>
Tonite is my debut on Fast Money — a fast "Chartology" segment, from 5:30pm to 5:40pm or so, on CNBC. The show is on at 5pm and again at 8 pm.
We will be discussing the SPX, State Street bank (STT) and Stanley (SXE)
See discussion after the jump . . .
Should be fun!
~~~
UPDATE: December 4, 2007 7:36am
The Chartology segment is posted at CNBC
Not how much macro/fundie info I slipped in.
~~~
The S&P500 SPX
– Long term trend line remains in
place. That means (at least short term) we give the market the bullish
benefit of the doubt. 1500 remains key resistance, and how the market
behaves between 1400-1500 will be telling, especially in terms of
breadth and volume. In our managed accounts, we remain mostly long,
but wary.
– Why wary? These 3 warning signs:
1) The SPX year over year quarterly earnings just went negative in Q3 2007 – this was the 1st time we saw that in 5 years.
2) Markets negative after 75 bps Fed Rate/Discount cuts – historically, this has not been a positive sign;
3) Dow Theory Sell signal is also a warning.
4)
Numerous big (200-300+) up & down days over the past 90 days —
msotly on the distribution side. . This tend to suggest a change in
market character.
Stanley (SXE):
Sexiest name in the group (pun intended), We like stocks that are strong getting stronger and love 52 week highs
-Stanley has doubled since the summer, while the rest of the market was in turmoil.
-The company is still small, just ~$800M market
-Your ideal entries are between $30-36
State Street Bank.
-While
the Financials have been getting creamed this year, State Street held
its own, bucking the trend in the financial sector.
-The stock is up ~16% YTD, raising its market cap to near $31 billion. Over the same period, the XLF Financials are DOWN 16%
– That’s terrific relative strength.
– Bullish consolidation above $73 support, and it recently broke out of a one month trading range to a new 52-week high.
– The entry is above this consolidation at $78 to $82, with a relatively tight stop below that line
Cool. That should be interesting.
Sweet
I love….. 1490,…… Giddyup.
Unfortunately now I have to watch fast money.
Barry,
They’re high energy, so speak loudly, clearly and quickly……
and don’t slouch…
Quints
what a little gadabout
good luck
rgds pcm
Stock talk without RNC propoganda or clown outfits. What a novel concept.
Barry, the segment was terrific. You were dynamite–don’t you dare second guess a thing about it!
That was great. Let’s have more like that!
BR they shoe horned you into a 3-minute segment… But the presentation was effective. Does this mean you’ve left Don Luskind to entertain himself now, or are the Kudlow appearances still to be regular?
I hope not, Kudlow is becoming a O’Reilly with all his shilling for the Bush admin.
He should rename the show “Kudlow Country”.
Leave Kudlow and his cronies behind. This was much better. If they let you work fundamental segments in, you just stick with this lot.
Yeah, how could I forget?!?
BR, Dylan Ratigan didn’t interrupt you seven times…
Still won’t watch that channel…..it’s too painful……;-)
BTW I think every guest on Tv giving out what they call advice should have a significant portion of money in whatever they are shilling so that we can finally get some objectivity…..
HAHAHHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH
Ciao
MS
Liked the segment on FastMoney tonight Barry. I think that this kind of segment allows you to shine more than the Kudlow segments do, since you have the time to yourself and can talk individual stocks easier.
Barry,
Great blog, your point of view is right.
BR,
Great job tonight. I would of liked to see those 4 ask you some questions. I do watch the show (dvr) most everynight just for giggles. Nice that DR didnt interupt you with his constant joking around..
Nice suit Barry!
Great segment, great delivery….
The show needs a good theme song. I suggest Black Oak Arkansas (sort of).
Ben Bernanke to the rescue!
Ben Bernanke to the rescue!
Ben Bernanke to the rescue!
Go, Ben Bernanke! Go, Ben Bernanke!
