Squawk Box

A couple of thoughts for today’s segment, which I may or may not get to:

Here are some examples of what the numbers for the 50% bonus the Accelerated Depreciation rule, scheduled to expire 12/31/04 (and discussed here) look like:

Example: Laptop PC
3 year depreciation schedule
2004 depreciation schedule: Year 1: 67% (50% + 1/2 of 33%)
2005 depreciation schedule: Year 1:  33% (1/3 of the value)

Switching Equipment
5 year depreciation schedule
2004 depreciation schedule: Year 1: 60% (50% + 1/2 of 20%)
2005 depreciation schedule: Year 1:  20% (1/5 of the value)

The key is that in order to qulaify for the 2004 depreciation schedule, the captial equipment must be “Placed in Service” by that 12/31/04 — not merely ordered, or sitting in a warehouse, but in actual use.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web:
  1. Dan commented on Aug 4

    Hey Barry – love your segment on the Chips today on CNBC – we too are starting to get a little Bullish here in Europe on the Chips. Love the statistics about cars being the biggest users of semis. Do you have official numbers regarding Semi usage? Perhaps post it on your blog maybe.

    Also another idea we have been playing around with is the idea that the Semis Index is the new Transport Index for the Dow Theory – Strength in Semis ultimately means strenght in the S&P….do have any views on that ????

  2. anonymous commented on Aug 6

    Hi Barry. Me again. I forgive you for never engaging me in my prior quesitons when the last jobs report came out. Remember? About the effects of changes in market participants? Your loss, really. I mean, let’s get real. How many people comment in here? 4? It ain’t like you are the New York Times or something. and you aren’t even going to talk to me? whatever.

    That isn’t really what I want to say, though. I actually wanted to give you a heads up. I went down to Barnes and Noble and bought the Mandelbrot book on your wish list. I might’ve bought you a copy, but since you won’t talk to me, (the annonymous thing and all) I don’t see the point. Maybe I’ll change my mind. You have a lot of guts even putting a comment board on this thing, even if you won’t engage me. It really seems silly, actually. Anyway, even if I don’t send you one, you really ought to read it. I won’t ask you to believe my recommendation. Anybody with his credentials in math who is saying that all of modern financial theory is built on a set of premises that are bullshit is definitely worth reading for a guy in your line of work.

    Parenthetically, while we are talking books, one reason I keep coming back is because you put Bloom on your recommend list. I first read his genetic view of history about 6 years ago, and loved it. I figured anyone who pimps Bloom has to be pretty interesting, and you haven’t dissapointed.

    Finally, let’s figure out if you are really worth your salary, or at least are a better prognosticator than say, an annonymous poster on your blog.

    I say you are dead wrong about the market. Your August 2 prediction of a reversal is off the mark. We are going to continue to go down. Added to the uncertainty of the election, as Iraq cools off, the insurgency is going to heat up. If tomorrow’s job report is any good, we might see a temporary bump, but overall, the market is going to stink until at least middle to late October. The herd is moving against your prediction, and the first rule is never fight the tape.

    If you want to put some numbers on it, just so the end points are clear, I suggest this. I bet the Dow will see 9500 before it sees 10500. Alternatively, I bet the NASDAQ will see 1700 before it gets back over 2000

    Now that we are both on record, it will be much more fun to watch the action. BTW, my money is where my mouth is. I am patiently waiting for an entry point. I’ll tell you which stocks I like the day after I buy them, probably next November.

  3. Barry Ritholtz commented on Aug 6

    I am violating my own rule by responding to anon here, but its an opportunity to clarify things:

    1) I do not respond to anonymous posts, trolls, or disengenous commentary (to his credit, anon is the 1st, & not 2 or 3). I simply do not have the time.

    2) If I am putting it out here — right or wrong for the world to see, the LEAST a commneter can do is have the courage of their convictions and put a name/email address up. Get some spine — or a Yahoo address.

    3) I expect to be wrong; That’s part of my process. Although for the pasty few years, I have been a lot righter than I have been wrong. Regardless, bat .400 in this field and you are a superstar — as long as you have a plan for what to do when you are incorrect.

    4) Note to cowards: You’re only as anonymous as I am lazy. While I capture IP addresses — Anon here is — its not worth my time to reverse look up who they are. So while you think you are anonymous, it turns out you are not.

    5) Certain posts get more commnets than others: See this one on Radio, or this on Amercian Rock Bands as examples.

    So on a final note to Anon, verily, I say to thee: Reveal yourself and I will respond. Hiding in the shadows forfeits your right to complain you’ve been overlooked . . . .

  4. Fester’s Place commented on Aug 13

    Business Investment

    future expansion would imply that another late 90’s boom would be on the way. I don’t think that is likely. So that leaves it to the govenernment or the consumers of America to sustain growth. However record federal budget deficits and record trade a…

  5. Seymour Shlomchik, M.D. commented on Aug 28

    Your guest host today (Brian?) judged retail sales in the country by one store in a mall in N.J. where he lives. He said it was anecdotal but spoke volumes regarding how slow business was. Business in a Boca Raton mall in Fl. was quite busy. I worry how a superficially judgemental person can make any scientific objective decisions. I couldn’t listen anymore to this genius and switched channels.

Posted Under