Wall Street Week guest actually mentions Y2k in a negative light... (no biggie but I thought I'd mention it)

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Must admit I don't watch the show much but last night watched "Wall Street Week" on PBS. The main guest was Charles Praddick (sp?) from a financial firm (Cowen???) and he was rolling along still sounding encouraging but consistently stated his belief that the market was going to slow down significantly (though he kept his options open). Finally one of the other analysts from another brokerage house asked him WHY he thought the market would slow down and he said simply "Y2K". He did not mention once about people causing the problem by panicking, he only said that he believed that there would be some production glitches, significant enough to hit profits and that would change things. He was careful to say he was not a "gloomer" (I think) but that it was a real problem.

Sorry I didn't remember more - I had to keep repeating his name before I fell asleep so I might remember it this morning for posting. Now for the much needed coffee!

-- Kristi (securxsys@cs.com), September 18, 1999


Kristi, I watched W$W, too. Charles Pradilla is his name. He's now 5% underweighted in stocks, currently at 55% stocks. He said if the Dow and S&P were up 10-15% by next year at this time, "we would be doing quite well," but he also said we could be right where we are now in a year. He specifically mentioned a possible slowdown from Y2K production glitches from JIT inventory, like you said. Thanks for posting.

-- Rebecca Waldock (RWaldock@aol.com), September 18, 1999.

I used to watch WSW every Friday night without fail, but I have been so bummed out by that tone of "what, me worry?" and no mention of reality that I stopped watching. This is one half-step up. If we're where we are now this time next year, I will be amazed and grateful. But mostly amazed!! (I don't think so.)

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWayne@aol.com), September 18, 1999.

Don't fret their WSW watchers. To paraphrase Sgt. Barnes, "the worm has turned...." My experience has been that until people actually begin making commercial decisions, the bullshit rules. We are well past that point. The swap spreads have spoken, the JGB's have spoken, the corp bond market has spoken, high qual munis are dissapearing, and crude oil is up like a rocket. Now "the street" has two faces, one that they show in private amoungst themselves and one that they show the public on WSW etc. I can assure you that the street is now quite serious about Y2K in that they realize the signs are all there. Commercial bets have already been placed and the market internals are screaming about the comming disruptions. When you start to see money managers begin to fret openly, you can only assume that the street is now way past initial awareness and firmly into "holy shit mode".

I listen to Bloomburg radio every morning at 430 am and over the last few weeks each time they have interviewed a fund manager he has mentioned "after we get through the Y2K problems", "the Y2K slowdown" "the Y2K this, the Y2K that". Previous to about a month ago you wouldn't have heard a peep about Y2K.

Rest assured, "the street" is very nervous about the market and Y2K right now. It's just bad form to show it in that dysfunctional world of theirs.

-- Gordon (g_gecko_69@hotmail.com), September 18, 1999.

Wall Street is holding onto to the seat of their pants. When you watch the investors on TV, they are not all happy smiley faces, they actually look like they've been told they have an incurable disease, and that disease is called "soup line."

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), September 18, 1999.

From time to time I turn on CNBC, and occasionally catch a segment in which this or that investment strategist or analyst or whatever is being interviewed, and on some such occasions, the interviewee spontaneously mentions Y2K, usually in a serious and concerned manner. However, since the sample size of these observations is very small, and the timing is quite sporadic, these incidents do not serve as a good basis for extrapolation. When I have caught Y2K related comments by any of the regular staff of CNBC, they have been consistently pollyish, which fits in with the usually bullish tone that they present. But the unsolicited Y2K references that pop up from time to time do seem to suggest that at least some of the pros are taking it quite seriously, even if they are not sure what to do or when to do it.


-- Jerry B (skeptic76@erols.com), September 18, 1999.

BTW, Warren Buffet moved about $9 billion of Berkshire Hathaway's assests from cash equivalents into notes/bonds rather than into equities during 2nd Qtr 1999.


-- Jerry B (skeptic76@erols.com), September 18, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