BR: Eloquent, insightful, lucid — why on earth would the filter catch this? Its the perfect comment !
markpmc Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
the title reminds me of the question greg maddux asked a rookie pitcher.
“You trying to throw strikes or get people out?”
Liquidity Trader Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
ahab,
The comment was from a traders perspective — it went right over your head.
Not only do you impose your politics on a non-political post, you completely misunderstand it. And to magnify your foolishness, you are rude to our host in a way that reveals you to be a much bigger asshole than I previously imagined.
This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types. Try one of the Austrians sites,or ZH — they don’t care about making money.
mbelardes Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
After reading through the comments (I rarely see BR this active on the comments, by the way) I’ve come to the conlcusion that some of the commenters are here to learn about macro perspectives and data analysis as a part of money management and some are here to root against the money management sector altogether.
This is why some of the posts where BR criticizes the market and market participants, such as firms and regulators, are so wildly popular and some of the sweet charts and data analysis get MAYBE a few dozen comments.
JasRas Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I’m in the makin’ money business, and frankly this isn’t that hard!! Right or wrong, the Fed and other CB’s are doing some version of QE, monetary expansion, etc… My basic view is dollars are worth less and other things are worth more…other things mean stocks, commodities–including precious metals, etc. Things that promise to return your dollars at a latter date in exchange for a predictable cash flow (ie. fixed income) mean you are getting dollars back later at an unknown deflated value. The cash flow paid in no way is compensating you for that lost buying power. Now, you say, there is no inflation! Look at the CPI. Well….if you believe stats compiled by the government, good luck to you because assets that perform well in inflationary environments are doing well. What amount is inflation and what amount is debasement is not for me to figure out or care….
Are we short term over bought? In all probability, yes. Is this market obliging people and “letting them in”? NO! My experience with rallies that “won’t let you in” is that they’ve got a ways to go. With so many institutional types underperforming, you are witnessing a rally most likely driven by career risk. But, again, the why is somewhat irrelevant. Are you going to watch, or are you going to participate? Are you long? Are you long enough?
The interesting thing I see is the TNX is still hitting record low yields on the 10yr… Someone is going to be wrong, and in a big way because these rubberbands only stretch sooooo far. Is it stocks or is it fixed? One could argue that both are overbought right now. Gold too for that matter. Something somewhere is going to take a breather. Which do you want to be wrong on. You want to top-tick fixed income? Gold? Or a stock market that still isn’t up to the April highs? I can tell you which one is easiest to get forgiveness for…equities.
Good luck to all.
davver Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Barry,
The essential problem is how one is supposed to own assets they know are overpriced. If you believe equities are overpriced then you are playing a greater fools game. How are you to know when you aren’t the greatest fool?
“BTW, just because you are making money in other sectors, does not mean you CANNOT make money in equities.
Making money in Gold or Bonds (ala my pal David Rosenberg) does not excuse missing a HUGE Equity rally.”
Can’t you say the same thing about every bubble? Shouldn’t I have been flipping houses from 2003-2005. Shouldn’t you have been buying and then selling tech 1998-2000. The truth is you have no clue when a bubble is going to end. You could just as easily have seen the housing bubble or tech bubble end earlier or later then it did. There is no rationality to a bubble. Prices simply get more and more insane until they don’t anymore. They seem just as insane the whole way through. You can’t say you have some magic insight as to pinpoint when the insanity will stop.
Look, I use technical investing and other indicators to try and pick my buy and sell points. But I buy things I think have good fundamentals and I sell them when I think they don’t anymore. The technical stuff just helps me pick specific entry/exit points on things I already feel good about. I don’t run out and buy assets I think are crap because some chart or sentiment indicator or gut feel makes me.
When I was younger I put myself through college playing poker, which I feel is very similar to investing. I was a pretty conservative player. I read up on Sklansky, analyzed my hands logically, and played very mathematically. I was aggressive but didn’t naked bluff often just enough to keep people off balance and steal some pots. I was careful never to get too deep into a hand that was trouble. It was reliable profit.
Some people are successful a very different way. They are extremely hyper aggressive and bluff constantly. They rely almost entirely on reading their opponent with little regard for their own cards. I’m sure that there are many people with a similar talent for trading financial instruments. They have a read on the tape. They can make money that way. However, like poker there are many people who think they can do that and can’t for every one that can. In fact I’d say its less likely in investing, as the sample size on investments is too small and the complexity too great.
If you truly think you have the talent to pick the bottom and top of every single investment trend then congratulations. Me, I’ve got to be more humble. I’ve got to focus on things I understand and have a track record of success with. I’d rather stay away from things I consider dangerous that I don’t understand. So I don’t think its wrong to chase every single bubble. Like Rosenburg I’ve made decent profits in gold and bonds. And I didn’t lose any on the way down for equities, in fact I captured about half of the down leg as a short before covering. Maybe I didn’t quintuple my money, but I’ve done rather well, and with a very low amount of risk in my mind.
DiggidyDan Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
I’m just glad after liquidating a lot of my positions from the stock market due to not believing the economic recovery was sustainable, I kept my basic core holdings in stocks i still believed in that pay good dividends and have constant demand such as ADM, BDX, BHP, CVX, GSK, JNJ, MMM, SCCO(formerly PCU YEAH COPPER!) and UL. and halved the rest of the stuff between long term TIPS Bond funds (LTPZ and PRRRX) and an emergency fund in 3% yield MM account. Only problem is I had a couple unforseen blowups in BP and BAX due to non market catastrophes that stopped me out and cost me some big coin. I haven’t made much money over the last 3 years, but I haven’t lost any and I have beat the S&P 500.
Only problem is, I lost 60 Large in the housing market and can’t refi at these low rates and took a pay cut.
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
“This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types”
laughable (and so full of self importance)- also you may want to consider a career in blog enforcement(as if BR can’t take care of himself)-
also- where are my politics? Where were they mentioned in this thread?
I guess you must have mind melded me from across your keyboard (and my guess is you still got it wrong)
Mark E Hoffer Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
“Regardless of how the rally concludes, the folks who missed an 85% generational run up in equities will pound their chests and say “See, we told you so!” And they will have made absolutely no money in the process.”–BR, above
BR,
‘Equities’ are the ‘only investment’?
why not run some DOW/Gold, or DOW/Silver, Charts to go with that?
as Boockvar, rightly, was pointing out, recently, the SPX/CRBRIND, after the “strongest one-month Equity Rally since ’39″, is nearly 1 ..
