UK Stockmarket 2009 and beyond

gadgetmind

jimjames wrote: »

You see, the FTSE 100 index first closed above 6,000 on 1 April 1998 -- almost fifteen years ago.

So what?

Here is the FTSE versus the FTSE Total Return on a few dates.

Dec20 1999, FTSE 100=6930, FTSE 100 TR=3141
Jan30 2006, FTSE 100=5780, FTSE 100 TR=3141
Aug17 2012, FTSE 100=5852, FTSE 100 TR=4077
Dec19 2012, FTSE 100=5972, FTSE 100 TR=4198

I can't be bothered to look up a more recent number but I hope the above shows why looking at the absolute level of the FTSE tells you very little.

And (of course) most people will have a portfolio that includes higher growth areas and alternative assets to rebalance against.

sabretoothtigger

You see, the FTSE 100 index first closed above 6,000 on 1 April 1998 -- almost fifteen years ago.

At the time they had been yelling for many months this is incredibly overvalued, much more about USA but also here.
Nobody had a clue why but it was tied to FED policy and bailouts apparently
Around that time I was thinking about emerging markets and India, unfortunately the managed fund charges put me off. Trackers were much cheaper but they didnt do abroad back then I think.

I ordered the brochure for JII in 2000 & it about quintupled vs FTSE which has been more comparable to a savings account return :money:

This week my IFA sent the cheque rebate for my ISA from 12 years ago, I forgot to actually cash it

Gadget is totally right, JII gives no dividends. Any income is put into capital which helps make it look superior.
I took FTSE acc which helps to even the comparison up, never buy just once bad idea

been wondering how I could get some exposure to short gilts without an ETF or spread bet. Shall get my researching hat on.

Neptune Japan is a big short theory guy. He made 130% in 2008 because he took it to the very extremes a fund can.
Crap performance mostly but I think he is right overall.
He shorts Yen as a flawed currency and I think he shorts Japanese government bonds as they yield like 0.1% and he owns Japanese stock so actually the risk is low/hedged yet these ideas are radical in the industry?

Artemis I think shorted Japan also. Good fund but alot of the fund I already got so I sold it.
Neptune has been rising great recently as Yen has been weak but then its still not recovered the pre earthquake level, its due to consolidate a bit probably

JC_Derby

my first trade, was a 50% profit on Barclays....but theyve since gained another 20p per share ah well!!! no complaints just looking for possible other investments as i begin this journey..
so so much to learn

grey_gym_sock

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

Neptune Japan is a big short theory guy. He made 130% in 2008 because he took it to the very extremes a fund can.
Crap performance mostly but I think he is right overall.
He shorts Yen as a flawed currency and I think he shorts Japanese government bonds as they yield like 0.1% and he owns Japanese stock so actually the risk is low/hedged yet these ideas are radical in the industry?

all quite plausible, but i feel much safer just holding japanese equities with currency unhedged ... it's kind of a natural hedge, in that japanese share prices and the yen are quite likely to move in opposite directions, since a lower yen helps japanese exporters.

coastline

jimjames wrote: »

Just seen this on Motley Fool, I'd not realised it was that long ago but I guess it makes sense when the peak was Dec 1999.

The FTSE 100 (UKX) index breached 6,000 for the first time since 2011 this week, after American politicians agreed a last-minute deal to avoid the so-called 'fiscal cliff'.
While this week's upward move was welcomed by many investors, it also put into perspective the index's performance during the last decade or so. You see, the FTSE 100 index first closed above 6,000 on 1 April 1998 -- almost fifteen years ago.

A link here on the effect of dividends...of course the fund you invest in has to beat the FT100 and as we know many haven't.
Trackers and passive funds have caught the eye in recent years and investors are moving in this direction....
There'll be many investors who have FT100 funds and as your link shows their returns will be pretty flat over a decade or so.
All we can do is look forward and take advantage of tracking funds with low costs where dividends will work in our favour.
The last few years have been more than usefull in reviewing our investment decisions....years ago I just read the weekend press and picked a fund that was going well...
All up to the individual where they play the game...passive is playing its part.

http://www.killik.com/importance-of-dividends/

jamesd

Glen_Clark wrote: »

Markets could fall again when they realise these countries are still heading towards bankruptcy. Nothing has been solved. Like Britain, Spain, Greece, Portugal etc US National Debt is increasing at an unsustainable rate, so things cannot just carry on as before.

Is the national debt increasing in real terms, though? Inflation may be reducing the national debts faster than new spending is increasing them.

Glen_Clark

jamesd wrote: »

Is the national debt increasing in real terms, though? Inflation maybe reducing the national debts faster than new spending is increasing them.

Good point - I think Inflation is one of the many complications that makes accurate calculations or comparisons of the National Debt almost impossible. It can only be an approximate guide.
In the case of Britain for example, the figures quoted don't usually include unfunded public sector index linked pensions promises (which must be astronomical with so many public employees now on 6 figure salaries), payments to PFI contractors, etc. Plus no other country in the world has privatised its power and water supplies, so does not have the liabilities there either.

jamesd

You surprised me with your assertion that no other country in the world has privatised its power and water supplies. Try the United States for example, where in general there's lots of private activity in the power business, though less in the water field.

Glen_Clark

jamesd wrote: »

You surprised me with your assertion that no other country in the world has privatised its power and water supplies. Try the United States for example, where in general there's lots of private activity in the power business, though less in the water field.

They don't have their power and water privatised.

Britain has the highest military spending in Europe, yet is dependant on American Satellites to use its weapons, and foreign corporations for its power and water!!!
Should Britains promise to maintain places like the Falklands and Gibraltar, or all the Royal Family hangers on, be included in its National Debt?
Britain pays battalions of Civil Servants to produce these statistics, one of the few Government Departments that is not being cut, yet the statistics they produce are virtually meaningless. You can virtually pick and figure you like for the National Debt, and justify it by what you exclude or include from the figures.

sabretoothtigger

Some parts of British Gas are retailing via operations in USA now. I think thats pretty smart BP obviously is not really British anymore.

Not sure about water but the private welsh water went bust, its now a mutual trust so their customers own and pay for it pretty much I think

Hyder consultancy works for them and others. I sold them in Dec, they done great, tripled from July 2009

Looking at Anglo American today, I also bought these in July 2009 and Ive sold ages ago.
The price dropped so much, its not far off 2009 prices. Could very well be cheaper then it deserves, they were caught up in South Africa for example and so on
Diamonds, Platnium, copper, a cornucopia of commodities

Questor tipped them, he is probably right I reckon

http://us.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2013/01/04/tsr-todd-one-trillion-dollar-coin.cnn
Speaking of Platinum, the USA treasury could be to issue a 1 trillion dollar platinum coin to pay off debts, awesome plan vs the ceiling
Laws ban them from forging silver or gold like this hence could this be time for platinum, can never tell with this lot