Kampala and captures the feeling of the city, with its hustle and crowded traffic and people hawking wares in the streets between cars.

I'm not sure if our resident Grandmaster is reading this and I hope he comments on the movie. In one scene her coach realizes that she can see 8 moves ahead. Chess is complex, but compared to life, it is simple. Life can be simplified by realizing that the most important thing is to love and be loved by others.

Even though she did not learn to read, she was able to master chess. I'm always fascinated by the pit traders, rough tumble, uneducated guys making good money trading. Trading basically is simple. When you learn it it becomes complex. When you get better at it, like many things one masters, it becomes simple again.



Night Time Surgery 'Doubles Death Risk':

People who undergo surgery at night are twice as likely to die as those operated on during regular daytime hours, research suggests.

The findings, being presented at a conference, also suggest a higher than usual risk of death among those who have surgery later in the day and in the early evening. 30-Day Hospital Survival Rates The results are based on studying 30-day survival rates for patients at a hospital in Montreal, Canada. Between April 2010 and March 2015, the researchers were able to compile a database of 41,716 emergency and routine operations carried out on 33,942 patients.

The operations were classified as taking place either in the daytime between 7.30 am and 3.29 pm; during the evening between 3.30 pm and 11.29 pm; or at night between 11.30 pm and 7.29 am. The researchers found that, after making allowances for assessment of patients' overall health and other factors such as age, those patients operated on in the night were 2.17 times more likely to die than those operated on during regular daytime working hours. Also, patients operated on late in the day were 1.43 times more likely to die than those operated on during regular daytime working hours.

Arch Stanton notes:

The article says the study made “allowances for assessment of patients’
overall health,” but in my experience hospitals undertake surgery at
night only if it’s urgent. This seems like a huge bias.



 My friend sent me this article on how to survive a rattlesnake attack.

It's disinformation, poorly and ignorantly written, but I appreciate the thought.

The best defense I used in rattlesnake territory was on the Pacific Crest Trail where they were coming out of the cracks in the desert hourly. 4' long fat rattlers. I had a pair of loose pants and passed an orange orchard. I filled the pants w/ oranges to the knees, tying shut the cuffs. Then I walked confidently, enjoying the orange juice until they were gone and I was out of the territory. 



 Like the German fairy tale Hansel and Gretel, the financial markets often have clues you can follow to safety and profits.

Sometimes though the clues that you intended to use, or thought would be there, are not. The question with DB is not if there will be a Lehman moment because there surely will not be. Rather, the consideration should be of the vicious cycle of bad politics leading to bad economics.

The key questions that should be asked include some of the following: First, to what extent does this weaken Chancellor Merkel's position in front of next year's German elections? Second, what does this mean for ECB chief Draghi and easy money which is wildly unpopular in Germany already? Third, what does this mean for Italian banks?

Surely, if Germany bails out DB, which is a given, how can the Germans ask Italians to play by different rules? Fourth, what does this mean for European banking union? Fifth, how might this influence German growth which has been the locomotive for Europe? Sixth, if Europe can't grow with a weaker Euro, low energy prices, and record low rates what does it take?



 Do you see any analogies between the Eurozone banking situation today and the failure of CreditAnstalt in 1931? - A Reader

The business of credit is always a Ponzi scheme in the sense that the issuer of notes, checks and IOUs never have enough money on hand to cash out all the promises. How could it not be? The stock and bond markets are nothing but promises to pay in the future rather than now. From the very beginning the United States has been founded on IOUs, not cash; George Washington's first pay day as President came in the form of a check, not dollars. The entire justification in U.S. law for having banks and insurance companies and securities firms all be special entities is that "the law" will somehow guarantee that these special people called bankers and brokers will never make imprudent promises to pay. Most of the time, the banks, insurance companies and securities firms succeed in at least the appearance of being prudent. They have to; their business is to sell their reputation for being "safe". But there are no actual guarantees being made; that is why the fine print always ends up saying "we promise but we don't personally back what we are saying".

The conventional financial histories try to point to "events" like the formal bankruptcy of the CreditAnstalt in 1931 as "causes". They follow the same approach that most military histories do - and all German General Staffs did - in studying the "lessons" of war. (Apologies for all the quotation marks, but the infection of the language by scholastic theology is now universal. Just as almost all discussions of enterprise end up using Marx's vocabulary, history has not escape from the assumption that life is a classroom.)