Hey, you’re better than that…
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
I ask:
“what happens if the Fed doesn’t or is unable to oblige?”
BR replies:
“Then you sell.”
I was looking for something more thorough (in a macro sense)- but I like this answer just on brevity alone
gman Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
Venn,
I may use that rant in the near future…maybe at my firm…to the only person who is a “tea-party fellow traveler”…who also just happens to be the only trader of the 9 we have who is struggling!
Well put!
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Boo-Yah Barry!
GYSC Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Barry,
I appreciate you taking the time to post this and answer all the comments. I think I see better know how you look at things.
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
It’s actually a good post BR. It does come across a little bit like “chest-thumping,” but sometimes the black and white pixels come across in a different way than the voice/tone in the head. We’ve all come across the wrong way in the written word.
With that said, I think the S&P will trade below 900 before 12/31/2011. I’d take some friendly side-action on that proposition bet.
rootless Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Barry,
We made money from March 09 til April 2010. Since then, we have mostly avoided losing money. Its been a good strategy.
Well, good. I haven’t been doing so well for recent months. But it wasn’t my fault. My trading program did it.
However, as of today, S&P500 is down only 4.7% from the peak in April. So my criticism stands. You say your approach is right, because you have made money since March 09, based on the performance mostly during the price run up. You say yourself the secular bear market has still to find its bottom. Right? And you think the market is overvalued based on metrics like CAPE? Then, I have to agree with some other commenter here, that you are playing the greater fool game. And, in addition to that, you ridicule the ones who are grumpy about it and don’t want to play along and have therefore “missed a 85% generational run up”. You basically say that everyone who participates in this game could have made huge profits. But this logic is flawed. A greater fool game can’t work and won’t have worked for everyone who has participated, after everything is said and done. It only works for some, the ones who are the first ones at the exits, you may belong to those, but it doesn’t work for many. It works for some because it doesn’t work for many. The gains for the ones are the losses for the other ones. The outcome this time won’t be different to the final outcome of the stock market and real estate bubble earlier this decade with misery for many. And the judgment over any investment approach will be spoken when the market cycle has come to its full closure, not based on the performance from the market lows in March 2009 to today.
Your at least implicit advice that one should do it like you have done it, if one wants to make big gains in the stock market, is actually very bad advice, even if it has worked for you.
Tom Perriello always knew it would be hard to hold his seat in Congress. The progressive Democrat from Albemarle County, Va. represents a district designed to nullify liberal votes with a wide swath of conservative countryside. He was elected in 2008, riding President Obama’s coattails to victory by just 727 votes. He does not represent a swing district--he is a committed progressive in a solidly Republican district. But unlike his Blue Dog contemporaries, Perriello has voted like a progressive for the past two years. And unlike many Blue Dogs, he might actually pull out a victory tomorrow night, even in the face of a Republican wave fueled by double-digit unemployment. The mere fact that he’s in the running is a stunning accomplishment.
I lived in Perriello’s district for eight years before moving to Washington, D.C. this summer. For mountains, majesty, and rock ‘n roll, it simply can’t be beat. But there were problems, namely persistent racial tensions, a lousy economy and politicians who perpetuated these two troubles. For all but the last two years we were represented by Virgil Goode, a conservative Republican and unabashed bigot. Years before Fox News made Islamophobia a mainstream political view, Goode was openly attacking Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., on the grounds that he was – gasp!—a Muslim. Goode cruised to re-election every cycle, easily surviving the 2006 Democratic wave, despite being a Bush-backing war-monger in a year when voters were rejecting both Bush and his war in Iraq.
I lived in Charlottesville, a tiny outcropping of progressive politics at the northern tip of the Fifth District. From Charlottesville, the district fans out directly to the rural south, extending all the way to the North Carolina border. It’s a two-and-a-half hour drive straight south from Charlottesville to Danville, three hours southwest to Collinsville or southeast to Brunswick. All four towns are in the same district. Just 40,000 people live in Charlottesville—120,000 if you include Albemarle County (which is not as progressive as “the city”). But the district as a whole includes nearly 650,000 people, most of it tiny towns and farmland, and most of its inhabitants Republicans. Jerry Falwell’s right-wing conservative Christian enclave Liberty University is smack in the middle of Perriello country.
Conventional wisdom dictates that Democratic politicians in such districts vote like Republicans. Otherwise, a Republican runs against you, points out that you’re not a Republican, and beats you.
But Perriello decided to take a different tack when he was elected. Instead of capitulating to policies and votes he didn’t believe in, he would do what he thought was right, and make an aggressive case to voters that he was, in fact, right.
On every major vote in the past two years, Perriello voted with progressives, at times even voting against President Obama on the grounds that his policies were not progressive enough. He voted for healthcare reform and the stimulus package, but he voted against Wall Street reform because it didn’t hit the big banks hard enough, and he voted against disbursing the second round of bailout money to the banks (he wasn’t in office when the bank bailout was approved).
He never apologized for these votes or caved to right-wing rhetorical frames, and he hit the road to campaign on his record, explaining his positions directly to voters. This was old-school campaigning, and it wasn’t glamorous—trekking from Danville to Martinsville to Charlottesville every week, making speeches, shaking hands and answering questions in town-hall meetings. But Perriello is not your standard politician waiting for a cushy lobbyist job. He has a deep background in social justice work—he’s in Congress because he wants to make a difference, not to score a sweet paycheck.
All of that campaigning has paid off. Voters are pissed off this year. They’ve watched Wall Street profits soar on the back of a taxpayer-financed bailout, even as ordinary Americans have been laid off by the millions. Whether Republicans take control of the House tomorrow night or not, they will certainly make big gains as voters reject policymakers who cater to big banks while failing to tackle the jobs problem—either out of political cowardice or ideological blindness.
But Perriello is holding even with Republican challenger Robert Hurt. The fact that Perriello even has a chance in this election ought to be viewed as something of a miracle. Or maybe it’s just good governing, combined with good politics.
Tim Fernholz almost gets it right in his profile of Perriello for The American Prospect. But he misses the mark with this comment, which is going to be echoed by the Beltway establishment on Wednesday morning, however the race turns out:
“If Perriello can beat the odds tomorrow, it is not only his reputation, and the president's, that will be burnished . . . . Should he lose, the voices who call for a more timid Democratic Party will have a point in their favor.”
