Now that the stock market has closed for the year, we can take a step back and survey the carnage. As is our custom here at IcebergCarwash, we will use the S&P 500 Index as our benchmark.
In 2008, as measured by the S&P 500, the U.S. stock market declined 38.5%.
While that number is ugly enough on its own, let's put some historical context around it. For background, consider that the S&P 500 Index reliably goes back to 1926. The full 500-stock index did not appear until around 1957, but the index existed in other forms for about 30 years prior to that point.
Looking at the annual (January 1st-December 31st) returns on the S&P 500 going back to 1926, giving us 83 years of annual performance statistics, we calculated the rolling, annualized 3, 5, 10, 25, and 50-year (when available) returns for each year, starting with 1926. For example, in examining the rolling 10-year returns, we looked at 1926 through 1935, 1927 through 1936, 1928 through 1937, and so on.
The research yielded some interesting information:
(1) This year's performance represented the second largest annual (January 1st - December 31st) decline in the Index's 83 year history, surpassed only by the 43.3% drop in 1931.
(2) The annualized three-year return (2006-08) on the S&P 500 is a negative 9.1%. Out of the 81 years in our database where trailing three year returns could be measured (1928-2008), only 13 three-year periods witnessed a negative annualized return.
(3) The annualized five-year return (2004-08) is a negative 2.7%. This has only happened 11 times out of the 79 rolling 5-year return calculations in our database.
(4) In order to get a really good feel for the historical stock market weakness we're witnessing, look at the annualized ten-year (1999-2008) on the S&P 500, which was a negative 1.6%. This represents the first time a ten-year investment period yielded a negative return since 1939, and only the third time overall (the 1929-1938 period also saw a negative return). The negative 1.6% annualized return for the period from the beginning of 1999 through the end of 2008 represents the worst ten-year return in the database. While our database only goes back to 1926, so this is speculating a bit, it is possible that 1999 through 2008 was the worst ten year period ever for U.S. stocks. The ten year period from 1869 through 1878 might have been worse; I'll have to check to see if anyone has data on a broad market index going back that far. It's really scary when you consider that the first year of that ten-year period, 1999, featured a 21% gain in the index. Absent a very strong rally next year, the period from 2000 through 2009 will look rather bleak as well.
(5) The annualized return on the S&P 500 over the past 25 and 50 years was 9.7% and 9.1%, respectively.
(6) Speaking of the long term, if you had invested $1 in the S&P 500 on January 1, 1926, you'd have $1,871.69 today. Or, more likely, your heirs would.
As a reminder, we're still taking entries for The First Annual IcebergCarwash Stock Market Prediction Contest.
To join, use the "comments" section of our earlier post to register your prediction of where the S&P 500 Index will be at the end of 2009. As a starting point, consider that the S&P 500 finished 2008 at 903.25.
Entries will be accepted until 9:30AM on Friday, January 2, 2009.
Good luck, everyone, and here's hoping for a better year in 2009.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Look at the Bright Side. Maybe Obama Won't Be Our President
As the calendar creeps toward 2009, I find myself, like most Americans I suppose, looking forward to next year with guarded optimism. Sure, things look bleak, and it will likely be quite a while before our economy returns to normal. However, downturns don't last forever, and if there's one thing that history has taught us, it's that you can't keep America down for long. Brighter days are ahead.
Or, maybe not.
According to this article , Igor Panarin, a Russian professor, is predicting that the United States will fall apart in 2010. Specifically, he believes:
So there you have it. The Russians are predicting the end of the American Empire. You're familiar with Russia, aren't you? The country that's less stable than the weapons-grade plutonium that about one-quarter of its citizens seem to have in their storage sheds. The place where a civil war of some sort breaks out every time two people disagree over the proper way to spell "Alexei." (Or is it "Aleksei?" "Alexy?" Can I just call you "Alex?"). The nation that doesn't seem to have figured out the need for decent public restrooms.
My personal biases aside, I do have some questions for Professor Panarin, as I prepare for the coming American Apocalypse.
(1) How, exactly, will the 50 states be divided up into the six new countries? Specifically, will New York and Massachusetts be in the same new country? Personally, I'd really love to avoid that. Is there anyone I could speak to about this now?
(2) Which new country will Barack Obama run?
(3) Will travel between the six countries require a passport?
(4) Regarding the three factors you cite as causes of the breakup, mass immigration, economic decline and moral degradation, a couple of questions:
(a) Have these factors already occurred, or are they expected to intensify? In other words, can we expect even more moral degradation? If so, while I'd hate to see the end of America as much as the next guy, you've gotta admit, things could get really interesting over the next 18 months.