The CreditAnstalt had failed by 1919. Its assets - loans made before the Great War - had been melted away to nothing by a pile of sugar in the rain; having Hayek in the bureaucracy did nothing to prevent the new stub of a country called Austria from printing its way to hyperinflation. What happened in the next dozen years was simply the redecorating of the accountings of all the banks in Central Europe to pretend that there had been no default by the authorities that controlled domestic legal tender. (As long as your depositors have no ability to swap their paper money and statements of account for coin, the banks as custodians have no trouble.) The country was ruined, but the banks were still fine. Their trouble came when their foreign counter-parties who had been sending gold to Vienna in the 1920s lost faith that they would ever see any repayments that could be sent abroad and actually cashed out into other currencies.

The event that caused that loss of faith was a decision to "save" the Atlantic world from the Great Depression. You will not find anything in the contemporary accounts or the current academic histories that says otherwise. In January 1930 The Hoover Administration led the Allies to agree that reparations need no longer be paid; what that meant, of course, was that Austria's currency would no longer have even an indirect connection to specie because there would be no more international lending by the U.S.

It seems to me that the present offers a completely different situation. Anyone can escape the clutches of official IOU currency by following Kyle Bass and buying bullion; they can also go further down the rabbit hole and buy Bitcoins. But, in neither case is there any doubt that the person selling gold or digital currency for conventional legal tender can go into the FX market and choose which other StayPuffedMarshmallow currency - pounds, euros, dollars, yen, francs, pesos, etc. - he wants to trade for.

By 1931 the world of commerce had literally begun to freeze because large foreign exchange transactions were no longer possible except the pseudo ones between the central banks and even the people with "good" money (U.S. dollars, in particular) found that they no longer had any. For a comparable modern situation, imagine that half the credit and debit cards in the U.S. suddenly disappeared and there were no replacements and no new extensions of consumer credit.

Deutsche Bank has already failed in the same way the Credit Anstalt did in 1919; the difference is that the units of account that DB's credit and debit cards use have not have lost all exchange value. Germans will still be able to go to Florida for their winter holidays and use magnetic stripe and chip credit to pay for their Mai Tais.



 If you measure wars by what proves lethal to your own side, then this is one like no other, as far as Americans are concerned. 2 out of every 3 casualties (killed and wounded) in Iraq and Afghanistan have been caused by the enemy's use of landmines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs). In the last Asian war (called "Vietnam" although it really was the 2nd Indochina War) fought by Americans, the fighting was largely conventional. The Viet Minh and Viet Cong used land mines, as did the Americans and their allies; but the use of what were then called booby traps was not greatly different from what it had been in Korea. Only 1 out of 7 or 8 casualties (roughly 14%) were from landmines.

The "war on terror" has become a terrorist war.



 The progression of winners in anything usually follows these steps:

1. In the beginning there are random advantages and accidental winners.

2. The neophytes then develop different body types and the superior becomes the victor.

3. Then among the better physically developed the brain determines the winner. This is the strategy stage.

4. Once the bodies and minds are on a par, the one who practices hardest to become the most graceful is victor.

5. The final champion develops an edge to lever out all the other qualities of body, mind, grace, and even spirit.

Knowing this, you may hone your skills stage by stage to reach the top.



 Today was a perfect day in the way expectations work. I don't fully know how they work but some of these factors were involved.

1. Market started way down Monday for fear that Trump would win the debate. The old accepted thing is always what the market wants even if it's creeping socialism and higher service rates.

2. Then on Tuesday evening, the market went down 1/2 % before the debate on fear that Trump would win. Fear always causes stops to be run.

3. Then during the debate, the market went up 20 points as it became obvious that the cattleist was winning and that trump was rambling, and interrupting, and proud of fact that he made money by stiffing people, and buying foreclosed houses, and not paying service.

4. Then the market went down 26 points to the open on the theory that you should buy the rumour and sell the news. Sort of a variant of "the threat is worse than the execution". Often good news i.e that the cattleist won, is worse than bad news. Of course often the good news is known in advance by flexions and they sell after it. Of course some people might have sold because the realization that the cattleist would win means that after-tax capital gains will be lower and regulation will be higher.

5. Then the market went up 10 quick points from the open to show that they were happy after all with the cattleist and to take profits from those who were stopped out at the open.

6. Then the market dropped a quick 5 points to recapitulate yesterdays and the prior days decline. People suffer from the remembrance of last 2 events effect or whatever absurd name Kahneman specifically gives it [Ed.: recency bias?].

7. Then finally the market advanced to where it was after the debate, letting no good opportunity for a stop or profit go unheeded. And it ain't over yet. Only a Brett can make sense of it all.