This is wrong. Perriello won in 2008 by just 727 votes. Any Democrat who entered office by so slim a margin is almost certain to lose this year. By any conventional political analysis, Perriello should be getting trounced He faces a massive voter registration disadvantage, representing a district that is designed to crush progressive voices during what is expected to be a wave election for Republicans, amid strong anti-incumbent attitudes sparked by high unemployment. But he’s holding even. That’s incredible. Even if things go well for Democrats tomorrow, and they hold the House, candidates in much safer districts than Perreillo’s are going to lose.
The Perriello lesson, in other words, is already clear. Whether he wins or loses on November 2, having the courage to govern by his convictions and do real work to sell those policies has paid off. It might not get him re-elected. But in an all-but-impossible district, losing close sends a clear signal to actual swing districts. Governing like a pretend-Republican only reinforces the Republican world-view and aligns voters against you. If you want to have a chance, you have to stand for something. Tom Perriello stood for something these past two years, and even if it can’t overcome a terrible economy to win him two more years, the political establishment should take heart.
eric seiger
<b>News</b> - Dad: How Demi Lovato Is Holding Up - Celebrity <b>News</b> <b>...</b>
"I want her to be happy," Patrick Lovato tells Us.
Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Snyder's 'Superman' Ditches Zod and Depp's <b>...</b>
To your right is the first look at Gary Oldman as George Smiley in Tomas Alfredson's ('Let The Right One In') adaptation of John.
Fox <b>News</b> Beats USA Network For Top Cable Network On Night After <b>...</b>
Fox News was the top cable network during prime time on Wednesday night, the day after the midterm election, ahead of USA Network's highly-rated NCIS re-runs. Bill O'Reilly had the most-watched show on all of cable, while Sean Hannity ...
eric seiger
BR: Eloquent, insightful, lucid — why on earth would the filter catch this? Its the perfect comment !
markpmc Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
the title reminds me of the question greg maddux asked a rookie pitcher.
“You trying to throw strikes or get people out?”
Liquidity Trader Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
ahab,
The comment was from a traders perspective — it went right over your head.
Not only do you impose your politics on a non-political post, you completely misunderstand it. And to magnify your foolishness, you are rude to our host in a way that reveals you to be a much bigger asshole than I previously imagined.
This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types. Try one of the Austrians sites,or ZH — they don’t care about making money.
mbelardes Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
After reading through the comments (I rarely see BR this active on the comments, by the way) I’ve come to the conlcusion that some of the commenters are here to learn about macro perspectives and data analysis as a part of money management and some are here to root against the money management sector altogether.
This is why some of the posts where BR criticizes the market and market participants, such as firms and regulators, are so wildly popular and some of the sweet charts and data analysis get MAYBE a few dozen comments.
JasRas Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I’m in the makin’ money business, and frankly this isn’t that hard!! Right or wrong, the Fed and other CB’s are doing some version of QE, monetary expansion, etc… My basic view is dollars are worth less and other things are worth more…other things mean stocks, commodities–including precious metals, etc. Things that promise to return your dollars at a latter date in exchange for a predictable cash flow (ie. fixed income) mean you are getting dollars back later at an unknown deflated value. The cash flow paid in no way is compensating you for that lost buying power. Now, you say, there is no inflation! Look at the CPI. Well….if you believe stats compiled by the government, good luck to you because assets that perform well in inflationary environments are doing well. What amount is inflation and what amount is debasement is not for me to figure out or care….
Are we short term over bought? In all probability, yes. Is this market obliging people and “letting them in”? NO! My experience with rallies that “won’t let you in” is that they’ve got a ways to go. With so many institutional types underperforming, you are witnessing a rally most likely driven by career risk. But, again, the why is somewhat irrelevant. Are you going to watch, or are you going to participate? Are you long? Are you long enough?
The interesting thing I see is the TNX is still hitting record low yields on the 10yr… Someone is going to be wrong, and in a big way because these rubberbands only stretch sooooo far. Is it stocks or is it fixed? One could argue that both are overbought right now. Gold too for that matter. Something somewhere is going to take a breather. Which do you want to be wrong on. You want to top-tick fixed income? Gold? Or a stock market that still isn’t up to the April highs? I can tell you which one is easiest to get forgiveness for…equities.
Good luck to all.
davver Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Barry,
The essential problem is how one is supposed to own assets they know are overpriced. If you believe equities are overpriced then you are playing a greater fools game. How are you to know when you aren’t the greatest fool?
“BTW, just because you are making money in other sectors, does not mean you CANNOT make money in equities.
Making money in Gold or Bonds (ala my pal David Rosenberg) does not excuse missing a HUGE Equity rally.”
Can’t you say the same thing about every bubble? Shouldn’t I have been flipping houses from 2003-2005. Shouldn’t you have been buying and then selling tech 1998-2000. The truth is you have no clue when a bubble is going to end. You could just as easily have seen the housing bubble or tech bubble end earlier or later then it did. There is no rationality to a bubble. Prices simply get more and more insane until they don’t anymore. They seem just as insane the whole way through. You can’t say you have some magic insight as to pinpoint when the insanity will stop.
Look, I use technical investing and other indicators to try and pick my buy and sell points. But I buy things I think have good fundamentals and I sell them when I think they don’t anymore. The technical stuff just helps me pick specific entry/exit points on things I already feel good about. I don’t run out and buy assets I think are crap because some chart or sentiment indicator or gut feel makes me.
When I was younger I put myself through college playing poker, which I feel is very similar to investing. I was a pretty conservative player. I read up on Sklansky, analyzed my hands logically, and played very mathematically. I was aggressive but didn’t naked bluff often just enough to keep people off balance and steal some pots. I was careful never to get too deep into a hand that was trouble. It was reliable profit.
Some people are successful a very different way. They are extremely hyper aggressive and bluff constantly. They rely almost entirely on reading their opponent with little regard for their own cards. I’m sure that there are many people with a similar talent for trading financial instruments. They have a read on the tape. They can make money that way. However, like poker there are many people who think they can do that and can’t for every one that can. In fact I’d say its less likely in investing, as the sample size on investments is too small and the complexity too great.
If you truly think you have the talent to pick the bottom and top of every single investment trend then congratulations. Me, I’ve got to be more humble. I’ve got to focus on things I understand and have a track record of success with. I’d rather stay away from things I consider dangerous that I don’t understand. So I don’t think its wrong to chase every single bubble. Like Rosenburg I’ve made decent profits in gold and bonds. And I didn’t lose any on the way down for equities, in fact I captured about half of the down leg as a short before covering. Maybe I didn’t quintuple my money, but I’ve done rather well, and with a very low amount of risk in my mind.