(b) Are these three factors inter-related? Should we expect millions of people to show up from other countries, not wearing any pants, thereby causing all of our stores to immediately close?
(5) When Alaska reverts to Russian control, will you drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)? Oh, wait. Scratch that question. You people already possess around 40% of the world's proven natural gas reserves, but are too stupid/ stubborn/lazy to do anything about exploiting it. Never mind.
(6) Will each new country have its own Olympic team?
(7) Is your comrade, Vladimir (Ras)Putin busy? As the recent U.S. presidential election indicated, we seem to have a real dearth of viable leaders in this country. I can't imagine having to chose six leaders. Just in case, I'd like to send "Ras" a nice "welcome-aboard-now-please-don't-jail-me-for-daring-to-be-successful-while-not-pledging-you-my-undying-support" gift. To which of his residences should I send it? The one in Moscow? New York? London? Paris? St. Moritz? Tuscany?
So many questions. So many things to prepare for.
By the way, those of our readers who reside in my new country (exact name and borders to be determined) are invited to a Labor Day barbecue at my house on September 6, 2010. The rest of you infidels can get your own darn burgers.
Or, maybe not.
According to this article , Igor Panarin, a Russian professor, is predicting that the United States will fall apart in 2010. Specifically, he believes:
...that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar. Around the end of June 2010, or early July, he says, the U.S. will break into six pieces -- with Alaska reverting to Russian control.
So there you have it. The Russians are predicting the end of the American Empire. You're familiar with Russia, aren't you? The country that's less stable than the weapons-grade plutonium that about one-quarter of its citizens seem to have in their storage sheds. The place where a civil war of some sort breaks out every time two people disagree over the proper way to spell "Alexei." (Or is it "Aleksei?" "Alexy?" Can I just call you "Alex?"). The nation that doesn't seem to have figured out the need for decent public restrooms.
My personal biases aside, I do have some questions for Professor Panarin, as I prepare for the coming American Apocalypse.
(1) How, exactly, will the 50 states be divided up into the six new countries? Specifically, will New York and Massachusetts be in the same new country? Personally, I'd really love to avoid that. Is there anyone I could speak to about this now?
(2) Which new country will Barack Obama run?
(3) Will travel between the six countries require a passport?
(4) Regarding the three factors you cite as causes of the breakup, mass immigration, economic decline and moral degradation, a couple of questions:
(a) Have these factors already occurred, or are they expected to intensify? In other words, can we expect even more moral degradation? If so, while I'd hate to see the end of America as much as the next guy, you've gotta admit, things could get really interesting over the next 18 months.
(b) Are these three factors inter-related? Should we expect millions of people to show up from other countries, not wearing any pants, thereby causing all of our stores to immediately close?
(5) When Alaska reverts to Russian control, will you drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)? Oh, wait. Scratch that question. You people already possess around 40% of the world's proven natural gas reserves, but are too stupid/ stubborn/lazy to do anything about exploiting it. Never mind.
(6) Will each new country have its own Olympic team?
(7) Is your comrade, Vladimir (Ras)Putin busy? As the recent U.S. presidential election indicated, we seem to have a real dearth of viable leaders in this country. I can't imagine having to chose six leaders. Just in case, I'd like to send "Ras" a nice "welcome-aboard-now-please-don't-jail-me-for-daring-to-be-successful-while-not-pledging-you-my-undying-support" gift. To which of his residences should I send it? The one in Moscow? New York? London? Paris? St. Moritz? Tuscany?
So many questions. So many things to prepare for.
By the way, those of our readers who reside in my new country (exact name and borders to be determined) are invited to a Labor Day barbecue at my house on September 6, 2010. The rest of you infidels can get your own darn burgers.
Purple Playoff Participants
The Viking ship is setting sail for the postseason.
The Minnesota Vikings defeated the New York Giants on Sunday, 20-19, on a last-second, 50-yard field goal by Ryan Longwell. Although they would have won the NFC North Division title and made the playoffs anyway, owing to the Chicago Bears' defeat at the hands of the Houston Texans, the victory allowed the Vikings to reach the 10-win plateau for the first time since the 2000 season.
While I don't expect the Vikings to go very far, making the playoffs for the first time since 2004 represents another important step forward for the team. After going 6-10 in 2006, they improved to 8-8 in 2007, and now 10-6 in 2008. This team is not a Super Bowl contender in my opinion, but could possibly be a few short steps away from attaining that lofty status. I'll save the "what-they-need-to-do-next" discussion for a later post.