 I'll go with the prediction market which reduced the probability of wining to 0.30 from 0.37 for Trump. Having listened to the debate, it is hard to believe that anyone could have thought Trump won the debate. He was totally unprepared. He could only mutter "wrong" and talk about his abilities in response to totally prepared remarks from Hillary. The Times gave a good fair analysis of the debate. As did Washington Post and Fortune.

anonymous writes: 

The prediction market is not anything like the markets that you all trade in every day. (Those of us out here in the piney woods are guilty of buying and selling stocks on occasion but comparing what we do to what you all do is like comparing subsistence farming to Cargill.) For one thing, there is no size. The move down 7 points came on basically no volume. If a stock moves that much on that little money changing hands, the shares belong to a business that is already bankrupt. Oh, wait, that is the general business magazine trade these days….and the newspaper business. For those who want to know where the money went…  There is not much volume; but there is, as there used to be with Berkshire in the good old days when its owner did outperform the market, some considerable size.

Victor Niederhoffer replies: 

I believe that the many small traders with insights and incentive to make money keep the prediction market very accurate. And there are numerous studies that show that the prediction markets work much better than the polls. (I think). 

Andy Aiken writes: 

A problem with most prediction models, including prediction markets, for the US presidential election, is that they combine state polls using a Gaussian copula-like approach. Andrew Gelman, political scientist at Columbia, showed how this approach is subject to the ecological fallacy. He resolves this with a hierarchical Bayesian model, which Nate Silver adapted for his 538 site. This is not to say that 538 is accurate, since it is only as good as the polls that are used as inputs, but it avoids a common methodological flaw. It doesn't take too much capital to manipulate a prediction market. I personally know some people close to Bush who in 2004 would push up or down the Presidential Election contracts market on the Iowa Electronic Market, merely to influence perceptions. Brexit may have been an example of such a manipulation attempt.



I just read this quote supposedly from Jeremy Siegel: "Dividends matter a lot. Reinvesting dividends is the critical factor giving the edge to most winning stocks in the long run…"

Why is this true when there is so much friction in reinvesting dividends vs. the more direct corporate reinvestment. For example, taxation, and the need to buy stock above book value when hypothetically a good company can invest in its business at book value and via earnings and with a decent ROE generate a multiple of that in terms of share price. How can high dividend payout top high ROE or ROIC and a high reinvestment rate.



The black doctor inspires some relevant Wiswell Proverbs.

1. "Not all games are lost in the mid and end games; many players go astray in the opening"

(beware of hasty opening forays)

2. "Some players know the game very well but don't know the game players themselves: this can lead to self defeat"

(It is bad to trade against the Fed or the flexions or small groups that control the fixings or pricings)

3. "Some players can stand a series of dull games, but the creative player lives for a challenge and a crisis. The latter star may win a brilliancy prize now and then but often at the risk of losing a few"

(A derivatives expert can make a profit once every 10 years or so assuming he can get out without the 100% bid ask spread or that homeostasis does not come at expiration)

4. "Keep your manuscript and in your years ahead, your manuscript will keep you"

(write down your trades and prices and keep them handy in front of you not on an instrument that can be wiped out by a (hammer?) or an algorithm)

5. "It is important to keep your forces together, yet flexible, ready, to attack or defend as the game develops. Any General will tell you that a divided army is hardly headed for victory."

(too many positions, too many accounts, too much money committed to margin is guaranteed to cause failure)

6. "Do not assume that every move a master makes is strong, or that every move a patzer makes is weak. Play the board not the player."

(the palindrome and the upside down man have been known to nod)

7. "When we resign with a draw on the board, and many of us do we don't deserve a draw"

(getting out of a winning position when it starts backpedaling is a dreadful psychosis that we should ask Dr. Brett about)

8. "The fourth dimension. In addition to the opening, the midgame, and the ending, there is a fourth act to every game– the result."

(you can play a great and lose, and a bad game and win)

9. The right way to win a game is before the first move has been made.

(prepare before the opening and know why and what you are doing)

10. "The winner of a game is not always determined by who is right–but in the end, by who is left."

(squalls, stops, and margin calls can occur)



 I was watching a formula one race the other evening and it reminded me of the racing line. The racing line is the direction, speed and angle in which a driver goes through a corner. Come in too far from the inside, your exit will be poor. Too far out, someone can pass you. Come out of the corner perfectly but be in the wrong gear, you're toast.

I was thinking how many times traders hit a trade entry well but don't have the right leverage (wrong gear). Or come in too far from the inside and spin out before they complete the corner (capitulate with too much leverage).



Computers are the key to modern trading. The Chair is famous for inventing modern algorithmic computer trading. I am trying to learn new computer skills including Python and Pro Tools audio recording interface. (Was it Spec-lister Jeff Sasmor that invented Pro Tools?) I am struggling to learn both programming and the new interface. I recommend to all young people starting out to study computer science. Computers run pretty much everything in the world now. The richest people I know are computer scientists who started businesses. They are in fact some of the richest people in the entire world. Trading is dependent on computers, programming, speed. Learning a trading interface and being able to operate it with speed accuracy under pressure is essential to trading.