DiggidyDan Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
I’m just glad after liquidating a lot of my positions from the stock market due to not believing the economic recovery was sustainable, I kept my basic core holdings in stocks i still believed in that pay good dividends and have constant demand such as ADM, BDX, BHP, CVX, GSK, JNJ, MMM, SCCO(formerly PCU YEAH COPPER!) and UL. and halved the rest of the stuff between long term TIPS Bond funds (LTPZ and PRRRX) and an emergency fund in 3% yield MM account. Only problem is I had a couple unforseen blowups in BP and BAX due to non market catastrophes that stopped me out and cost me some big coin. I haven’t made much money over the last 3 years, but I haven’t lost any and I have beat the S&P 500.
Only problem is, I lost 60 Large in the housing market and can’t refi at these low rates and took a pay cut.
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
“This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types”
laughable (and so full of self importance)- also you may want to consider a career in blog enforcement(as if BR can’t take care of himself)-
also- where are my politics? Where were they mentioned in this thread?
I guess you must have mind melded me from across your keyboard (and my guess is you still got it wrong)
Mark E Hoffer Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
“Regardless of how the rally concludes, the folks who missed an 85% generational run up in equities will pound their chests and say “See, we told you so!” And they will have made absolutely no money in the process.”–BR, above
BR,
‘Equities’ are the ‘only investment’?
why not run some DOW/Gold, or DOW/Silver, Charts to go with that?
as Boockvar, rightly, was pointing out, recently, the SPX/CRBRIND, after the “strongest one-month Equity Rally since ’39″, is nearly 1 ..
Hey, you’re better than that…
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
I ask:
“what happens if the Fed doesn’t or is unable to oblige?”
BR replies:
“Then you sell.”
I was looking for something more thorough (in a macro sense)- but I like this answer just on brevity alone
gman Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
Venn,
I may use that rant in the near future…maybe at my firm…to the only person who is a “tea-party fellow traveler”…who also just happens to be the only trader of the 9 we have who is struggling!
Well put!
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Boo-Yah Barry!
GYSC Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Barry,
I appreciate you taking the time to post this and answer all the comments. I think I see better know how you look at things.
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
It’s actually a good post BR. It does come across a little bit like “chest-thumping,” but sometimes the black and white pixels come across in a different way than the voice/tone in the head. We’ve all come across the wrong way in the written word.
With that said, I think the S&P will trade below 900 before 12/31/2011. I’d take some friendly side-action on that proposition bet.
rootless Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Barry,
We made money from March 09 til April 2010. Since then, we have mostly avoided losing money. Its been a good strategy.
Well, good. I haven’t been doing so well for recent months. But it wasn’t my fault. My trading program did it.
However, as of today, S&P500 is down only 4.7% from the peak in April. So my criticism stands. You say your approach is right, because you have made money since March 09, based on the performance mostly during the price run up. You say yourself the secular bear market has still to find its bottom. Right? And you think the market is overvalued based on metrics like CAPE? Then, I have to agree with some other commenter here, that you are playing the greater fool game. And, in addition to that, you ridicule the ones who are grumpy about it and don’t want to play along and have therefore “missed a 85% generational run up”. You basically say that everyone who participates in this game could have made huge profits. But this logic is flawed. A greater fool game can’t work and won’t have worked for everyone who has participated, after everything is said and done. It only works for some, the ones who are the first ones at the exits, you may belong to those, but it doesn’t work for many. It works for some because it doesn’t work for many. The gains for the ones are the losses for the other ones. The outcome this time won’t be different to the final outcome of the stock market and real estate bubble earlier this decade with misery for many. And the judgment over any investment approach will be spoken when the market cycle has come to its full closure, not based on the performance from the market lows in March 2009 to today.
Your at least implicit advice that one should do it like you have done it, if one wants to make big gains in the stock market, is actually very bad advice, even if it has worked for you.
Tom Perriello always knew it would be hard to hold his seat in Congress. The progressive Democrat from Albemarle County, Va. represents a district designed to nullify liberal votes with a wide swath of conservative countryside. He was elected in 2008, riding President Obama’s coattails to victory by just 727 votes. He does not represent a swing district--he is a committed progressive in a solidly Republican district. But unlike his Blue Dog contemporaries, Perriello has voted like a progressive for the past two years. And unlike many Blue Dogs, he might actually pull out a victory tomorrow night, even in the face of a Republican wave fueled by double-digit unemployment. The mere fact that he’s in the running is a stunning accomplishment.
I lived in Perriello’s district for eight years before moving to Washington, D.C. this summer. For mountains, majesty, and rock ‘n roll, it simply can’t be beat. But there were problems, namely persistent racial tensions, a lousy economy and politicians who perpetuated these two troubles. For all but the last two years we were represented by Virgil Goode, a conservative Republican and unabashed bigot. Years before Fox News made Islamophobia a mainstream political view, Goode was openly attacking Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., on the grounds that he was – gasp!—a Muslim. Goode cruised to re-election every cycle, easily surviving the 2006 Democratic wave, despite being a Bush-backing war-monger in a year when voters were rejecting both Bush and his war in Iraq.
I lived in Charlottesville, a tiny outcropping of progressive politics at the northern tip of the Fifth District. From Charlottesville, the district fans out directly to the rural south, extending all the way to the North Carolina border. It’s a two-and-a-half hour drive straight south from Charlottesville to Danville, three hours southwest to Collinsville or southeast to Brunswick. All four towns are in the same district. Just 40,000 people live in Charlottesville—120,000 if you include Albemarle County (which is not as progressive as “the city”). But the district as a whole includes nearly 650,000 people, most of it tiny towns and farmland, and most of its inhabitants Republicans. Jerry Falwell’s right-wing conservative Christian enclave Liberty University is smack in the middle of Perriello country.
Conventional wisdom dictates that Democratic politicians in such districts vote like Republicans. Otherwise, a Republican runs against you, points out that you’re not a Republican, and beats you.
But Perriello decided to take a different tack when he was elected. Instead of capitulating to policies and votes he didn’t believe in, he would do what he thought was right, and make an aggressive case to voters that he was, in fact, right.
On every major vote in the past two years, Perriello voted with progressives, at times even voting against President Obama on the grounds that his policies were not progressive enough. He voted for healthcare reform and the stimulus package, but he voted against Wall Street reform because it didn’t hit the big banks hard enough, and he voted against disbursing the second round of bailout money to the banks (he wasn’t in office when the bank bailout was approved).
