In Michael Lewis’s Liar’s Poker, there’s a named Alexander, maybe not his real name, who Lewis uses to show how someone who’d an entire mastery of the markets thought about trading and trading. To show how soon Alexander might interpret market information, Lewis explains Alexander’s a reaction to Chernobyl:
Alexander called, when news broke that the Soviet nuclear reactor had increased. Only minutes before, proof of the problem had blipped across our Quotron devices, yet Alexander had already purchased the equivalent of two supertankers of crude oil. The focus of individual attention was on the New York Stock Market, he said. Particularly it was on any company involved with nuclear power. The shares of those businesses were plummeting. Never mind that, he said. He had just obtained, on behalf of his clients, oil commodities. Straight away in his head less supply of nuclear energy equaled more demand for gas. [...] “Buy potatoes,” he explained. “Gotta hop.” He then put up. Needless to say. A cloud of fallout would threaten European food and water supplies, such as the potato crop, placing reasonably limited on uncontaminated American alternatives. – Liar’s Poker
I really believe that section will make almost anyone an improved investor, just by reading it several times. It shows you how a master of the areas, would prevent a crowded deal (shorting nuclear power shares) and consider just what a big event will cause (gas to move up because of a fall in nuclear power). In addition it implies that oftentimes the best opportunities will be the last you would ever consider. Getting apples is outstanding, and very few people could say they’d have considered that.
The reason why I have been contemplating that element of Liar’s Poker recently may be the increased concerns surrounding North Korea and nuclear weapons. Considering the fact that recently we’ve seen improved posturing by North Korea regarding the use of nuclear weapons I think it’s a good time to think about what would happen in the situation of a nuclear event in North Korea.
Just what exactly would function as the effect of a event in North Korea because I think that it’d be considered a very short term issue, also it is probably very, very unlikely to happen) the term nuclear event is used by me. Well it would obviously do unique quickly the bat.
It would deliver the Asian markets, specially the major South Korean index, the Kospi, right into a tailspin. It has recently been investing near a four-month low due to fears concerning the a potential conflict with North Korea.
It’d send the VIX skyrocketing. The Vix is really a way of measuring fear, or formally the implied volatility on S&P 500 index options.
North Korea, which essentially has no economy, would not be economically harmed any more than it already is. While there would almost certainly be described as a high death toll, South Korea would see the impact of the financial impact.
Just what exactly are some potential consequences that we would see in the stock and economic markets in case of a nuclear event between North Korea and South Korea? Well thinking abstractly, it would adversely influence Apple’s (AAPL) supply chain. Any struggle would force China to act, and it may cause further disarray in Apple’s supply chain, that includes a major presence in Southeast Asia. You can also contemplate shorting Monsanto (MON). Soybean seeds are supplied by monsanto to many farmers in South Korea and a nuclear function could seriously disrupt the plant in South Korea, hurting Monsanto profits if farmers cannot pay. Yet another big South Korean company that you should observe is Samsung (SSNLF.PK), as any type of conflict would disrupt Samsung’s business and can lead to it losing the power to get its products to the United States. One might also think that carmakers like Kia (KIMTF.PK) and Hyundai (HYMLF.PK) would be adversely effected, and they would, but because they both have big manufacturing plants in the Usa, their company would be less adversely effected than businesses like Apple and Samsung that rely heavily on Southeast Asia for low-cost production of the goods.
Yes, it is possible to wrap up a few ETFs and provide a pleasant bunch of dividend growth and dividends that meets the requirements of dividend growth investors. It’s a good surprise.
Several advocates of dividend growth investing who write for Seeking Alpha have now been disappointed in the dividend growth options offered in ETF form. And they maintain that there’s no ETF that would satisfy the details of accurate dividend growth and attractive yield. As most dividend growth investors are looking for a considerable dividend growth and healthy produce a basic starting point. That is, the companies have increased their dividends year over year for 10, 15 or 25 years.
Generally they like to view a mix of dividend and yield growth rate that will equal 12. For example a company that offers a produce and a growth rate of 8% could provide on the search for 12. SA author and commentator Chowder devised that small “rule” and it’s been called the Chowder Index. I’ll limit that to the ChowDex.
Given these parameters, it’s true that no individual U.S. centric dividend growth ETF offers a mix of ample yield and dividend growth. The most popular dividend growth ETF, (VIG) from Vanguard offers a yield of 2.2% and a growth rate of 9.7%… Arriving at 11.9. Dang so close.
Needless to say, given those figures VIG certainly foots the bill for the Chowder principle, hello what’s (0.1) among friends? But that’s only too easy – they are buying bit more. And undoubtedly a of 2.2% would mean this ETF would need the required time to deliver a really nice revenue stream. That said, VIG would likely do just fine for investors with a 10-15 year (or even more) time horizon – those in the money building period.
There is yet another solution from Vanguard that offers most of the common dividend growth stocks we see in the DG stock pickers’ lists – the High Yield Dividend ETF (VYM). VYM offers a growth rate of 8.5% and a more ample yield of 3.15%.
Thanks, Andy, and good evening, everyone else. Clearly, Q2 answers are well below our expectations and our inner outlook. During the quarter, difficulties were experienced by us in as clients hesitated to produce purchase requests, causing our internal forecast to be adjusted by us in the last month of the quarter closing certain forecasted offers. The decline in orders was pronounced in The United States and to a smaller extent, EMEA, while Asia Pacific and Japan came in about at plan.
While we plan to go into more depth on sales results by straight on our regular profits contact, far and away the biggest area of weakness was in the telco area, where sales were down somewhat on both a year-over-year and constant foundation as funding for all projects were postponed. While we are very optimistic regarding our industry-leading options for the telco area and the opportunity to grow our earnings within this client base, telco sales tend to be very lumpy, and we saw this in our Q2 result. Government income were also down year-over-year and were probably affected to some extent by the U.S. government sequester. Outside telco and the U.S. Government, we saw fine effects on sales to company customers with fair year-over-year bookings development.
Our gain charges remain consistent with previous groups, while we didn’t — while we did visit a slight upsurge in how many aggressive engagements. We believe the downturn in orders is not caused by competitive failures but by clients committed to F5 who were reluctant to sign off on purchase orders toward the end of the quarter. Our view is that many of this reluctance was due to either budget constraints or delays in decisions as clients move to F5′s new range of goods we are launching into the market over the length of this year. We also experienced a fairly substantial drop in orders greater than $1 million in dimensions, a development that has been continuous since Q3 of this past year.