Has the market peaked?

economic

GreatApe wrote: »

World is more linked than ever, 2008 was pretty much a global recession (of course the developing countries did not contract but their rate of growth did)

World has always been linked since WW2. The crisis of 2008 originated from the US. Some of the western world had exposure to the subprime crap hence they suffered a lot more then they would have otherwise (e.g. UK banking system, Iceland, EZ banks etc).

China reducing growth even though they still grow its effectively like a recession to them due to credit growth that has led to them growing. But i think China are more wiser and smarter now to control credit growth. And they have a growing "middle class" who are more and more productive and adding value.

The big risks i see (not neccessarily long term):
- US growing a lot more then the rest of the world leaving UK, EU etc behind. This could lead to a very strong dollar (capital flowing to theUS dollar/stocks.etc) which would hurt EM and then end up hurting US eventually.
- Aging population and unfunded liabilities ever increasing. Productivity growth slowing or just shutting down would make this problem a hell of a lot worse and could cause a debt crisis. Not sure when this could play out - could be many decades from now. This will be a western world problem and could see the rise of China taking over as a global leader.

GreatApe

economic wrote: »

Why would self driving cars add 10 points? Sure you have more efficient way to traveling thus savings peoples time but how does that add to the GDP at 1% a year?

I was thinking, say Google corners the driverless car market. They could expand their ad revenue by a multiple folds then currently. You can show advertising in the cars whilst the people use the cars. The ads will be more valuable as people can not just get out of a car if they don't want to watch the ad. they need to wait till their destination.

You could have ads played on the windscreens and the back of the seat headrest. The total space for google ads would rise considerably then what is there currently (which is pretty much just PC screens and phone/tablets). Phones/tablets have small screen real estate and most people use a laptop which is small as well. i think this is a huge untapped market - self driving cars plus ads in the cars. not sure how this would translate to GDP though.

We could very well have a uk election before 2022. It could be called before then and very likely given brexit.

We have been in a very shallow recovery since the great recession. I would say most likely we stay low growth for now (the cycles between recessions could be longer now then before) with a recession hitting if Labour come in (the recession would already have started prior to election).

Moving things around is about 10% of the workforce and 10% of GDP

If computer driven vehicles saves 80% of the resources that means we suddenly have 8% more workers to produce goods and services. That should add about 8.8% to GDP assuming it happens over 10 years that is about +0.9% a year.

Regarding advertising google would have to take dollars from elsewhere
So advertisers spend less on TV and more on in car advertising.
Google missed a trick with housing. They should have set up the world dominant equivalent of rightmove. That is advertising and very profitable. Rightmove has a market cap of $5 billion for a country of 65 million people. X 100 to scale up to the world and you get $500 billion market cap if a company could capture most the worlds house sales advertising. Instead each nation seems to have a dozen or so of their own websites for housing. Facebook Amazon or google could take that market away from the likes of rightmove just make it free to use until they have 70%+ market share then charge after that. A big pot of gold waiting for one of the big tech companies most likely Facebook or google could take it if they wanted to do so

economic

GreatApe wrote: »

Moving things around is about 10% of the workforce and 10% of GDP

If computer driven vehicles saves 80% of the resources that means we suddenly have 8% more workers to produce goods and services. That should add about 8.8% to GDP assuming it happens over 10 years that is about +0.9% a year.

Regarding advertising google would have to take dollars from elsewhere
So advertisers spend less on TV and more on in car advertising.
Google missed a trick with housing. They should have set up the world dominant equivalent of rightmove. That is advertising and very profitable. Rightmove has a market cap of $5 billion for a country of 65 million people. X 100 to scale up to the world and you get $500 billion market cap if a company could capture most the worlds house sales advertising. Instead each nation seems to have a dozen or so of their own websites for housing. Facebook Amazon or google could take that market away from the likes of rightmove just make it free to use until they have 70%+ market share then charge after that. A big pot of gold waiting for one of the big tech companies most likely Facebook or google could take it if they wanted to do so

they would spend less on TV and spend more in cars but they would most likely spend more in cars then the reduction in TV. TV has a lot of scope to go down in price though (with ot without driverless cars). I hardly watch TV, only watch TV for films and only if with a few people. Otherwise i watch everything on my PC.

All TV would eventually be just streamed (live or not) and someone like netflix or amazon or both would be the worlds replacement of the TV.

Advertising would be done through these channels. So either amazon or netflix would gain additional revenue source from ads. Google will remain with internet ads plus eventually driverless car ads. So overall market value of the advertising business may not go down but could very well go up a lot specially due to driverless cars. Plus you have all the stuff that will make it work, like networks, streaming hardware, specialist glass for the screens etc. Theres a huge market right there.

Question is who will actually be the guys who provide the tech and manufacture driverless cars?

I think google has a lot to offer as they cna offer the tech to a manufacturer like Ford and give them a small cut in any advertising revenue from cars. google has a lot to offer in a partnership. but then so could tesla. So is it a good bet that its 90% likely itll be one of google or tesla that will provide the tech to manufacture the driverless cars?

Crashy_Time

ilovehouses wrote: »

Claiming a non-existent edge isn't something unique to people going long.

Thinking you have the ability to give investment advice isn`t unique either

economic

My views on the markets over the next 5-10 years or so:
- short/neutral london housing, long/neutral rest of uk housing
- long US stocks, long/neutral dollar
- short sterling
- short all government bonds. some HY and IG
- long commodities (particularly gold)

westernpromise

Crashy_Time wrote: »

I have just got back from London ... the state of Victoria coach station

There is something desperately sad about a man in his 50s who rents a bedsit and goes from Edinburgh to London on a coach.

I haven't used a coach since 1985.

Crashy_Time

westernpromise wrote: »

There is something desperately sad about a man in his 50s who rents a bedsit and goes from Edinburgh to London on a coach.

I haven't used a coach since 1985.

You do know that they have buses that take people from airports into city centres nowadays..? :rotfl:You are so tragic that you always need to find the tragic in others, you really really need to take a break from the internet :money:(and stop lying about your post count :rotfl:)

Crashy_Time

ilovehouses wrote: »

You'll find no investment advice in my posts. It's a point worth remembering though - it doesn't matter whether you call short or long - it's still declaring an edge.

By now you should've realised you have no edge - just a deep desire for house prices to crash. House prices will continue to do their thing irrespective of what you think will happen - just as they always have.

I am just stating an opinion, property is a credit fuelled bubble that the PTB don`t know how to unwind without a real mess, those eyebrow deep in property debt are the one`s praying they have "an edge" (edge of the precipice more like)

GreatApe

Crashy_Time wrote: »

I am just stating an opinion, property is a credit fuelled bubble that the PTB don`t know how to unwind without a real mess, those eyebrow deep in property debt are the one`s praying they have "an edge" (edge of the precipice more like)

Everything but baked beans and bullets are in a bubble if your mindset is that the end of the economic world is just around the corner. This is the problem with crash cheerleaders they see nothing but bubble all the time.

There are versions of you who have been crying wolf for 20 years just on the internet

The reality though is that the world is a hell of a lot richer than it was 20 years ago and will be a hell of a lot richer in 20 years time.