He never apologized for these votes or caved to right-wing rhetorical frames, and he hit the road to campaign on his record, explaining his positions directly to voters. This was old-school campaigning, and it wasn’t glamorous—trekking from Danville to Martinsville to Charlottesville every week, making speeches, shaking hands and answering questions in town-hall meetings. But Perriello is not your standard politician waiting for a cushy lobbyist job. He has a deep background in social justice work—he’s in Congress because he wants to make a difference, not to score a sweet paycheck.
All of that campaigning has paid off. Voters are pissed off this year. They’ve watched Wall Street profits soar on the back of a taxpayer-financed bailout, even as ordinary Americans have been laid off by the millions. Whether Republicans take control of the House tomorrow night or not, they will certainly make big gains as voters reject policymakers who cater to big banks while failing to tackle the jobs problem—either out of political cowardice or ideological blindness.
But Perriello is holding even with Republican challenger Robert Hurt. The fact that Perriello even has a chance in this election ought to be viewed as something of a miracle. Or maybe it’s just good governing, combined with good politics.
Tim Fernholz almost gets it right in his profile of Perriello for The American Prospect. But he misses the mark with this comment, which is going to be echoed by the Beltway establishment on Wednesday morning, however the race turns out:
“If Perriello can beat the odds tomorrow, it is not only his reputation, and the president's, that will be burnished . . . . Should he lose, the voices who call for a more timid Democratic Party will have a point in their favor.”
This is wrong. Perriello won in 2008 by just 727 votes. Any Democrat who entered office by so slim a margin is almost certain to lose this year. By any conventional political analysis, Perriello should be getting trounced He faces a massive voter registration disadvantage, representing a district that is designed to crush progressive voices during what is expected to be a wave election for Republicans, amid strong anti-incumbent attitudes sparked by high unemployment. But he’s holding even. That’s incredible. Even if things go well for Democrats tomorrow, and they hold the House, candidates in much safer districts than Perreillo’s are going to lose.
The Perriello lesson, in other words, is already clear. Whether he wins or loses on November 2, having the courage to govern by his convictions and do real work to sell those policies has paid off. It might not get him re-elected. But in an all-but-impossible district, losing close sends a clear signal to actual swing districts. Governing like a pretend-Republican only reinforces the Republican world-view and aligns voters against you. If you want to have a chance, you have to stand for something. Tom Perriello stood for something these past two years, and even if it can’t overcome a terrible economy to win him two more years, the political establishment should take heart.
eric seiger
<b>News</b> - Dad: How Demi Lovato Is Holding Up - Celebrity <b>News</b> <b>...</b>
"I want her to be happy," Patrick Lovato tells Us.
Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Snyder's 'Superman' Ditches Zod and Depp's <b>...</b>
To your right is the first look at Gary Oldman as George Smiley in Tomas Alfredson's ('Let The Right One In') adaptation of John.
Fox <b>News</b> Beats USA Network For Top Cable Network On Night After <b>...</b>
Fox News was the top cable network during prime time on Wednesday night, the day after the midterm election, ahead of USA Network's highly-rated NCIS re-runs. Bill O'Reilly had the most-watched show on all of cable, while Sean Hannity ...
eric seiger
eric seiger
eric seiger
<b>News</b> - Dad: How Demi Lovato Is Holding Up - Celebrity <b>News</b> <b>...</b>
"I want her to be happy," Patrick Lovato tells Us.
Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Snyder's 'Superman' Ditches Zod and Depp's <b>...</b>
To your right is the first look at Gary Oldman as George Smiley in Tomas Alfredson's ('Let The Right One In') adaptation of John.
Fox <b>News</b> Beats USA Network For Top Cable Network On Night After <b>...</b>
Fox News was the top cable network during prime time on Wednesday night, the day after the midterm election, ahead of USA Network's highly-rated NCIS re-runs. Bill O'Reilly had the most-watched show on all of cable, while Sean Hannity ...
eric seiger
BR: Eloquent, insightful, lucid — why on earth would the filter catch this? Its the perfect comment !
markpmc Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
the title reminds me of the question greg maddux asked a rookie pitcher.
“You trying to throw strikes or get people out?”
Liquidity Trader Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
ahab,
The comment was from a traders perspective — it went right over your head.
Not only do you impose your politics on a non-political post, you completely misunderstand it. And to magnify your foolishness, you are rude to our host in a way that reveals you to be a much bigger asshole than I previously imagined.
This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types. Try one of the Austrians sites,or ZH — they don’t care about making money.
mbelardes Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
After reading through the comments (I rarely see BR this active on the comments, by the way) I’ve come to the conlcusion that some of the commenters are here to learn about macro perspectives and data analysis as a part of money management and some are here to root against the money management sector altogether.
This is why some of the posts where BR criticizes the market and market participants, such as firms and regulators, are so wildly popular and some of the sweet charts and data analysis get MAYBE a few dozen comments.
JasRas Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I’m in the makin’ money business, and frankly this isn’t that hard!! Right or wrong, the Fed and other CB’s are doing some version of QE, monetary expansion, etc… My basic view is dollars are worth less and other things are worth more…other things mean stocks, commodities–including precious metals, etc. Things that promise to return your dollars at a latter date in exchange for a predictable cash flow (ie. fixed income) mean you are getting dollars back later at an unknown deflated value. The cash flow paid in no way is compensating you for that lost buying power. Now, you say, there is no inflation! Look at the CPI. Well….if you believe stats compiled by the government, good luck to you because assets that perform well in inflationary environments are doing well. What amount is inflation and what amount is debasement is not for me to figure out or care….
Are we short term over bought? In all probability, yes. Is this market obliging people and “letting them in”? NO! My experience with rallies that “won’t let you in” is that they’ve got a ways to go. With so many institutional types underperforming, you are witnessing a rally most likely driven by career risk. But, again, the why is somewhat irrelevant. Are you going to watch, or are you going to participate? Are you long? Are you long enough?
The interesting thing I see is the TNX is still hitting record low yields on the 10yr… Someone is going to be wrong, and in a big way because these rubberbands only stretch sooooo far. Is it stocks or is it fixed? One could argue that both are overbought right now. Gold too for that matter. Something somewhere is going to take a breather. Which do you want to be wrong on. You want to top-tick fixed income? Gold? Or a stock market that still isn’t up to the April highs? I can tell you which one is easiest to get forgiveness for…equities.
Good luck to all.
davver Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Barry,
The essential problem is how one is supposed to own assets they know are overpriced. If you believe equities are overpriced then you are playing a greater fools game. How are you to know when you aren’t the greatest fool?
