stockmarkets -are we nearing the bottom or is there further to go ??

coyrls

kittie wrote: »

Started by trading pennies, honest I did, that was better than paper trading as there were actual monies to lose. I saw people become stony broke and lose their homes and redundancy packages by day trading, esp the dow which is up and down in a blink. Went on courses held by good people, David Linton, Jeremy du plessis, Boss from moneyam. Once lost £40k when HEC pulled the plug and I had shares, so then I traded more frequently to make it up

It was a hard learning curve but learn I did and the current method serves me well, however I have to be more conservative now and never gung ho. I think over the years I have developed an eye and can kind of look at charts and get the picture, enough for me anyway. I don`t have a crystal ball, I just go by what I see. I never manage to follow the trend to the end but am happy to get the bit in the middle and it adds up over time

If anything is to be learnt it is never to put at risk what you cannot afford to lose

Oh Kittie, Kittie, Kittie, I hope your nine lives hold out for you, your approach is much too risky for me.

nb73

2010 wrote: »

Kittie, I wish you well in everything you do.

trading shares is a zero sum game - for every winner there is a loser.

Other than me, who do you wish to lose?

masonic

2010 wrote: »

I can remember years ago politicians looked towards Japan and admired it`s low (2%) inflation rate and said this is what we needed to achieve.
Well it`s not done Japan much good in the long term and we have hardly boomed, except in G.Brown`s mind.
But that also proved an illusion.

An artificial .5% bank rate for seven years, printing artificial money by the billions and massive debt encouraged by the BoE and politicians has really helped,hasn`t it?

It`s a mess and probably can never be fixed.

Agree about interest rates and money printing. All this has done is created a bubble in bond and property markets. All efforts now seem to be aimed at stringing out this situation for as long as possible. But I guess most voters would rather live in this make-believe world than face the fact that their overpriced home needs to fall in value, or that their debts are unsustainable.

There's quite a difference between normal inflation and hyperinflation, though. Hyperinflation would be a catastrophe.

[Deleted User]

coyrls wrote: »

Oh Kittie, Kittie, Kittie, I hope your nine lives hold out for you, your approach is much too risky for me.

haha coyris. Take note here, there are certain precepts that I always use in re-building my portfolio. Ukx has to look pretty well stable ie upward bound rather than ready to dive. I tend to be at least 70% defensive. I have a good spread of sectors. I buy big solid companies with a decent divi if possible and with decent divi cover.

Re amounts spent. In the old days, I used to buy cheap stocks, penny stocks and they made or lost money quite quickly, no different to spread betting really but they could never go negative ie if they were wiped out then that was it, nothing else was owed. I could get a lot for £500. These days my shares can cost £40 each, a world of difference

I admit I do like and use charts. Looking at ukx, the monthly chart ie monthly bars on the graph has indicators that have gone into negative territory so I would be foolish to buy at this stage. The weekly chart is negative and the daily chart is positive but an indicator called stochastics is overbought with signs that it will soon go negative. 5600 is not out of the question and at that point the risk/reward ratio will be better from a buying point of view, at least for me.

BananaRepublic

masonic wrote: »

Agree about interest rates and money printing. All this has done is created a bubble in bond and property markets. All efforts now seem to be aimed at stringing out this situation for as long as possible. But I guess most voters would rather live in this make-believe world than face the fact that their overpriced home needs to fall in value, or that their debts are unsustainable.

There's quite a difference between normal inflation and hyperinflation, though. Hyperinflation would be a catastrophe.

When the Big Crash crashed, which after all is what most crashes do, the US, Spain and Ireland suffered massive falls in the value of property. This country suffered a relatively minor crash and it has soon picked up again, as it is sustained by demand. I recall trying to buy a house after the crash and it took me a couple of years. Quite simply houses were not coming onto the market, as people did not want to crystallise losses. I bought a house from a very old woman who wanted to move in with her fancy man in the Big Smoke. Most other houses I saw were on the market due to the death of the owner, or a divorce. A friend has recently bought two BTL houses. He will pay off the mortgages within 10 years. He earns well and can handle the risk. I could go into BTL but I cannot be bothered with the hassle, and unit trusts do not moan: "I can't turn on the lights, the oven does not work, my finger is stuck up my backside, waah waaah waaaah" and so on.

I do not see a collapse in house prices unless large numbers of people emigrate, the Black Death arrives, or we all decide to grow our hair and live in teepees.

Glen_Clark

BananaRepublic wrote: »

When the Big Crash crashed, which after all is what most crashes do, the US, Spain and Ireland suffered massive falls in the value of property. This country suffered a relatively minor crash and it has soon picked up again, as it is sustained by demand.

demand fuelled by Osborne throwing taxpayers borrowed money at his so called 'Help to Buy', coupled with the world's most onerous planning system to restrict the supply.

JohnRo

Don't forget the demand created by the buy to let bonanza, effectively the transfer of welfare from the state to the private landlord.

Glen_Clark

BananaRepublic wrote: »

I do not see a collapse in house prices unless large numbers of people emigrate, the Black Death arrives, or we all decide to grow our hair and live in teepees.

I guess thats because you still don't understand the effect of politics on investments so I'll try again.
A relaxation in planning restrictions for example would cause a collapse in house prices. As would withdrawing Osborne's taxpayer funded housing market subsidies. These are things that stop English house prices falling like in US, Spain and Eire.

2010

Glen_Clark wrote: »

I guess thats because you still don't understand the effect of politics on investments so I'll try again.
A relaxation in planning restrictions for example would cause a collapse in house prices. As would withdrawing Osborne's taxpayer funded housing market subsidies. These are things that stop English house prices falling like in US, Spain and Eire.

And of course greedy housebuilders who delibrately don`t build enogh houses simply to keep prices higher.

One of the government`s subsidies is the artificail bank rate of seven years where saver`s are effectively subsiding mortgage holders.

Plus the billions of cheap money the banks can get from the gov. to supply mortgages.
So why are the gov. also supplying mortgages with taxpayer`s money when it should be the banks that do this with the cheap money?

2010

nb73 wrote: »

trading shares is a zero sum game - for every winner there is a loser.

Other than me, who do you wish to lose?

For every buyer, who buys, because they think the price will go up, there is a seller who thinks it will go down.

I don`t want you or Kittie to lose just the smart asses.