Market sittin’ on 14,000 top
Outta nowhere it began to drop
Paper profits were gettin’ thin
Then the chairman came rushin’ in
Ben Bernanke to the rescue!
Go, Ben Bernanke! Go Ben Bernanke!
Magic worked a little while
Crooks and liars began to smile
But those smile began to fade
on whispers of some more downgrades
Ben Bernanke to the rescue!
Go, Ben Bernanke! Go, Ben Bernanke!
Ben Bernanke to the rescue!
Ben Bernanke to the rescue!
Ben Bernanke to the rescue!
Go, Ben Bernanke! Go, Ben Bernanke!
The segment worked for you, but why does everyone on CNBC act as if they’ve just consumed 2 or 3 quarts of coffee?
I wouldn’t mind seeing a business network with thoughtful anchors skillfully unpacking difficult scenarios without speed or attitude.
Why does it have to be Fast Money anyway? What’s wrong with Money Without Yelling? I’m guessing these shows demonstrate the values of modern television producers and not necessarily anything else.
You look good and did good Berry; fast, short and sweet.
Remember that formula, the bulls are so dilatory.
“What many men desire–that ‘many’ may be meant” William Shakespeare
You need a show. That is all.
I have a philosophical question for you.
Nothing against Gartman because I regard him highly, but I’ve noticed a strange phenomenon that occurs when he guests most any segment on any financial show… even by phone without appearing in person.
He speaks of being long or short some security or commodity in this manner: “Long ‘of’ copper, or short ‘of’ gold” or other positions and he always uses the word ‘of.’
I may be wrong but I don’t remember that there is any other person or persons who do that, singularly or in combination. That is, nobody else practices ofadding, except Gartman.
That’s not what the phenomenon is however, because I myself probably have the random odd or atypical mannerism when appearing in public or private discourse.
No, the puzzlement I observe is that when he guests somewhere, others on the show begin to add the ‘of’ like he does. They become ofadders… they add of when he’s on and never add of at any other time independently of Gartman’s appearances.
Why is that?… Is it mind control?… Is it hypnosis?… Respect-for-guest?… Lingo adaptation?
I’m just saying I’m puzzled, that’s all.
Barringo, you are not an ofadder… You didn’t add of. Why didn’t you? Are you opposed to ofadding?… Are you too proud to add of? I watched but didn’t record the show, so if I missed you ofadding I wish to be corrected.
BTW, I’m not saying I’m opposed to adding the odd of, and I’m certainly not opposed to Mr. Gartman’s ofadding, His is natural and instinctual, but I must say that I can only force myself to add of just for this writing. Hard as I try when I put stills of Mr. Gartman up and focus on them and try to conjure up his voice and mannerisms with the sound turned down, or with the sound up and I listen to him ofadding… it just doesn’t work for me. There’s no magic… I don’t get even one single of out of it.
I’m thinking of beginning my own tradition and speaking of long or short positions by inadding. I want to be an inadder and spread the adding of in.
Henceforth on TBP, I shall only refer to positions as being long ‘in’ or short ‘in’ a given position. I’m going to attempt to meet the Gartman ofadder syndrome and turn it to inadding before it becomes too common.
I ask you all, my readers, do you now feel a need in the sense of wanting to inadd, as in “long ‘in’ gold, or short ‘in’ XYZ?”
Or, would you all just, absent the stimuli, once again default to not being ofadders or inadders?
Nice job, my friend — even if I still think most of the chartology stuff is voodoo.
Thanks, Paul
You will note that the segment was leavened with a lot of fundamental and macro data . . .
While we can debate the finer merits of TA, its hard to argue with the basic merits of staying on the right side of the trend.
As you get more and more esoteric, the odds move further away from your favor. The more complex the chart pattern, the more subjective its interpretation becomes.
Eclectic,
What you noticed is called mirroring, in psychology. In short, the syncing up means both parties are agreeing on a subject on a sub-conscious level.