Some years ago I learned R with the help of some erudite and benevolent Spec Listers. I fondly remember the Wiz, a true master, who from the top of head could with a single line of code, search relevant data, process it, and have it report a table of elegant results. Computer science does not replace judgment or vision, but realization requires the computer skills.

Some of the specialized programmers can get a bit nerdy. Thinkers of big thoughts can really benefit from being able to program and fine tune their thinking. Writing up the algo's really clears up thinking. The computers really help with the massive number crunching that would be impossible without them. I kind of understand the basic statistics and math in a general way, but the computers help me do the computations.



 O. Henry often boasted that you could name any place, any situation, any number and he could write a short story about it. I have often felt that I could take any situation, and relation, any game, and find a relation to markets in it (albeit not usually a predictive one).

I recently was studying integration by parts so I could compute moments of the exponential distribution. I gave myself the challenge of finding a market relation for integration by parts. I am wondering if anyone can find some useful take off point and relation to markets in it. I will give my answer after the market closes today.



Chain Rule says that the area to be covered by u dv = uv - area covered by v du

In that case when u and v are high the effect of a change in the other one should be algebraically higher than when u or v is low.

I looked at the 5 occasions when tbonds, crude and SPU all set a 10 day high, sort of like today although not all highs. In the last 6 years.

I find a change in SPU is very bearish– down 32 next 5 days. A change in bonds down is very bullish. Change in crude very bearish. Down almost 10 ^+% next 5 days. Change in bonds quite bullish.

Compare that to 3 occasions when they all were at 10 day lows:

change in S&P fairly bullish

change in bonds very negative

change in crude fairly bullish

No significant effect except that bonds tends to continue at extremes.



Imagine a world that were perfect. Imagine such a world would have no approximations. No variations. No risk.

Such a world would have no humans, but only pre-destined robots that appear to be humans. Such a world would also have no opportunities. In such a world, enterprise would have no value. It would certainly be a boring, unchallenging place. Such a world would have no incentives.

So we should rather feel happy that we live in an imperfect world that makes us perfectly human, offers opportunities, and incentivizes enterprise. Uncertainty should never be eliminated. If it were possible to eliminate uncertainties it would be a world of the living dead.

Well, if uncertainties prevail, the only choice we have is either switching off for a while from active risk to passive risk and then switching back on. Risk cannot be eliminated. From choosing styles, instruments, level of exposure we are only able to make a choice to believe we are better off handling one type of risk over another. Returns originate out of risk and not vice versa, since whether or not there are prospects of any returns, risk will always be there.



 In music, space is very important. The underlying beat can be implied. The space between notes and phrases is as important as the notes themselves. Modern hip hop has a lot of musical space. In the 80s the mixes tended to be thick with no space. It was a wall of sound.

I've been thinking about the spaces between vol events and their distributions. They can be as important as the moves the themselves because of timing, leverage issues.

Peter Pinkhaven writes: 

Somewhat unrelated, but I think the study of changing cycles and tastes is important.

Pre 2005, most hip hop music was sampled. The mix had an aesthetic and sonic ambiance that was very hard to emulate from scratch in modern digital studios– as most records that producers sampled from were originally cut to tape through dozens of vintage analog mixing desks and compressors, before being cut to vinyl. Producers would record open spaces of sound into these into 12-bit or 16-bit samplers and then loop them. They would go to find a drum break — some common ones are Skulls Snap's its a new day, California Soul, Led Zeppelin's When the Levee Breaks.

Creativity came from a lack of technological ability to manipulate the sound. These samplers could only hold 12-60 seconds of sampling time. In order to get bass lines, you had to cut a kick drum note into the first sine wave, loop it and what you would get is a long buzz. EQ filter the high end of this buzz and pitch it down 12 octaves, you had the authentic sound of golden era hip hop bass.

As computers started to enter the modern studio, these samplers were not seen as useful anymore. The limitations of them became a hindrance. Most sequencing starts and ends on the computer these days. Its not hard to replicate the vintage sonic sound anymore. These factors I think are what led to the open space Mr. Sogi was referencing to.



 Two interesting developments this week in the competition for smart home ecosystem.

Apple iOS 10 update which introduces the Home app. (note, Home is also the name for Google's competitor to Amazon's Alexa.)

Amazon's echo "dots" for those who prefer their Alexa services with a lower profile and footprint than the obelisk Amazon Echo.

Amazon is also offering Echo Dot bundles with Bose, Phillips Hue and ecoBee Thermostats for preorder.

