# Time to get out of the market?



## Sampson (Apr 3, 2009)

With the recent market rally - are you tempted to cash in and go to the sidelines?

Some industries have bounced >75% from the lows (Ag/fertilizers stocks), the CAD life-co's are up almost 50%, banks have recovered a lot etc.

No one has shown any real ability for sustained growth in this environment, we know both consumers and financial institutions are not spending - the major root of this down turn (tight credit) is still around.

I'm not bearish per se, certainly no bullish - I just think it'll take a long while before things start chugging. So, any of your tempted to sell, now that markets have recovered substantially? I know I'm tempted, don't know if I'll do anything though.


----------



## CanadianCapitalist (Mar 31, 2009)

Sampson said:


> With the recent market rally - are you tempted to cash in and go to the sidelines?


I'm fully invested as always. We are getting largish refund this year and would love to have another market correction!


----------



## archanfel (Apr 7, 2009)

Tempted, yes. Doing it, no. 

I tends to stick with my investment schedule no matter the market condition.


----------



## Rickson9 (Apr 9, 2009)

Sampson said:


> With the recent market rally - are you tempted to cash in and go to the sidelines?


No. My wife and I don't like the idea of cashing out - especially since we don't need the cash. We have found that 10 years of gains significantly outweights any fast short term price increases.



Sampson said:


> Some industries have bounced >75% from the lows (Ag/fertilizers stocks), the CAD life-co's are up almost 50%, banks have recovered a lot etc.


Our stocks have run up 30% in a month. We don't expect that rate of growth to continue, but we won't sell either.

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=...on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=...on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined



Sampson said:


> I'm not bearish per se, certainly no bullish - I just think it'll take a long while before things start chugging. So, any of your tempted to sell, now that markets have recovered substantially? I know I'm tempted, don't know if I'll do anything though.


When prices are low and falling we are VERY bullish. When prices are high and rising we are VERY bearish. At the moment we find ourselves to be bullish far more than bearish. A year ago it was the opposite.


----------



## thecomingdepression (Apr 8, 2009)

Rickson9 said:


> No. My wife and I don't like the idea of cashing out - especially since we don't need the cash. We have found that 10 years of gains significantly outweights any fast short term price increases.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You may want to view this Economic Advisor by the name of Martin Armstrong, if he is right, we will see a catastrophic event on April 20-23. He has predicted, with his mathematical economic model, many events that have happened. He is currently in JAIL because he refused to turn over this "model" to the US government. The Government claimed he was controlling the world markets. Goldman Sachs was the main whiner. Martin got 5 yrs in prison, if you can believe that! It must have some HUGE economical meaning for the government to put him away. I have read entire articles over the years and they are incredibly ACCURATE and SCARY..He just wrote one in the last few weeks I have it on my blog...We'll see how accurate he is over the next few days!


----------



## Bullseye (Apr 5, 2009)

Everyone got their tinfoil hats on?


----------



## Sampson (Apr 3, 2009)

Who needs tin foil hats?

I got a machine that recycles urine and a couple of shotguns.


----------



## ethos1 (Apr 4, 2009)

thecomingdepression said:


> You may want to view this Economic Advisor by the name of Martin Armstrong, if he is right, we will see a catastrophic event on April 20-23. He has predicted, with his mathematical economic model, many events that have happened. He is currently in JAIL because he refused to turn over this "model" to the US government. The Government claimed he was controlling the world markets. Goldman Sachs was the main whiner. Martin got 5 yrs in prison, if you can believe that! It must have some HUGE economical meaning for the government to put him away. I have read entire articles over the years and they are incredibly ACCURATE and SCARY..He just wrote one in the last few weeks I have it on my blog...We'll see how accurate he is over the next few days!


report back on the 24th and update us on what happened

If Armstrong is correct as you say, then everyone should be buying PUTS or shorting stocks

Tin hats - not allowed

BTW, do you have any idea or any details of the catastrophic event?