“BTW, just because you are making money in other sectors, does not mean you CANNOT make money in equities.
Making money in Gold or Bonds (ala my pal David Rosenberg) does not excuse missing a HUGE Equity rally.”
Can’t you say the same thing about every bubble? Shouldn’t I have been flipping houses from 2003-2005. Shouldn’t you have been buying and then selling tech 1998-2000. The truth is you have no clue when a bubble is going to end. You could just as easily have seen the housing bubble or tech bubble end earlier or later then it did. There is no rationality to a bubble. Prices simply get more and more insane until they don’t anymore. They seem just as insane the whole way through. You can’t say you have some magic insight as to pinpoint when the insanity will stop.
Look, I use technical investing and other indicators to try and pick my buy and sell points. But I buy things I think have good fundamentals and I sell them when I think they don’t anymore. The technical stuff just helps me pick specific entry/exit points on things I already feel good about. I don’t run out and buy assets I think are crap because some chart or sentiment indicator or gut feel makes me.
When I was younger I put myself through college playing poker, which I feel is very similar to investing. I was a pretty conservative player. I read up on Sklansky, analyzed my hands logically, and played very mathematically. I was aggressive but didn’t naked bluff often just enough to keep people off balance and steal some pots. I was careful never to get too deep into a hand that was trouble. It was reliable profit.
Some people are successful a very different way. They are extremely hyper aggressive and bluff constantly. They rely almost entirely on reading their opponent with little regard for their own cards. I’m sure that there are many people with a similar talent for trading financial instruments. They have a read on the tape. They can make money that way. However, like poker there are many people who think they can do that and can’t for every one that can. In fact I’d say its less likely in investing, as the sample size on investments is too small and the complexity too great.
If you truly think you have the talent to pick the bottom and top of every single investment trend then congratulations. Me, I’ve got to be more humble. I’ve got to focus on things I understand and have a track record of success with. I’d rather stay away from things I consider dangerous that I don’t understand. So I don’t think its wrong to chase every single bubble. Like Rosenburg I’ve made decent profits in gold and bonds. And I didn’t lose any on the way down for equities, in fact I captured about half of the down leg as a short before covering. Maybe I didn’t quintuple my money, but I’ve done rather well, and with a very low amount of risk in my mind.
DiggidyDan Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
I’m just glad after liquidating a lot of my positions from the stock market due to not believing the economic recovery was sustainable, I kept my basic core holdings in stocks i still believed in that pay good dividends and have constant demand such as ADM, BDX, BHP, CVX, GSK, JNJ, MMM, SCCO(formerly PCU YEAH COPPER!) and UL. and halved the rest of the stuff between long term TIPS Bond funds (LTPZ and PRRRX) and an emergency fund in 3% yield MM account. Only problem is I had a couple unforseen blowups in BP and BAX due to non market catastrophes that stopped me out and cost me some big coin. I haven’t made much money over the last 3 years, but I haven’t lost any and I have beat the S&P 500.
Only problem is, I lost 60 Large in the housing market and can’t refi at these low rates and took a pay cut.
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
“This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types”
laughable (and so full of self importance)- also you may want to consider a career in blog enforcement(as if BR can’t take care of himself)-
also- where are my politics? Where were they mentioned in this thread?
I guess you must have mind melded me from across your keyboard (and my guess is you still got it wrong)
Mark E Hoffer Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
“Regardless of how the rally concludes, the folks who missed an 85% generational run up in equities will pound their chests and say “See, we told you so!” And they will have made absolutely no money in the process.”–BR, above
BR,
‘Equities’ are the ‘only investment’?
why not run some DOW/Gold, or DOW/Silver, Charts to go with that?
as Boockvar, rightly, was pointing out, recently, the SPX/CRBRIND, after the “strongest one-month Equity Rally since ’39″, is nearly 1 ..
Hey, you’re better than that…
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
I ask:
“what happens if the Fed doesn’t or is unable to oblige?”
BR replies:
“Then you sell.”
I was looking for something more thorough (in a macro sense)- but I like this answer just on brevity alone
gman Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
Venn,
I may use that rant in the near future…maybe at my firm…to the only person who is a “tea-party fellow traveler”…who also just happens to be the only trader of the 9 we have who is struggling!
Well put!
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Boo-Yah Barry!
GYSC Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Barry,
I appreciate you taking the time to post this and answer all the comments. I think I see better know how you look at things.
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
It’s actually a good post BR. It does come across a little bit like “chest-thumping,” but sometimes the black and white pixels come across in a different way than the voice/tone in the head. We’ve all come across the wrong way in the written word.
With that said, I think the S&P will trade below 900 before 12/31/2011. I’d take some friendly side-action on that proposition bet.
rootless Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Barry,
We made money from March 09 til April 2010. Since then, we have mostly avoided losing money. Its been a good strategy.
Well, good. I haven’t been doing so well for recent months. But it wasn’t my fault. My trading program did it.
However, as of today, S&P500 is down only 4.7% from the peak in April. So my criticism stands. You say your approach is right, because you have made money since March 09, based on the performance mostly during the price run up. You say yourself the secular bear market has still to find its bottom. Right? And you think the market is overvalued based on metrics like CAPE? Then, I have to agree with some other commenter here, that you are playing the greater fool game. And, in addition to that, you ridicule the ones who are grumpy about it and don’t want to play along and have therefore “missed a 85% generational run up”. You basically say that everyone who participates in this game could have made huge profits. But this logic is flawed. A greater fool game can’t work and won’t have worked for everyone who has participated, after everything is said and done. It only works for some, the ones who are the first ones at the exits, you may belong to those, but it doesn’t work for many. It works for some because it doesn’t work for many. The gains for the ones are the losses for the other ones. The outcome this time won’t be different to the final outcome of the stock market and real estate bubble earlier this decade with misery for many. And the judgment over any investment approach will be spoken when the market cycle has come to its full closure, not based on the performance from the market lows in March 2009 to today.
Your at least implicit advice that one should do it like you have done it, if one wants to make big gains in the stock market, is actually very bad advice, even if it has worked for you.
Tom Perriello always knew it would be hard to hold his seat in Congress. The progressive Democrat from Albemarle County, Va. represents a district designed to nullify liberal votes with a wide swath of conservative countryside. He was elected in 2008, riding President Obama’s coattails to victory by just 727 votes. He does not represent a swing district--he is a committed progressive in a solidly Republican district. But unlike his Blue Dog contemporaries, Perriello has voted like a progressive for the past two years. And unlike many Blue Dogs, he might actually pull out a victory tomorrow night, even in the face of a Republican wave fueled by double-digit unemployment. The mere fact that he’s in the running is a stunning accomplishment.
