Morningstar Video - All Comments

Re: Arnott on the Case for Fundamental Indexing

glebbb — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:52:15 GMT

Hmmmm????

This seems to be a very accurate statement.

I put my grandsons into some of the Schwab Fundamental Index Funds starting this April; adding on a monthly basis.

SFSVX SC; YTD +40.52%=rank 3, 1YR -7.11%=rank 9

SFLNX LC; YTD +33.33%=rank 7, 1YR -5.30%=rank 5

SFNNX LC Int YTD +35.26%=rank 4, 1YR -3.70%=rank 1

SFIVX SC Int YTD +40.32%=rank 20, 1YR +2.00%=rank 6

SFENX EM YTD +52.24%=rank 33, 1YR -2.38%=rank 12

Pretty good in this up market; we'll see how this works out during the next 10-20% correction?

Best,

Glenn

Viagra canada.

Viagra studies women. — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 08:07:52 GMT

Generic viagra. Story comparison viagra. Viagra.

Re:Government Sends Tow Truck for Automakers

Avinash — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:35:51 GMT

I have seen this before and it is a good summary with no AGENDA. Being an Auto Industry retiree I am very sensitive to bad mouthing of American Auto Industry without any facts all over the media. This in turn hurts our sales, and young people (who actually buy cars ) just keep on repeating that American Cars are no good and we lose sales.

As for as complaint of poor quality in the 60's, please honestly think and remember, in that time frame whole America produced junk in all the industries. I know, I was there, poor quality was evident in all industries. You do not hold plastics, mattress, industry responsible, why pick on Autos.

Re:Gross on the Rescue Plan, Market

LarryR — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 06:21:41 GMT

Can anyone explain why banks that are afraid to lend to other shaky banks don't lend directly to other companies? (assuming they have capital that isn't locked up in bad mortgages) I was also wondering why the government doesn't just set up some new banks to lend to non- banks?

Re:Re:Gross on the Rescue Plan, Market

capecod — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:11:46 GMT

We are naturally impatient. To the best of my knowledge, not one actual penny of the $700 billion has been deployed yet. Nobody's boat has ACTUALLY be righted and no bank is ACTUALLY any more creditworthy than they were last week. They will be, but right now it's all locked up in the plan awaiting implementation. Our 24/7 - 6 hour news cycles have raised our expectations for speed of action that just can't occur in the real world.

Regards, Dick

Re:Sizing Up the Government Bank Stakes

LarryR — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:26:49 GMT

If I understand the problem is the banks won't lend to each other and to businesses. Some say they can't lend because they need all the money they have for their bad debts, or they don't want to lend to unsound banks.

So why don't just lend directly to these businesses instead of these other banks, AND why doesn't the government just setup some new banks to lend to these other businesses?

Re:What Berkshire's GE Stake Means for Both

mdadigital — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:57:54 GMT

Justin Fuller last week on a video interview specifically noted that GE was fine and did not need capital help like Goldman.

This guy is a total apologist for GE.

Re:What to Make of the Bailout Plunge

nightshadehue — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:20:40 GMT

Kill a bunch of birds with one stone. Strap Barney Frank, Pelosi, Paulsen, and Burnake to the top of a cruise missle, and a la Ronald Regan, send it through the front door of Amadinajah, and have thew above ring the door bell on the way in! RWO PROBLEMS SOLVED - AT MINIMUM COST!

Re:Our Take on the Bailout Plan

Ben Graham Fan — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 04:30:03 GMT

Are we supposed to read between the lines here? What I took away is that the banks have to be able to unload these assets at level close to where we are now in order to avoid raising capital. And since the bail out is designed to bail out the banks the treasury has to be willing to work against the best interest of tax payers to resolve this mess. If they are to hard on banks and other they run the risk of the plan folding. Sounds like another house of cards! What a tangled web we weave! A real SNAFU.

I look forward to a detailed analysis to the risks of the plan once we have all the details and enjoyed the comentary. I guess I am still wondering how this bail out plan saves the economy per se. But something tells me that the economy isn't really the point.