----------



## Rickson9 (Apr 9, 2009)

thecomingdepression said:


> You may want to view this Economic Advisor by the name of Martin Armstrong, if he is right, we will see a catastrophic event on April 20-23. He has predicted, with his mathematical economic model, many events that have happened. He is currently in JAIL because he refused to turn over this "model" to the US government. The Government claimed he was controlling the world markets. Goldman Sachs was the main whiner. Martin got 5 yrs in prison, if you can believe that! It must have some HUGE economical meaning for the government to put him away. I have read entire articles over the years and they are incredibly ACCURATE and SCARY..He just wrote one in the last few weeks I have it on my blog...We'll see how accurate he is over the next few days!


I don't pay attention to predictions because I don't believe in predicting the future. If I did, I would also believe in fortune tellers... but perhaps I should pay more attention to fortune tellers who use 'mathematical economic models'? Yea, math definately lends more credibility to my fortune teller...


----------



## ethos1 (Apr 4, 2009)

Rickson9 said:


> I don't pay attention to predictions because I don't believe in predicting the future. If I did, I would also believe in fortune tellers...


my wife can predict almost anything and be 100% wrong


----------



## takingprofits (Apr 13, 2009)

Sampson said:


> With the recent market rally - are you tempted to cash in and go to the sidelines?
> 
> Some industries have bounced >75% from the lows (Ag/fertilizers stocks), the CAD life-co's are up almost 50%, banks have recovered a lot etc.


I am looking at it on a stock by stock basis. Some stocks may just be due for a short pullback and not a retest of lows. Others look like they will soldier on. 

If a stock has had a long run the time for me to sell is when it closes below the trend time or below the 20 day moving average. Sometimes I get spooked earlier though given the behaviour of this recession.

I actually sold a few going into last weekend expecting a bigger pullback than we got and bought a few that had pulled back yesterday and today - and probably tomorrow.


----------



## confusion (Apr 17, 2009)

I cashed in my SDRSP account (as in "sold all my equities") and was very pleased upon doing so as I was able to realize a large gain in the span of less than 5 years - I had basically exceeded my investment goals. 
I needed to put aside a chunk of money for the HBP anyways, so this was as good a time as any. 
Now the question is, when do I get back in?


----------



## Rickson9 (Apr 9, 2009)

confusion said:


> Now the question is, when do I get back in?


My wife and I hate this question; we're not smart enough to know the answer - which is one of the reasons we never get out.


----------



## Rickson9 (Apr 9, 2009)

ethos1 said:


> My wife can predict almost anything and be 100% wrong


When I try to make predictions I usually come out with the same record.


----------



## mfd (Apr 3, 2009)

I'm tempted to sell. I'm fully invested right now and am finally back in the black. Its hard not to since I'm up a lot on a few of my purchases (ing 130% and USB 70%). Right now I'm just waiting on BAC to announce and I'll decided then.


----------



## ethos1 (Apr 4, 2009)

mfd said:


> Right now I'm just waiting on BAC to announce and I'll decided then.


annouce what?

and when you do get into BAC will it be buy & hold, since they currently are paying no dividends


----------



## mfd (Apr 3, 2009)

ethos1 said:


> annouce what?
> 
> and when you do get into BAC will it be buy & hold, since they currently are paying no dividends


BAC is announcing earning on the 20th. I already own BAC and am enjoying that 1c dividend  . I just haven't decided if I want to sell if the news is half decent.


----------



## ethos1 (Apr 4, 2009)

mfd said:


> BAC is announcing earning on the 20th. I already own BAC and am enjoying that 1c dividend  . I just haven't decided if I want to sell if the news is half decent.


sometime after the 20th April have you considered doing a long covered call then taking the premium to buy more stock.

Whether its worth doing or not depends on you average price, right now the call option $12.50 JAN 2010 is paying over $2.50


----------



## mfd (Apr 3, 2009)

ya might be worth while. My average price is about $10.20. I wouldn't mind selling 700 shares as covered calls.


