Dec

3

Here's an interesting article saying that daylight savings time is bearish because it's disruptive. I believe the study should be generalized to all disruptive events.

Jordan Low asks:

But what about this article saying the opposite? Which article is correct?

Vic Niederhoffer continues:

That's the point. Daylight savings time comes too rarely for a scientific study to be based on it, and there are too many comparable events that occur once or twice a year. Or perhaps I don't get the joke?

Bruno Ombreux writes: 

I cannot think of anything more disruptive than the dreaded EFA calendar in the UK power market. You may want to study its impact on spark spreads and UK-continent spreads.

Also, their days run from 23:00 to 23:00 instead of 24:00 to 24:00 like everywhere else in the World.


Comments

Name

Email

Website

Speak your mind

2 Comments so far

  1. FrParlentAuxFr on December 4, 2012 8:07 pm

    Is a crack-up boom caused by a disruptive event, is it bearish on asset prices? Maybe in real terms for some of them, maybe not in real terms for others. Is it caused by a disruptive event?, most likely. Maybe the definition of bearish should be first in order. If I am short an asset or contract am I bearish? I am bullish on my short view maybe. Sometimes a colleague talks to me about a asset price going “up”. At that point a 90 degrees rotation of the screen is in order, and then asset prices move right and left all of the sudden. Problem solved! For some reason the psychological association with right and left is less problematic than up and down. Maybe it is because ultimately we all go down and finish beneath the ground…. We do not go left or right, although Italians are superstitious and would consider left as a bad sign ” a sinistra”.

  2. FrParlentAuxFr on December 4, 2012 8:24 pm

    Another question, in all contractions where the precious metals was the monetary standard there was a rush to convert currency into precious metals which would force banks to liquidate assets. Since the parity was maintained the adjustment was trough bankruptcies. Today we remove bankruptcies but the rush is still there and the adjustment is not through the bankruptcies but through the price of of the monetary standard (USD or shadow monetary standard). The point being, if I am bearish on most asset classes am I bullish on the monetary standard? In 2009, pretty much every asset class was going into a bear mode, should it be rather that one should have been bullish on the monetary standard at the time? So bullish the numerator or bullish the denominator, or bearish the denominator and bearish the numerator and vice and versa. The cognitive bias of bearishness is fascinating. If a super intelligent computer could think, maybe he would have no fear of going “down” and die and concept of bearishness and bullishness would be foreign to him.

Archives

Resources & Links

Search