BGF

Re:A Bright Spot Amid the Financials Gloom

Ben Graham Fan — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 03:58:06 GMT

M* dave,

Any chance that Pat Dorsey or Jaime Peters will give some commentary on Basel I and II, specifically tier I and II capital. What I am getting at is many banks still look to need to make some additional provisions to cover loan losses. To use WB as an example, just announced having to buy back about 8.5 billion in Auction rate securities and to my understanding only abot 500m has already been reserved for such an issue. I would assume this could serious impact funds in excess of Tier 1 capital requirements when you consider the loan losses that still lie ahead.

So the point, I think it would be nice either via this thread or a morningstar video if we saw something education regarding how to determine a banks financial strength, its uses and abilities to generate additional capital and on a deeper note a good bench mark on how to measure a companies tier I and tier II capital. The balance sheet on a bank can be very elusive because of a lack of ability to measure the risk of the banks portfolio. Everyone seems to think WB will need to raise more capital soon, but then now one (including morningstar's analysis to this point) appears to have any real concern about what this does to the bank's balance sheet now.

While I am at it, in reviewing various different banks I have noticed the trend to include a break out of various loan types by credit quality and ltv %. Some thankfully seem to be making the effort to re-examine the true current ltv. But even with that I have yet to examine a bank that reports those loan balances that exceed 100% LTV. Any useful insight that you might have into the idea how to model future charge off/provisions? Realtytrac still shows some pretty nasty numbers out there in the largest areas that many big banks targeted; florida, california, arizona, nevada. So scary in fact that it is hard to believe the idea of a bottom in prices with the high level of supply, the bulk in some areas actually being homes that are short sales and already foreclosed on properties.

BGF

Re:The Best ETF for 2018

davinci — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 22:15:09 GMT

HI all I wonder if there are any regional ETFs focusing on Scandinavia? Or Baltic states? Any specific ETFs in Norway, Denmark or Sweden? thanks

Re:Fuel Tech: This Small-Growth Pick Still Has Spark

bobstock — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 06:36:55 GMT

While this article was posted by a short seller of FTEK it seems

to have enough research behind it to go beyond rumor:

http://seekingalpha.com/article/56348-fuel-tech-or-fool-s-tech-valuation-suggests-the-latter

Re:Another Intriguing Spin-Off

gb267 — Sat, 29 Dec 2007 23:34:57 GMT

I am unable to view any of M*'s videos. The link opens a M* page with an animated "Player loading" thingy, then eventually presents a blank screen. "Play" is inoperative.
George

Re:Re:Another Intriguing Spin-Off

M*_Dave — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 16:01:51 GMT

Hi George,

Thanks for your feedback. You will want to make sure you have the latest version of Adobe Flash Player installed. You can download it here:

http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/

In addition, you'll need a broadband connection and a relatively fast computer. Feel free to post back here if you still run into problems.

Re:Will E*Trade Survive?

15pct — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:42:25 GMT

I invested in Etrade for two reasons: first, I use it for my broker and have always been pretty satisfied. Second, Morningstar's analysis was very bullish. I was, frankly, angry at Morningstar's about-face, as I relied on their analysis (and, in fact, their hype one day as the 'Featured Stock')

I'm no financial analyst, but, when the Citadel deal came out, it looked like a really bad deal. 12.5%!! with all the restrictions it has!! but the market reacted favorably, and I often bow to the efficiency of the market.

I'm glad M* explained themselves, but their explanation smacks of a cover-up for one reason: the analyst has changed. It looks to me that he did a really bad job of his analysis, and either got fired or reassigned.This isnt the first time I've been burned with M*'s bad analysis of a stock. Frankly, as much as I like M*, I'm taking their stock analysis in the future with a grain of salt Maybe they should stick to mutual fund analysis.

On the subject of ET, one of three possibilities exists:

1. client attrition accelerates and they fail. (I doubt this)

2. they muddle through, and eventually turn profitable again in 2009

3. a competitor figures out a way to break them in two, sell the mortgage business to one of these groups (like Citadel) that is making a killing on picking up distressed assets for a song, and merges their brokerage with their own.

This third possibility, which is discounted by M* in their analysis, is the more interesting possibility for a short-term investor, and the reason ET's stock has been so volatile. It is now being discounted by the market, as it is obviously not imminent.

One question I have, however: the M* analyst in the video quoted some numbers that I wish I had access to: client attrition, net inflows/outflows, etc, which were up-to-date. Where do they get this information? Is this available to ordinary investors?

A bit of trivia: ET went public in 1996 at a price of $2.62/share.