----------



## ethos1 (Apr 4, 2009)

mfd said:


> ya might be worth while. My average price is about $10.20. I wouldn't mind selling 700 shares as covered calls.


at end of day BAC closed up at $10.60, then after hours it popped to $10.96

The $12.50 call options last trade

Jan 2010 last $2.74
Jan 2011 last $3.20

After seeing what Citi reported today, BAC's results next week may see the stock go either way. My guess is above $11 - $12


----------



## CJB (Apr 4, 2009)

I voted yes, for the simple reason that I am pulling my money out for a down payment on my first house (using RRSP HBP etc). Perfect timing!

In any other scenario I would be holding on to my investments and cash, wait for another correction and buy some more.


----------



## mfd (Apr 3, 2009)

ethos1 said:


> After seeing what Citi reported today, BAC's results next week may see the stock go either way. My guess is above $11 - $12


BAC will probably report good numbers and cause the price to go up. I agree with thicken My Wallet that the numbers will probably be accounting slight of hand. 

What worries me is I don't have any more funds on hand. If the stock spikes I'll probably exit half of my position since I'm way over weight in BAC and sit on the cash and wait for another possible market correction


----------



## spbrunner (Apr 19, 2009)

*Investing in current market*

Before the last bear market, that start at the end of 2000, I had always waited until it was considered that the bear market was over before starting to invest again. This did not work out well, as I never got any really great deals in stock. In the last bear market, I invested when the market was on it way down. When I found a stock I liked at a price I liked, I bought. This worked out very well for me. The main problem was dealing with stock I bought go further and further down. However, in all my time investing since the '70's, I got some of the best deals I ever managed. I have been investing in this market basically since January 2009. I have been doing this carefully and slowing, but I have been investing. Is this bear market over? Will we have another down leg? I do not know. But, eventually, the market will turn and my portfolio will continue to be in great shape.
-----------------
http://www.susanpbrunner.com/ -talking about Canadian Stocks

-------------
I must admit when I when back to look at my entry and I was listed as a "Junior" member I was quite surprised. It is rather wonderful to be called "junior" at my age. I must admit I have not been called "junior" anything for some time.


----------



## Rickson9 (Apr 9, 2009)

spbrunner said:


> Before the last bear market, that start at the end of 2000, I had always waited until it was considered that the bear market was over before starting to invest again. This did not work out well, as I never got any really great deals in stock. In the last bear market, I invested when the market was on it way down. When I found a stock I liked at a price I liked, I bought. This worked out very well for me. The main problem was dealing with stock I bought go further and further down. However, in all my time investing since the '70's, I got some of the best deals I ever managed. I have been investing in this market basically since January 2009. I have been doing this carefully and slowing, but I have been investing. Is this bear market over? Will we have another down leg? I do not know. But, eventually, the market will turn and my portfolio will continue to be in great shape.


My wife and I strongly agree.

Buy during bear markets and go to bed. Wake up in 10 years and enjoy the wealth.


----------



## Brad911 (Apr 19, 2009)

I'm with CC on this one: I welcome another correction or downdraft in the markets.

As an investor in the accumulation phase of his investing timeline I want valuations to remain low so I can buy more shares of great companies. I'm actually disappointed that the markets have moved upwards ~20% because stocks and bonds just aren't as cheap as they were when everyone was irrational and fearful.


----------



## ethos1 (Apr 4, 2009)

*MFD, did you sell your BAC today?*



mfd said:


> BAC will probably report good numbers and cause the price to go up. I agree with thicken My Wallet that the numbers will probably be accounting slight of hand.
> 
> What worries me is I don't have any more funds on hand. If the stock spikes I'll probably exit half of my position since I'm way over weight in BAC and sit on the cash and wait for another possible market correction


MFD, ouch today on BAC


----------



## Jon Chevreau (Apr 4, 2009)

If you think you can "time" the market, read Larry Swedroe's new blog which I mention in my own blog today at www.wealthyboomer.ca.