Samsung SmartThings seems to be lagging but they are a bit distracted by the Galaxy Note 7. Perhaps released too early (arguably applies to Apple and Google as well.)

Full disclosure: Despite being a gadget geek and early adopter, I have not yet set up automation in my home for two reasons:

1. Waiting for the ecosystem shake outs–who wants to choose the equivalent to BetaMax and have to rebuy/reconfigure etc?

2. Not yet comfortable with security practices by the providers as well as data privacy concerns (they need to incentivize me to give such delicious consumer data away.)

Dylan Distasio adds:

I have been dipping my feet into the smart home waters. I was an early Echo adopter based on getting a good price on it. I have since picked up a Tap and FireTV on Prime Day, and plan on some Dots next now that Amazon has released v2.0. I am only able to turn lights on and off with the Echo ecosystem at this point, and have it integrated with Belkins WeMo and Philips Hue wireless lights. I also have a WeMo switch it can control that can be wired to anything I please, but I haven't gotten around to going nuts yet.

Regarding 1) I'm not sure if you're familiar with If This, Then That (IFTTT.com), but for me, it is the greatest thing ever for home automation across competing platforms and standards. While it is not comprehensive, you can create simple recipes for actions (or use existing ones) as long as your devices support IFTT (many of them do, including the Echo). I use it to control the lights from the Echo, and would highly recommend checking it out.

2) I agree with you on this, and don't have a great answer. I'd prefer to build the system around open source components and have the voice recognition done on an internal server in my house with no phoning home, but I've given into the dark side.



 Emerson state polls for Colorado, Georgia, Arkansas and Missouri.

The "news" is that Trump is now up 2 in Colorado. The poll has a MOE of 3.4.

Reuters-Ipsos now has "high confidence" that Trump will win Vermont. Their current Electoral Vote prediction is Trump 243, Clinton 242. They rate Maine as a "toss-up" and do not predict Rhode Island because of insufficient data. (General commentary has recently said Trump has a chance in R.I.)

Their 60% turnout model has Clinton winning the election by 13; their current odds are Clinton 3:2.

anonymous writes: 

OK but Rhode Island is the most liberal spot in the country. It's not even worth looking there. I don't think it has voted Republican since 1908.

I live in Manhattan and believe a terrorist did the new work. The Rep was not my candidate, but he is now. My mother's family built the wall here. I am no stranger to work.



 Centuries ago, sailors on long voyages would leave a pair of pigs on every deserted island. Or a pair of goats. Either way, on any future visit, each island would be a source of meat. These islands were home to breeds of birds with no natural predators that lived no place else on earth. The plants there, without enemies, evolved without thorns or poisons. Without predators and enemies, these islands were paradise. The sailors, the next time they visited these islands, found the only things still there would be herds of goats or pigs. Build your bridges slowly, and don't burn them.

Victor Niederhoffer writes:

I look around 3 times and wait for Dr. Jov to correct.



 There are only two rules for a successful education: (1) have parents with high IQs and (2) have teachers with high IQs. I leave it to each of you to determine what the cumulative score is for your particular situation.

As for educational systems and testing, always remember that they are designed for the "norm" - the roughly 2/3rd of the test takers who fit nicely in the middle of the presumed bell curve. The curve for skills is not, in fact, in the shape of any bell known to man; but the political demands for education are, and always will be, a perfectly symmetrical one.

If tests were used and designed properly, they would not be for "grading" at all; but for diagnosis of the particular students' skill levels in very particular subjects - not "math" but numeracy (how easily a child memorizes times tables), spacial geometry (fitting blocks into holes), visual pattern recognition, capacity for abstraction and so on. Of course, selling such tests to publicly funded schools will and always has been impossible for a number of reasons.

Good luck with your struggles and believe in your children. (My particular good fortune was to have scarlet fever as a child so I missed the first few years of indoctrination and was able to teach myself to read and write with the help of my older sisters when they came home from middle school. I also had the absolute loyalty and affection of our father.)



 In the Industrial Revolution in London many new workers came to work for pennies. The Royal Mint did not want to be bothered coining small change, but it made it difficult to pay the workers. A private mint began minting pennies and became the de facto currency to pay pennies to the workers their meager wages.

Now, $100's are almost too small to carry enough cash for traveling and business needs. I had difficulty spending 500 Euro notes as most establishments wouldn't take or break them. Credit cards and other forms of money are more common but with a large vig. Bit Coin if it becomes more popular and stable seems like a good solution. When I was in New Zealand I had to go through some gyrations to buy from private parties, or transfer money funds through banks to pay private parties. Each time I had to pay quite expensive transfer fees and commissions to transfer funds and to convert currencies.