I lived in Perriello’s district for eight years before moving to Washington, D.C. this summer. For mountains, majesty, and rock ‘n roll, it simply can’t be beat. But there were problems, namely persistent racial tensions, a lousy economy and politicians who perpetuated these two troubles. For all but the last two years we were represented by Virgil Goode, a conservative Republican and unabashed bigot. Years before Fox News made Islamophobia a mainstream political view, Goode was openly attacking Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., on the grounds that he was – gasp!—a Muslim. Goode cruised to re-election every cycle, easily surviving the 2006 Democratic wave, despite being a Bush-backing war-monger in a year when voters were rejecting both Bush and his war in Iraq.
I lived in Charlottesville, a tiny outcropping of progressive politics at the northern tip of the Fifth District. From Charlottesville, the district fans out directly to the rural south, extending all the way to the North Carolina border. It’s a two-and-a-half hour drive straight south from Charlottesville to Danville, three hours southwest to Collinsville or southeast to Brunswick. All four towns are in the same district. Just 40,000 people live in Charlottesville—120,000 if you include Albemarle County (which is not as progressive as “the city”). But the district as a whole includes nearly 650,000 people, most of it tiny towns and farmland, and most of its inhabitants Republicans. Jerry Falwell’s right-wing conservative Christian enclave Liberty University is smack in the middle of Perriello country.
Conventional wisdom dictates that Democratic politicians in such districts vote like Republicans. Otherwise, a Republican runs against you, points out that you’re not a Republican, and beats you.
But Perriello decided to take a different tack when he was elected. Instead of capitulating to policies and votes he didn’t believe in, he would do what he thought was right, and make an aggressive case to voters that he was, in fact, right.
On every major vote in the past two years, Perriello voted with progressives, at times even voting against President Obama on the grounds that his policies were not progressive enough. He voted for healthcare reform and the stimulus package, but he voted against Wall Street reform because it didn’t hit the big banks hard enough, and he voted against disbursing the second round of bailout money to the banks (he wasn’t in office when the bank bailout was approved).
He never apologized for these votes or caved to right-wing rhetorical frames, and he hit the road to campaign on his record, explaining his positions directly to voters. This was old-school campaigning, and it wasn’t glamorous—trekking from Danville to Martinsville to Charlottesville every week, making speeches, shaking hands and answering questions in town-hall meetings. But Perriello is not your standard politician waiting for a cushy lobbyist job. He has a deep background in social justice work—he’s in Congress because he wants to make a difference, not to score a sweet paycheck.
All of that campaigning has paid off. Voters are pissed off this year. They’ve watched Wall Street profits soar on the back of a taxpayer-financed bailout, even as ordinary Americans have been laid off by the millions. Whether Republicans take control of the House tomorrow night or not, they will certainly make big gains as voters reject policymakers who cater to big banks while failing to tackle the jobs problem—either out of political cowardice or ideological blindness.
But Perriello is holding even with Republican challenger Robert Hurt. The fact that Perriello even has a chance in this election ought to be viewed as something of a miracle. Or maybe it’s just good governing, combined with good politics.
Tim Fernholz almost gets it right in his profile of Perriello for The American Prospect. But he misses the mark with this comment, which is going to be echoed by the Beltway establishment on Wednesday morning, however the race turns out:
“If Perriello can beat the odds tomorrow, it is not only his reputation, and the president's, that will be burnished . . . . Should he lose, the voices who call for a more timid Democratic Party will have a point in their favor.”
This is wrong. Perriello won in 2008 by just 727 votes. Any Democrat who entered office by so slim a margin is almost certain to lose this year. By any conventional political analysis, Perriello should be getting trounced He faces a massive voter registration disadvantage, representing a district that is designed to crush progressive voices during what is expected to be a wave election for Republicans, amid strong anti-incumbent attitudes sparked by high unemployment. But he’s holding even. That’s incredible. Even if things go well for Democrats tomorrow, and they hold the House, candidates in much safer districts than Perreillo’s are going to lose.
The Perriello lesson, in other words, is already clear. Whether he wins or loses on November 2, having the courage to govern by his convictions and do real work to sell those policies has paid off. It might not get him re-elected. But in an all-but-impossible district, losing close sends a clear signal to actual swing districts. Governing like a pretend-Republican only reinforces the Republican world-view and aligns voters against you. If you want to have a chance, you have to stand for something. Tom Perriello stood for something these past two years, and even if it can’t overcome a terrible economy to win him two more years, the political establishment should take heart.
eric seiger
eric seiger
<b>News</b> - Dad: How Demi Lovato Is Holding Up - Celebrity <b>News</b> <b>...</b>
"I want her to be happy," Patrick Lovato tells Us.
Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Snyder's 'Superman' Ditches Zod and Depp's <b>...</b>
To your right is the first look at Gary Oldman as George Smiley in Tomas Alfredson's ('Let The Right One In') adaptation of John.
Fox <b>News</b> Beats USA Network For Top Cable Network On Night After <b>...</b>
Fox News was the top cable network during prime time on Wednesday night, the day after the midterm election, ahead of USA Network's highly-rated NCIS re-runs. Bill O'Reilly had the most-watched show on all of cable, while Sean Hannity ...
eric seiger
eric seiger
<b>News</b> - Dad: How Demi Lovato Is Holding Up - Celebrity <b>News</b> <b>...</b>
"I want her to be happy," Patrick Lovato tells Us.
Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Snyder's 'Superman' Ditches Zod and Depp's <b>...</b>
To your right is the first look at Gary Oldman as George Smiley in Tomas Alfredson's ('Let The Right One In') adaptation of John.
Fox <b>News</b> Beats USA Network For Top Cable Network On Night After <b>...</b>
Fox News was the top cable network during prime time on Wednesday night, the day after the midterm election, ahead of USA Network's highly-rated NCIS re-runs. Bill O'Reilly had the most-watched show on all of cable, while Sean Hannity ...
eric seiger
<b>News</b> - Dad: How Demi Lovato Is Holding Up - Celebrity <b>News</b> <b>...</b>
"I want her to be happy," Patrick Lovato tells Us.
Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Snyder's 'Superman' Ditches Zod and Depp's <b>...</b>
To your right is the first look at Gary Oldman as George Smiley in Tomas Alfredson's ('Let The Right One In') adaptation of John.