In particular, read his three-part series entitled "The Advice Remains the Same," in which he talks about efficient markets, why you can't time the market and why even so-called "defensive" strategies won't work.

http://moneywatch.bnet.com/investin...e-markets-are-efficient/218/?tag=content;col1


----------



## ethos1 (Apr 4, 2009)

Jon Chevreau said:


> If you think you can "time" the market, read Larry Swedroe's new blog which I mention in my own blog today at www.wealthyboomer.ca.
> 
> In particular, read his three-part series entitled "The Advice Remains the Same," in which he talks about efficient markets, why you can't time the market and why even so-called "defensive" strategies won't work.
> 
> http://moneywatch.bnet.com/investin...e-markets-are-efficient/218/?tag=content;col1


Agree that timing the market is a fools game

Did you not say you held GE?

If so, what is your average price on GE and how long have you been holding it?

What had you set as an exit price going in the first time, or was the idea to be in for the long haul no matter what to collect dividends


----------



## Jon Chevreau (Apr 4, 2009)

Yes, my advisor suggested G.E. about a year ago as a "bond substitute" -- his term for quality blue chip stocks that pay a dividend of 5 or 6% (or more) and therefore can be "substituted" for no more than 1/5th of your bond portfolio, assuming you have the risk tolerance. 

This was one of about a half dozen such recommendations and the only one that really blew up: as we know, G.E. cut the dividend for the first time in decades. I don't plan to sell: it's a long-term position and in fact I don't mind adding to it as it falls. 

Still "down" about half on that stock but it's just a miniscule percentage of the total portfolio and I intend to collect its dividends when I'm old and grey. Well, older and greyer.

www.wealthyboomer.ca

www.financialpost.com/fd


----------



## mfd (Apr 3, 2009)

ethos1 said:


> MFD, ouch today on BAC


Yep...what can you do. Mr. Market doesn't know what they want.


----------



## takingprofits (Apr 13, 2009)

Regarding "timing the market" - that phrase has become a catch all put-down to be used whenever someone strays from the advisor-friendly buy, forget, and hold philosophy that is laden with risk. Are you still holding the Nortel stock you bought years ago because to sell is "timing the market".? So where do you draw the line?

For some reason, being learned enough to scrutinize a stock to determine if it is worth buying is considered a good thing while having a strategy to sell the stock when most of the good times are over is considered a bad thing - timing the market. One must hold through the bad times instead of putting the money to better use.

If an investor is smart enough to understand from the fundamentals and technicals that a stock has a reasonable chance of advancing - why is using that same information to sell when the reasonable chance of advancing is over and buying another with a reasonable chance of advancing looked upon with derision?

Swerdoe's article is carefully crafted to deflect blame for portfolio losses from advisors and encourage clients to stay with them because only advisors have the wisdom to do nothing and not "time the market".


----------



## archanfel (Apr 7, 2009)

takingprofits said:


> Regarding "timing the market" - that phrase has become a catch all put-down to be used whenever someone strays from the advisor-friendly buy, forget, and hold philosophy that is laden with risk. Are you still holding the Nortel stock you bought years ago because to sell is "timing the market".? So where do you draw the line?
> 
> For some reason, being learned enough to scrutinize a stock to determine if it is worth buying is considered a good thing while having a strategy to sell the stock when most of the good times are over is considered a bad thing - timing the market. One must hold through the bad times instead of putting the money to better use.
> 
> ...


The real problem with timing the market is the investor make money mostly from other market timers. Therefore, it's a zero sum game. 

Actively traded funds manage their funds, well actively. Therefore, it does not matter whether the client stay with them, the underline equities are changing constantly, thus timing the market constantly. They can do that because they are professionals. However, study have shown that very few actively traded fund can outperform the market more than its MER. Advisors rarely advice that client to buy passive index funds because there's nothing in it for them. Therefore, I'd say the advisor friendly way is timing the market rather than buy, forget and hold. 