An international currency that can be split small, or transferred in large size and move large amounts internationally would be very beneficial. Negative rates add to the vig of holding cash. There needs to be a better currency.



 "There is a tide in the affairs of men, which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat. And we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures." - Shakespeare

Jim Sogi writes: 

The connection between tides and earthquakes allows some degree of prediction of timing which was difficult before. As with markets, it's not so much whether, but when.

Richard Prout writes: 

Well a guy in NZ used to love doing this: Predictweather.co

Everyone says he is a nutter.

I read a tiny bit of related science and it actually did seem to suggest more quakes due to global warming and water pressure on plates, and also big tide issues.



 Today is the anniversary of Jay Cooke and Company's bankruptcy in 1873, after failing to secure a government loan. But what seems to me most memorable is the fact that Henry Clews advised Grant NOT to make the loan to "save" Wall Street, even though it put Clews' own fortunes in jeopardy.

The Clews family is an extraordinary clan.

Henry Clews

Elsie Clews Parsons

Henry Clews Jr

Henry Clews Museum



The Autobiography of Frank Tarbeaux is well worth the time. It was a great recommendation from the chair.

I like how he found out that horses with a weaze, a lung condition in the east could be bought for $25 and then freight trained to Wyoming and cured by the mountain air and then sold for as much as $500 depending on the quality of the stock.

And that if you wanted men to play cards after dinner serve burgundy since a man will like a warm and soothing feeling that yields to the idea of cards rather than serving champagne which gets a man worked up and wanting to stretch his legs looking for ladies after the meal.



The normal state of affairs is that 1-month expected volatility (i.e. VIX) is lower than 3-month expected volatility. In many ways this is similar to short term interest rates being lower than longer rates. The logic is that a lot more grief (random or otherwise) can happen over the long term and the market prices that in.

Let us suppose you believe that expected volatility is forward looking (the standard belief). Should you happen to find yourself in the (less common) situation where the market has priced 1-month expected volatility higher than the 3-month, the logical conclusion is that the market places a higher risk on the near term. Since higher levels of expected volatility tend to be bearish, your subsequent conclusion is that the market will get its butt handed to it fairly soon.

Hey, that means you could simply take the difference of the two expected volatilities. Sounds great, but the levels of 1-month and 3-month expected volatilities are not directly comparable. To make them comparable the geek/data monkey has to normalize them over the most representative period. To further complicate this, the last item (the representative period) is never static, but variable. However all of the above are minor items that can be dealt with.

Now the question is: Why am I telling you this NOW? Go figure.

N.B. I am deliberately choosing not to show this in chart form.



 In honor of new member Richard Prout:

"I've known scores of men who were unable to wait to win. They are too impatient. They want to do everything all at once. When I was racing my horses, all over the world I always figured there was plenty of time. I would be out there with them at crack of dawn watching them. And I would see to it that they lost races until their prices were right. I didn't care how long it took. But when they were right, and I knew they were right, I got busy."

The cowboys and soldiers fought when Frank wasn't taking their money in cards. "The odds were all in favor of the cowboys. The soldiers nothing but city boys, and didn't know anything about firearms except what they were taught in the army. The cowboys were all gun fighters. The cowboys filed down their triggers until they hung on a hair, just being discharged by pulling back the hammer. The solders guns were hard on the pull, a necessary army reg to prevent the poor gentleman from shooting each other by mistake. Lots of soldiers were killed". "There wasn't any law except guns unless a man shot someone in the back or got caught stealing horses. A man or two was killed, and what could be done about it? Nothing. The army could just charge it to profit and loss."

"The women liked to gamble. And they were all wild about systems. Of course it is a mathematical fact that no system can be built to get around the zero the percentage always must be in favor of the bank. In Monte Carlo there is one zero in roulette and here there are two zeros. Of course for a professional gambler like myself the casinos would be foolish places to spend my time. I gamble only to make money… when a hand of cowboys came in and with their gold dust, or sold their cattle, we would sit up night and day spelling each other until we had cleaned them out. I never put a shovel to the ground during all those mining fevers, and I saw them all except the great gold rush of 49. And I wasn't born then."



 "Chinese Billionaire linked to giant aluminum stockpile in mexican desert"

This is one of many ways to get capital out of the country, Ken Rogoff highlighted others in an article awhile back.

I am not in full agreement with the sanguine view on NZ, China, etc. for a variety of lengthy reasons but I thought this piece interesting.