Mirroring is very key to neuro-linguistic programming. In this case one of the parties is engaging the mirroring consciously to get into the system (lower the psychological barrier) of the other party/parties. Once in you can elicit responses which you would normally not have access to.
To answer your question, once the sync is gone you revert to the default behaviour. Which is best, unless it is part of a psychological treatment, were the reverting would mean a total failure (get your money back).
I don’t think the host in your example is engaging the interviewee. But yes, a ‘weak’ person could be coaxed into agreeing with his views on the show, and later on regret not knowing ‘why the hell did I say that!?’ …
About that support level: it doesn’t have the volume coming into it for support. We are going lower.
It was fun to watch. Thanks.
mhm,
I got’cho neuro-linguistic mirrorized psycho-syncng right here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-O_Ntv-Q628
In other words…. the h-e-r-d-i-n-g instinct, where the human psychological craving for it is always a core explanation to human behavior.
But our Fearless Leader is no sheep!
All in fun, mhm… all in fun. I’m not naming sheep.
Thanks for the laugh, Eclectic.
Barry ask football Pete about his big pipe computer hook up. Guy has been in to many kick-offs!!!
STT above 80 otherwise don’t bother.
I noticed that Karen Finerman also made some skeptical comments about technical analysis. This is the standard “voodoo” charge of the hard core value investors who can’t imagine trying to be anything other than Warren Buffett.
But the truth is that stocks move for reasons and so when you look at a chart it gives you an idea of if a company is doing well, how loved it is by investors, where are points that it seems cheap and expensive to investors, etc…
A chart gives you a lot of information about a company and especially how investors collectively think about a company. Because you need a variant perception (a difference between what the market thinks and what you think) to make money, this is a crucial piece.
Barry-
That was an excellent segment on Fast Money last night. I am a regular reader of you Blog so I tuned in to see you. I think you were very well presented.
I have a comment regarding Stanley. On the show you explained their business as a government-funded infrastructure play. Looking into the company, I love their earning and sales growth. Their general fundamentals as well as the technicals look excellent for significant price growth in the near future, so thanks for the great pick; however, I think you missed the idea of what the company does.
They are an information technology company that focuses on software for system engineering, enterprise integration, and business process improvements. Nothing they do is an actual infrastructure (ex. Minnesota Bridge) project. Their work revolves around developing software that streamlines and manages information flow.
Just a suggestion for next time …
BR – excellent presentation. Re-assuring as well in that it dovetails with my thinking and I’m far from your class as an analyst by several magnitudes. Also re-freshing to hear you make your points in a collaborative manner instead of getting nibbled by constipated ducks.
As it happens a couple of weeks ago I took a short- and long-term view as well as put together a chart comparing deeper structural factors to technical and sentiment factors. Interestingly those borrow heavily from you as well, hat tip and then some.
Tremors: Assessing the Markets:http://tinyurl.com/yrdgcg
WRfest 11Nov07: SEE changes and Cusp Points(Markets):http://tinyurl.com/23sklf
Oops – two postscripts.
1) Regularly watch CNBC vis MSN Money where the shows are sliced and cherry-picked. This segment didn’t make it but would hope this becomes regular.
2) Did see our friend Prof. Wesbury who’s finally admitting that consumer spending is slowing :) !!
Katie bar the door.
Larry’s still shilling and unwatchable though.
I must say that I have incorrectly labeled Barringo as being a non-ofadder when viewing the clip from Fast Money.
Indeed, he never had the opportunity to be an ofadder, and thus I can not certify him as being a true ofadder.
I will observe him in the future, particularly in proximity to Gartman’s appearances in order to assess his true ofadder status.
I sincerely hope you do not let me down, Barringo.
Please don’t be an ofadder. Please, I beg of you.
Barry,
the first time I saw you on TV. WOW.
you are so cute, you look like Mr. Bean.