Nortel is a matter of diversity, rather than timing. For a diversified investor, Nortel should never make up more than a very small percentage of his portfolio. Therefore, whether he sticks with it or not, does not make any difference. There's always a chance that Nortel would recover and the stock price reflects that chance (which diminished over the years). In fact, another main problem with active trading is lack of diversification. It's a double edge sword. Bigger return = bigger risks. Unfortunately, a lot of investors only see the returns.

Again, I am not saying timing the market is a bad thing. By definition, half of the investments performs better than the market.


----------



## takingprofits (Apr 13, 2009)

archanfel said:


> The real problem with timing the market is the investor make money mostly from other market timers. Therefore, it's a zero sum game.


I would not agree with that. When you buy or sell a stock it is the same as any other purchase or sale. You are doing so because you believe it will benefit you - and it usually does based upon your own needs, time horizons, etc. The same applies to the person on the other end of the transaction.

The transaction usually ends up being an advantage to both parties - it is not a matter of one wins and the other loses. To not sell because of some belief that the buyer will be disadvantaged is wrong-headed. You should not project your own circumstances on the market in general.


----------



## archanfel (Apr 7, 2009)

takingprofits said:


> I would not agree with that. When you buy or sell a stock it is the same as any other purchase or sale. You are doing so because you believe it will benefit you - and it usually does based upon your own needs, time horizons, etc. The same applies to the person on the other end of the transaction.
> 
> The transaction usually ends up being an advantage to both parties - it is not a matter of one wins and the other loses. To not sell because of some belief that the buyer will be disadvantaged is wrong-headed. You should not project your own circumstances on the market in general.


Subjectively, yes, different people have different needs. Objectively, the market doesn't really care. The fact is, you bought at $x/share an sold at $y/share. It doesn't really matter you took the loss to satisfy a debt repayment thus in reality saved money, that's outside the market. If the index value returned to the value of a particular point, I suspect the sum of the return of all the people participated in the market over the that period would be 0 (not counting commissions and dividends). Of course, the indexer's return would also be 0. 

Of course, since indexers would be dollar averaging in (i.e. not pure buy and hold), you can potentially make money from them. However, I doubt that would be significant and should balance itself out over the long run. The majority of the gains above the market performance should be mirrored by other people who are under performing the market, for whatever reasons.


----------



## takingprofits (Apr 13, 2009)

One can overthink this concept. 

Today I sold some bank stock because I believe it is overdue for a correction. I intend on buying it back at a later date at a lower price.

It is unlikely the stock I sold was bought by a "market timer" as anyone who was "timing the market" would be aware of the current market conditions for that particular stock and would not be buying it. 

It is more likely the stock was bought by someone who is buying for a long term hold and when the stock dropped after they bought the stock that does not mean they were a loser if they were buying for a long term hold as the stock will go up again and it will go significantly higher. The short term loss would be meaningless to the buyer.


"Market timers" do not buy from other "market timers" as you asserted earlier making it a zero sum game. Since the buyer and seller have different needs and time horizons both win. 

Who do you think you bought the stock you currently own from? After all how can one person who believes in buy and hold buy from another since neither will ever sell


----------



## archanfel (Apr 7, 2009)

takingprofits said:


> One can overthink this concept.
> 
> Today I sold some bank stock because I believe it is overdue for a correction. I intend on buying it back at a later date at a lower price.
> 
> ...


When you buy back the stock at a lower price, who are you going to buy it from? Sure, it might be a retiree leaving the market, but chances are it would be somebody who think the price will drop (because the chart says this or the fundamentals says that). He would think you are a long term buy and holder since "anyone who was "timing the market" would be aware of the current market conditions for that particular stock and would not be buying it. " The guy who you sold it to definitely would not sell it back to you if he is a buy and holder. 