Vince Fulco writes:

As an aside, my sample set is small since I am growing my network with Chinese who are in Toastmasters or employed by foreign firms, but I have rarely met a harder working group of young people. Most are required to work ridiculous amounts of overtime and still find time to go to English language schools, Meetups, Toastmasters like professional organizations and the gym/yoga/run once in a while. And from what I have been told by a few western employers, hiring people with advanced degrees and strong professional/personal motivations costs peanuts. That having been said, they are no fools and will jump ship for a small increase in salary. Loyalty means nothing if the employer is going to underpay for any length of time.

Maybe I forgot what it means to be young and give everything to an employer/cause/dream. The bottom line is underlying the grossly inefficient state-owned enterprise system are some stars in the making benchmarked on a world scale who can be hired for a relative pittance.



This is a great article: a modern tale of fear and rescue.

'Steve Moon, 24, was on a normal mission to lure red fish using cut bait near Burnt Store Marina. Instead, he was nearly left as the bait, stranded and surrounded by sharks.

"It wasn't a big deal until I counted 10, and they kept getting closer and more aggressive, getting within a foot of me," Moon said.'

Florida man rescued after being surrounded by 10 sharks By Tony Sadiku



 Bertrand Russel's sage advice is a two minute meal for a lifetime.

Stefan Jovanovich counters: 

Fortunately, by that time, the old fart didn't have that much longer to live. Why does anyone ever believe anything that a communist ever says - even the ones who later recant? Russell ignored the central facts about Marxism for almost his entire life and believed that "communism is necessary to the world". He criticized the Soviet Union but that seems to have been primarily the result of Lenin's being uninterested in Russell's own genius (they met in 1920 when the philosopher went to Moscow to see what wonders had been wrought by the "communist experiment"). To the end of his life Russell believed in and praised the tyranny of experts. That seems to be the vice of very, very smart people; they cannot understand how or why all the stupid people should be left to be free to muddle through their own individual lives.

That sentiment was behind Russell's belief in his own racial superiority: "It seems on the whole fair to regard Negroes as on the average inferior to white men, although for work in the tropics they are indispensable, so that their extermination (apart from the question of humanity) would be highly undesirable." He wrote that in 1929. When he discovered how much that opinion went against the grain of good Leftist doctrine, he did his best to pretend he hadn't meant what he wrote and that, in any case, he was only discussing the question of environmental conditioning.

As for his advice about study and school, only someone born a Lord could be so ridiculous. No one who goes through conventional education is allowed to ignore what the school teachers "wish to believe". If they persist in the delusion that they should only ask "what are the facts?", the smarter they are the less likely they are to make it through. Nora's favorite Physics professor at Cal dropped out of high school in the 10th grade because, as he put it, "I could either go completely crazy or finish". Russell never once in his life faced those hurdles so, of course, he could give people the kind of advice that regularly got people shot everywhere that Marx and Engels were part of the curriculum.



 In Australia, the best trading story I know is in Following the Equator by Mark Twain. The gist is that Cecil Rhodes started his fortune by catching a shark in Botany Bay. The shark had eaten a German spy in the North Sea when war broke out between Germany and France. The spy's diary was in the shark's belly and Rhodes immediately cornered the wool futures market as England would no longer be exporting wool. One thing led to another and Rhodes soon used his stake to buy his first diamond mines.

As an aside, to take a page out of the book of all the world travelers we have, my favorite botanical garden is the Rhodes Gardens in Capetown. I like the Gardens in Hilo, Hawaii also and will buy a tree there for Artie. Through the spec list I met a good man, Ken Roman, and I now have a beautiful bench in the Bronx Gardens: "In honor of Artie and Elaine and their love of books and nature," looking out at the stand of tulip trees from the 1890s, and the library and Ken's Roman Pavilion Gazebo. One thing leads to another.

A favorite thing to do when trading was going very well in the old days was to take Laurel or Susan (never together) to the Roman pavilion and read a 100 year old book about markets there surrounded by the smell and sight of the trees. One apologetically notes that "The Autobiography of Frank Tarbeaux is only 86 years old. A spate of such books was planned in 1929 and published in 1930.



 I just posted that Gary doesn't know one book game in chess but beats me and Bill, a 1700 all the time. He's an athlete and doesn't know how to lie or cheat like the others. He has common sense as his answer showed as both combatants are using our ammo. He doesn't have 30 secret service or handlers following him around like the others. As he said, "he'll just try to be smarter in the future". But is it smarter to know these jeopardy questions thrown at him to humiliate him. I'd put his IQ at 160, probably the equal of his partner who knows all the pres's of each country, and speaks Greek and Latin the way the 36 in his family had to do to get into Harvard.

Jeff adds:

Remember that Trump doesn't know what the nuclear triad is and the harridan cattle trader didn't know what the letter C in an e-mail header meant. The termagant also didn't know that Libya is having a civil war, one that she started. Gary shouldn't know what Aleppo is as his concerns are to stay away from foreign entanglements.