Fox <b>News</b> Beats USA Network For Top Cable Network On Night After <b>...</b>
Fox News was the top cable network during prime time on Wednesday night, the day after the midterm election, ahead of USA Network's highly-rated NCIS re-runs. Bill O'Reilly had the most-watched show on all of cable, while Sean Hannity ...
eric seiger
<b>News</b> - Dad: How Demi Lovato Is Holding Up - Celebrity <b>News</b> <b>...</b>
"I want her to be happy," Patrick Lovato tells Us.
Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Snyder's 'Superman' Ditches Zod and Depp's <b>...</b>
To your right is the first look at Gary Oldman as George Smiley in Tomas Alfredson's ('Let The Right One In') adaptation of John.
Fox <b>News</b> Beats USA Network For Top Cable Network On Night After <b>...</b>
Fox News was the top cable network during prime time on Wednesday night, the day after the midterm election, ahead of USA Network's highly-rated NCIS re-runs. Bill O'Reilly had the most-watched show on all of cable, while Sean Hannity ...
eric seiger eric seiger
eric seiger
eric seiger
eric seiger
<b>News</b> - Dad: How Demi Lovato Is Holding Up - Celebrity <b>News</b> <b>...</b>
"I want her to be happy," Patrick Lovato tells Us.
Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Snyder's 'Superman' Ditches Zod and Depp's <b>...</b>
To your right is the first look at Gary Oldman as George Smiley in Tomas Alfredson's ('Let The Right One In') adaptation of John.
Fox <b>News</b> Beats USA Network For Top Cable Network On Night After <b>...</b>
Fox News was the top cable network during prime time on Wednesday night, the day after the midterm election, ahead of USA Network's highly-rated NCIS re-runs. Bill O'Reilly had the most-watched show on all of cable, while Sean Hannity ...
big seminar 14
There are very few people left in the money making industry online that are honest and can be trusted. Some of the big shots and gurus advertise their own products and make wild promises of making money with their stuff, and more often than not, they fail. The money making world needed a break, And The Light In The Darkness provides it.
The Light In The Darkness is the first system/book/manual that I've come across that actually tells you what it takes to make money online, and what you can achieve if you're diligent. Unlike most other programs today that claim that you can make over a billion dollars in 23.86 seconds by just shelling out the money these people are demanding, The Light In The Darkness tells it as it really is. The promise of the author is simple, and most of what I've learnt and writing about is actually from the book. This is what the author says :
If you are willing to WORK HARD in the first few months, you can easily make over $40,000 at the end of the sixth month. You will have to work and learn in the first few months. None of this will cost you anything, and we'll use the money from your earnings to take you over $40,000 a month.
This is a breath of fresh air on the internet where every other guru is selling another system that will make you a billionaire if you give him the money and click on his link! The program covers a variety of areas of working online, starting with writing for money to generate some captial for you, and going on to everything you can think of! The Light In The Darkness covers:
- Writing online to generate an income without spending any money. The Light In The Darkness helps you put some money in your pocket before you start with the other stuff.
- Building a website, and marketing affiliate programs with it. This is one of The Light In The Darkness program's strenghts – helping you advertise in a very effective manner.
- Advertising your programs using articles (that you're being paid for!).
- Adsense optimization/Adbrite or any PPC contextual ad service optimization.
- PPC campaigns, Adwords, other PPC engines and how to run them.
- Selecting affiliate programs for PPC engines. This is one of the sections of The Light In The Darkness that I thoroughly enjoyed, as it helped me understand why some of my affiliate programs were doing better than others.
- How to write good ads for PPC programs.
- How to advertise using programs such as Trafficwave, Leadsomatic and so on. The Light In The Darkness gives you the exact step by step details to help you build a very cost-effective advertising program.
- The top online money making systems and how to use various services to make incredible amounts of money with them (that takes you to over $40,000 a month – I learnt a whole lot from here!).
- How to build an opt-in list and use it effectively. You are shown how to make a page with a sign-up form on it, and how to link it to an autoresponder and how to follow-up with prospects and so on. Very detailed and helpful. The best part that I liked about this was that he even gave me some templates to use to help me get started.
My experience with The Light In The Darkness has been nothing short of delightful! I've used it more than any other program, and I've seen the incredible earnings already starting to happen. The updates keep on coming at a rate of at least 1-2 per week, which means that the author of The Light In The Darkness is keeping up with the task and is pouring out all he can into this.
All in all, if I was to recommend any single program today, I would recommend The Light In The Darkness manual. You know the best part? It each and every aspect that any other $97 course by the “gurus” like Mike Filesame, Cody Moya or any other would, but costs nothing close to them. On an average, a decent fluffy e-book that covers any of the ten topics about costs $47. As such, a fair price of The Light In The Darkness should be $470, right? Well, it costs only $19.95. Yup, it blew me away too! The explanation for this low price was that the point of this book is to help people make money, not to have them get a personal loan to give making money a shot! The Light In The Darkness is easily the best manual I've ever come across on the net. Check it out here.
eric seiger
<b>News</b> - Dad: How Demi Lovato Is Holding Up - Celebrity <b>News</b> <b>...</b>
"I want her to be happy," Patrick Lovato tells Us.
Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Snyder's 'Superman' Ditches Zod and Depp's <b>...</b>
To your right is the first look at Gary Oldman as George Smiley in Tomas Alfredson's ('Let The Right One In') adaptation of John.
Fox <b>News</b> Beats USA Network For Top Cable Network On Night After <b>...</b>
Fox News was the top cable network during prime time on Wednesday night, the day after the midterm election, ahead of USA Network's highly-rated NCIS re-runs. Bill O'Reilly had the most-watched show on all of cable, while Sean Hannity ...
eric seiger
<b>News</b> - Dad: How Demi Lovato Is Holding Up - Celebrity <b>News</b> <b>...</b>
"I want her to be happy," Patrick Lovato tells Us.
Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Snyder's 'Superman' Ditches Zod and Depp's <b>...</b>
To your right is the first look at Gary Oldman as George Smiley in Tomas Alfredson's ('Let The Right One In') adaptation of John.
Fox <b>News</b> Beats USA Network For Top Cable Network On Night After <b>...</b>
Fox News was the top cable network during prime time on Wednesday night, the day after the midterm election, ahead of USA Network's highly-rated NCIS re-runs. Bill O'Reilly had the most-watched show on all of cable, while Sean Hannity ...
eric seiger
No comments:
Post a Comment