Again, the sum of all people buy and selling a particular stock would be exactly the same as buy and holder over a particular time period. Of course, it could be paper loss or strategic loss or whatever, but the math is quite simple. Some people win, some people lose over that time period. Some people would care more, some people would care less, but that does not change the numbers.


----------



## takingprofits (Apr 13, 2009)

archanfel said:


> When you buy back the stock at a lower price, who are you going to buy it from? Sure, it might be a retiree leaving the market, but chances are it would be somebody who think the price will drop (because the chart says this or the fundamentals says that).


I doubt that. Anyone who was actually looking at the fundamentals and the technicals would think the stock was going up and would be buying - not selling. It would more likely be the retiree cashing out to put his money into a GIC. I would be doing him a favour by buying his stock - everyone wins


----------



## archanfel (Apr 7, 2009)

takingprofits said:


> I doubt that. Anyone who was actually looking at the fundamentals and the technicals would think the stock was going up and would be buying - not selling. It would more likely be the retiree cashing out to put his money into a GIC. I would be doing him a favour by buying his stock - everyone wins


Ok. If that's your view of the market, then so be it. I don't think all market timers agree with each other all the time. I actually never met two who agreed all the time, but what do I know. 

Although if every market timer agree with each other, why would the stock price drop to the lower price in the first place? Unless all retirees start to sell their stocks at the same time. The minute one retiree start to sell, a market timer would have snatch the stock up. The price will stay right where it belongs. 100% representing the value of the company. That would be a perfectly efficient market. Therefore, no bargains to be found. Either way, it's a zero sum game.


----------



## Rickson9 (Apr 9, 2009)

I don't know if it's a zero-sum game or not, but it sure is an easy way to build wealth!

"I'd be a bum on the street with a tin cup if the markets were always efficient." - Warren Buffett

"I have a name for people who went to the extreme efficient market theory which is "bonkers". It was an intellectually consistent theory that enabled them to do pretty mathematics. So I understand its seductiveness to people with large mathematical gifts. It just had a difficulty in that the fundamental assumption did not tie properly to reality." - Charlie Munger


----------



## takingprofits (Apr 13, 2009)

archanfel said:


> The price will stay right where it belongs. 100% representing the value of the company. That would be a perfectly efficient market. Therefore, no bargains to be found. Either way, it's a zero sum game.


You seem to thing there is an actual identifiable value for a stock - one that is based on fact and is indisputable. There isn't of course. 

The value is determined by the buyer's opinion of the value at that point in time - just like the value of your house is not fixed. Even when an appraiser gives the the "value" of your house - it is just an opinion and just based on what buyers have been prepared to pay in the past and what homes of comparable utility are selling for.


----------



## Bullseye (Apr 5, 2009)

thecomingdepression said:


> You may want to view this Economic Advisor by the name of Martin Armstrong, if he is right, we will see a catastrophic event on April 20-23. He has predicted, with his mathematical economic model, many events that have happened. He is currently in JAIL because he refused to turn over this "model" to the US government. The Government claimed he was controlling the world markets. Goldman Sachs was the main whiner. Martin got 5 yrs in prison, if you can believe that! It must have some HUGE economical meaning for the government to put him away. I have read entire articles over the years and they are incredibly ACCURATE and SCARY..He just wrote one in the last few weeks I have it on my blog...We'll see how accurate he is over the next few days!


I guess not very accurate! Or like most doomsdayers, he'll just say he got the date wrong, but IT'S COMING!!! YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!!!


----------



## archanfel (Apr 7, 2009)

takingprofits said:


> You seem to thing there is an actual identifiable value for a stock - one that is based on fact and is indisputable. There isn't of course.
> 
> The value is determined by the buyer's opinion of the value at that point in time - just like the value of your house is not fixed. Even when an appraiser gives the the "value" of your house - it is just an opinion and just based on what buyers have been prepared to pay in the past and what homes of comparable utility are selling for.