Charles adds:

A colleague suggested that a good comeback would have been "Look, my intention is to not start wars, so that Americans won't have to know the name of every war ravaged hamlet on earth."



Arizona Frank who did much turf training and punting in Australia would berate all his jockeys when they tried to win. He insisted like Bacon that the only way for him to make a reasonable return on his stable was to make his horses run bad in the races while he prepared them to win so that he could receive proper winning odds when he bet on his horses. How much like a market that looks bad.



Here is a story I trust you will all find most useful and informative. I have not figured out how to game the Whole Foods Market system yet, but this story gives away some of the good tactics that work in most shopping cart checkout stores.

"How to Pick the Fastest Line at the Supermarket"

anonymous writes: 

There are similar tactics in the TSA security lines. Avoid lines with kids and old people and wheelchairs. Avoid lines with ladies with lots of bling. Best is to get TSA pre or priority or first class lines. One trick is to use a different gate portal. For example, the line at the end of the terminal in Honolulu had a handful vs an half hour line in the middle. Another trick is to go to the International Terminal and walk back to domestic. The lines at international are empty during mid day as many Intl flights come late at night. A good thing if you have time is to come very early for the flight and check in early. Even better is to ride a private jet. 



 Not market related, but useful if true:

The overly long article makes the case that:

1. It is severe overkill to be changing your oil every 3,000 miles. 5,000 may even be more frequent than necessary–try 7,500.

2. If you use Mobil 1 Extended Performance synthetic oil, you can stretch it out to 15,000 miles.

3. Not included in the article, but I recall a big study by Consumer Reports that came to roughly the same conclusion. The experiment was done on NYC taxi cabs (iirc).

I hate changing oil and had been thinking of how great it would be to have a Tesla for that reason. But I could live with once every 15,000 miles.

anonymous writes: 

I think you can make an analogy here with time, risk, and energy spent on unnecessary trades that among other things, don't meet certain criteria, are part of a preset dogma that doesn't take advantage of market price movements, use of energy, capital, etc. that could be used for other activities, etc.



 I just completed a drive from Lewistown, Montana to Miami, Florida going through the Dakotas, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and then dropping South. Here are a few of the things we noticed.

The most highway patrolmen pulling over people was in Ohio. So many we googled it and found that in fact Ohio gives more tickets than any other state combined the ticket giving business is $6 billion a year revenue to the states.

I was amazed how few signs I saw for Clinton or Trump, certainly a scarcity of them. The Trump signs were always very large and homemade. They were not the traditional poster signs given by the candidates. I find this very interesting. It probably marks the intensity of his followers.

The price of gasoline varied from 3.27 a gallon at the airport in Miami to $1.84 in South Carolina. On average we paid 2.00 .Lots and lots of semi-trucks and discovered they get paid about 45 cents a mile up to 60 depending on the goods they are delivering and a few other things. So for my 2,500 miles I would have made $1,250; not easy money at all.

I have also had my fill of talk radio, but it can be helpful when getting sleepy. I found talk jocks I very much disagreed with and listened to them. Stayed awake with no problem.

Happy trails to all.



 "People in Los Angeles are getting rid of their cars"

Uber and Lyft have already devastated investments in taxi medalions. Their ride sharing applications will cause the car manufacturing industry to shrink from the current peak. Replacement parts may increase as the average fleet wears out rather than ages out.

Watch LA traffic to determine if the increase in ride sharing causes congestion to actually decrease. A decrease in congestion may result in a decrease in the demand for transportation infrastructure, and lower profits for specialty construction equipment and contractors. (I tried to convince the local county government not to fund the extension of DC Metrorail and let software apps handle the growth in travel. Obviously, I failed to convince them.)

Be careful with investments in toll roads or toll road bonds (short opportunities?). Income of parking company REIT's may also suffer at some point, but this may be hidden by capital gains if interest rates remain below market clearing levels.



 Lately, I've been studying a lot of close up magic. Knowing how magic works gives a glimpse into many market behaviors. I've realized that the market mistress is the best magician ever. That being said, Jay Sankey provides the best magic tutorials I've ever seen on Youtube and I recommend that you subscribe and see how "in your face deception" really works.

Here's a classic trick that will fool anyone, and this guy is the best. Without any equivocation, I will say that this is the most elegant card trick I've ever seen. (As an aside, I'd fast forward the video first to 17:00 to see how the trick in full to gain perspective, then back up to the beginning to see the behind the "scenes"). This will be the best 18 minutes you ever spent learning something new.


Resources & Links