Media Appearance: CNBC’s Morning Call (05/21/07)

Morningcall128x88


This morning, I’ll be on CNBC at 10:00am, discussing markets & the economy with the lovely Liz Claman.

On today’s agenda:

Relative outperformance of overseas bourses versus the U.S.

Defensive rotations: Materials, Agricultural Chemicals, Insurance, Utilities, Pharmaceuticals, Energy

Big & Mid cap versus Smallcap 

Underperformance of Tech

Should be fun!

UPDATE:  05/21/07 4:54pm

Its on the CNBC site

Marketoutlook2thumb_2

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web:
  1. patu commented on May 21

    “Money is very available, it’s reasonably cheap, stocks aren’t expensive and world growth is good,” said Robert Doll, who oversees more than $1 trillion as chief investment officer at BlackRock Inc. in Plainsboro, New Jersey. “That’s the logic in a lot of these deals. I think they continue.”

    The S&P 500 added 3.34, or 0.2 percent, to 1526.09 as of 11:03 a.m. in New York, less than 0.1 percent below its all-time high set in March 2000.

  2. Barry Ritholtz commented on May 21

    Those numbers sound off:

    The all time high is 1552.7; The CLOSING high is 1527.

    I would think that an intra-day high past an intra-day high is significant, as well as a closing high above a prior closing high.

    Why anyone (but CNBC) cares about an intra-day move past a closing high is hard to fathom . . .

  3. Fred commented on May 21

    Why do we care about Starbores, I mean Starwars either? Thank God for Bloomberg.

  4. S commented on May 21

    Merrill Lynch owns a big chunk of Blackrock. It was announced today that Merrill is buying a minority stake in Bennett Goodman’s $8 billion distressed debt fund today. (Morgan Stanley has recently aquired stakes in a couple of distressed debt shops, too)

    Guess they’re preparing now for when the credit mania ultimately ends in tears. I firmly believe the distressed guys are going to be tomorrow’s Billionaire Boys on the magazine covers — probably around 2009-2010.

    But who knows, maybe it really is different this time.

  5. tjofpa commented on May 21

    Underperformance of Tech…

    and of course, as soon as u post this , that great contrary eye in the sky has the Dizzy leading the way today.

  6. Barry Ritholtz commented on May 21

    I’ve mentioned the underperformance of Tech repeatedly over the past year

  7. jkw commented on May 21

    It’s not clear to me why an all-time high would be very significant. I can understand why people would care about a 1-month, 1-year, or other fixed time period high. But does it really mean anything that the Dow keeps making new all-time highs? Does that actually make this rally any stronger than the one last spring, when the Dow was making multi-year highs below the all-time high? Does the fact that the market has now caught up to previous bubble prices mean anything at all? Given economic growth, it doesn’t even mean we are in a bubble now.

    It means even less when considering that the highs aren’t inflation adjusted. What is the all time high in the continuous futures contract? How much would a June 2007 S&P 500 contract have been worth in 2000? My quick estimate is that it would have been around 2100-2200. You would have been much better off buying a 7 year CD in 2000 than trying to make money in the market. A 3-year CD followed by 4 years long would have been the most profitable (or maybe short for 3 years and long for 4), but you would have to be good at market timing to pull that off.

  8. NJ Lawyer commented on May 22

    A few weeks before the November 2006 election, Liz Claman interviewed a guest who said that the Republicans could hold Congress.

    Her reply was: “That would be wonderful.”

    She should have been fired on the spot.

    My opinion would be the same if she had expressed a preference for the Democrats.

  9. joh commented on May 22

    barry you were calling for dow 10,500 in the 1006 year end business week survey and here we are at 13,600 and you sound bullish. they only bring you on tv because you’re one of the few overall bearish people in the last 5 years

    ~~~

    BR: Joh, you are incorrect. Here are the facts:

    3 years ago, I rec’d investing in Japan, Korea, Maylasia, Singpore and Australia over the US. Specifically, our thesis was that Asia would do much better than the U.S., and that the US economy would lag the world’s growth rate, as interst rates went up and housing pulled GDP down.

    Since then, the indices in the US have lagged those other bourses.

    Additonally, prior to the major 1973-type correction you refer to, I specifically called for a major rally in the indices and new highs PRIOR to the major correction. The numbers were Dow 11,800, Nasdaq 2600, and SPX 1350. Its in print at businessweek, and thestreet.com. (http://www.thestreet.com/_tscs/markets/marketfeatures/10262175.html)

    I know why certain insincere and intellectually disengenous weenies don’t like to reference that part of the correction discussion — it ruins their argument. Is it asking too much that people actually read a full article? Its on the first page, for cryin out loud.

  10. Barry Ritholtz commented on May 22

    Here is the Bull Call Before the Fall that disingenuous critics like to ignore:

    Before the Fall

    “With everyone so focused on the bearish year-end forecast, many have overlooked my expectations for early 2006. As the Business Week survey shows, my first half Nasdaq prediction of 2620 was the single most bullish in the group, while my mid-year S&P call of 1350 was in the top 10 of nearly 80 forecasters. I also forecast Dow 11,800 by mid-year. (For the record, the survey was conducted in early December.)

    Why the bull call before the fall? Because that’s how market tops get made: In the 12 months leading up to the October 1987 highs, the Dow ran from 1800 to 2700 (a 50% gain), while the S&P 500 sprinted from under 240 to about 340 (about 42%). From October 1999 to March 2000, the Nasdaq nearly doubled. Although I don’t expect anywhere near those gains in the first half of 2006, the pattern could be quite similar: A leap to new highs on some widely held assumption, which subsequently turns out to be false.

    In the present case, several suppositions potentially fit the bill: The widespread expectations that the Federal Reserve will halt tightening sooner rather than later and that the U.S. consumer will keep spending. And do you know anyone who doesn’t believe earnings will remain robust?”

  11. Fred commented on May 22

    Barry…do you still feel that we are in a secular bear market?

  12. joh commented on May 22

    BARRY IN THE BUSINESS WEEK POLL DID YOU NOT HAVE YOUR PREDICTION FOR DOW 10,500 FOR MID 2007 AND 13300 FOR YEAR END 2007? I COULD HAVE SWORN THAT WAS YOUR PREDICTION. I DON’T THINK YOU’RE A PERMA BEAR BY ANY MEANS BUT YOU DO TILT TOWARD THE BEARISH SIDE

  13. Matt M. commented on May 22

    BR:
    Your forcasting article hits the silly game right on the head. The biggest problem I ever have with any pundit is the absolute conviction in his/her call. Never… what could go wrong or right with the call…never acknowledging that the other side of the trade could be intelligent as well….never why I missed this call…never…. wow-I can’t afford to have missed this kind of move and so on. It’s always the same stone conviction “I’m right …you’ll see…all you morons should be heeding my call”

    I’m talking in general here, so don’t get defensive. As you know, any trader worth a nickel has a ton of respect for what can go wrong with a trade, yet a pundit rarely mentions it.

  14. Barry Ritholtz commented on May 23

    No disrepect taken!

    Long story short — I originally approached Business Week to do a piece about the folly of forecasting — why the annual surveys are worthless a few days later.

    Instead, they invited me to do the annual forecasting issue.

    I do the forecasting stuff because its good business (PR), and my partners would be miffed if I didn’t.

    But as I made it clear in that column, people should realize its nonsense . . .

Read this next.

Posted Under