Therefore, no two buyers will agree. That's kind of my point. You might think the house is cheap, another person would think it's too expensive. From a pure financial perspective, one of you would be wrong and lose out on the deal. It doesn't even need to be an actual loss, it can be a opportunity loss. However, in the end, the sum of your returns would negate each other out. Therefore, it's a zero sum game. It's really simple math. You can run a simulation of millions of random buy and sell on a stock. In the end, you will find out once you add everybody's return together, the sum would be zero (assume the stock price returned to the original value).


----------



## archanfel (Apr 7, 2009)

Bullseye said:


> I guess not very accurate! Or like most doomsdayers, he'll just say he got the date wrong, but IT'S COMING!!! YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!!!


Didn't you see the rally stopped right on April 20th? Sell! Sell! Sell!


----------



## CanadianCapitalist (Mar 31, 2009)

archanfel said:


> Therefore, it's a zero sum game. It's really simple math. You can run a simulation of millions of random buy and sell on a stock. In the end, you will find out once you add everybody's return together, the sum would be zero (assume the stock price returned to the original value).


Agreed. Market timing gains and losses in aggregate cancel out and sum up to a big fat zero for all market participants. Add in commissions, bid-ask spreads and taxes and it is hardly a surprise that market timing is extremely hard to make money in.


----------



## stephenheath (Apr 3, 2009)

> He is currently in JAIL because he refused to turn over this "model" to the US government. The Government claimed he was controlling the world markets.


Funny, according to wikipedia he's in jail for fraud and running a ponzi scheme...



> In 1999, Japanese fraud investigators determined that Armstrong had been collecting money from Japanese investors, improperly "commingling" these funds with funds from other investors, and using the fresh money to cover losses he had incurred while trading; this is a form of Ponzi scheme. [6] Assisting Armstrong in his scheme was the Republic New York Bank which produced false account statements to reassure Armstrong's investors, and which in 2001 agreed to pay $606 million as restitution for its part in the scandal.[7]
> 
> Armstrong was indicted in 1999, and was ordered by Judge Richard Owen to turn over a number of gold bars, computers, and antiquities that had been bought with the fund's money; the list included bronze helmets and a bust of Julius Caesar.[8] Armstrong produced some of the items, but claimed the others were not in his possession; this led to several contempt of court charges.[9] Armstrong was jailed for seven years for contempt of court, and only went to trial when the NY Court of Appeals removed Judge Owen from his case; in 2007 he pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five more years in prison.[10] Armstrong continues to write essays and has commented on the current economic conditions facing the United States and the world in 2007-09.


(From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_A._Armstrong)


----------



## furgy (Apr 20, 2009)

With 50% of my portfolio in REIT's , I have been using this market downturn to buy more units.
At a combined return of about 18-20% on all my REIT holdings , I am content to sit out this market and wait for the equity side of my portfolio to come back up in value.
I invest for income instead of just hoping for capital gains , so short term market fluctuations don't influence my investing decisions much.
I invest mainly in small to mid cap companies , to me they have the largest upside potential , whenever a stock doubles in price I sell half of my holdings , this does not include REIT's which I hold forever for the income.
So no , I am not tempted to sell unless one of my stocks doubles in value.


----------



## Spidey (May 11, 2009)

I've been selectively selling into this rally. Mind you, I was buying during the crash. (However, even I chickend out toward the bottom.) It depends on personal circumstances. In a way, the timing of this crash may have been beneficial for me because its taught me that I've over estimated my risk tolerance and I don't want to be caught with my pants down (or overly dependant on equities)when I do retire. I'm considering retiring in 5-7 years. I'm a lot closer to retirement than Brad911, so I'll take advantage of any upticks to gradually adjust my balance towards more fixed-income.


----------



## mike_bayer (May 13, 2009)

Dr. Ken French on market timing - yahoo video

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/3913819/10646890


----------