In looking back at the regular season, the Vikings turned things around nicely after starting 1-3. More recently, after going 5-5 through the first 10 weeks of the season, they finished with a 5-1 run, allowing them to win the division and make the playoffs.
An interesting note is that even in their losses, the Vikings were never blown out of any game. Five of their six losses were by 7 points or less, and in most of those games, they had the ball late in the game, with a chance to tie the score or take the lead. Even in their one double-digit loss (30-17 to the Tennessee Titans in Week 4), they were within a touchdown until about 4 minutes remained, and Gus Frerotte threw an interception that led to an "insurance" touchdown near the end of the game. On the other hand, the Vikings put together few complete games, looking sloppy or sluggish at some point in nearly every contest. For example, while they beat the Detroit Lions twice, they did so by a total of six points. This, against the first team in history to post an 0-16 record, who were blown out of most games, was a frustrating sign of weakness of the part of the Vikings. In short, even in retrospect, this is a tough team to figure out.
By winning the division title and taking the team to the playoffs, head coach Brad Childress has probably saved his job. I'm still not a big fan of Coach Childress, who seems utterly clueless at times, but I'd have to expect that he will be back in 2009. There is definitely a benefit to be derived from coaching continuity, but Childress has got to improve as a coach if this team is ever going to make the leap to becoming a Super Bowl contender. The Vikings still commit too many silly penalties, and their clock management leaves a lot to be desired.
The jury is still out on QB Tarvaris Jackson as well. While T-Jack has appeared to be vastly improved in his second stint as the team's starting QB, after being benched for most of the season, he hasn't yet developed into a reliable signal-caller. It will be very interesting to see how he performs this coming week, in the crucible of a playoff game, against the aggressive Philadelphia Eagles defense, which will probably attempt to blitz him into submission.
Still, flaws and all, the Vikings will be participating in the playoffs this coming Sunday. Should be fun. (Unless they lose).
The Minnesota Vikings defeated the New York Giants on Sunday, 20-19, on a last-second, 50-yard field goal by Ryan Longwell. Although they would have won the NFC North Division title and made the playoffs anyway, owing to the Chicago Bears' defeat at the hands of the Houston Texans, the victory allowed the Vikings to reach the 10-win plateau for the first time since the 2000 season.
While I don't expect the Vikings to go very far, making the playoffs for the first time since 2004 represents another important step forward for the team. After going 6-10 in 2006, they improved to 8-8 in 2007, and now 10-6 in 2008. This team is not a Super Bowl contender in my opinion, but could possibly be a few short steps away from attaining that lofty status. I'll save the "what-they-need-to-do-next" discussion for a later post.
In looking back at the regular season, the Vikings turned things around nicely after starting 1-3. More recently, after going 5-5 through the first 10 weeks of the season, they finished with a 5-1 run, allowing them to win the division and make the playoffs.
An interesting note is that even in their losses, the Vikings were never blown out of any game. Five of their six losses were by 7 points or less, and in most of those games, they had the ball late in the game, with a chance to tie the score or take the lead. Even in their one double-digit loss (30-17 to the Tennessee Titans in Week 4), they were within a touchdown until about 4 minutes remained, and Gus Frerotte threw an interception that led to an "insurance" touchdown near the end of the game. On the other hand, the Vikings put together few complete games, looking sloppy or sluggish at some point in nearly every contest. For example, while they beat the Detroit Lions twice, they did so by a total of six points. This, against the first team in history to post an 0-16 record, who were blown out of most games, was a frustrating sign of weakness of the part of the Vikings. In short, even in retrospect, this is a tough team to figure out.
By winning the division title and taking the team to the playoffs, head coach Brad Childress has probably saved his job. I'm still not a big fan of Coach Childress, who seems utterly clueless at times, but I'd have to expect that he will be back in 2009. There is definitely a benefit to be derived from coaching continuity, but Childress has got to improve as a coach if this team is ever going to make the leap to becoming a Super Bowl contender. The Vikings still commit too many silly penalties, and their clock management leaves a lot to be desired.
The jury is still out on QB Tarvaris Jackson as well. While T-Jack has appeared to be vastly improved in his second stint as the team's starting QB, after being benched for most of the season, he hasn't yet developed into a reliable signal-caller. It will be very interesting to see how he performs this coming week, in the crucible of a playoff game, against the aggressive Philadelphia Eagles defense, which will probably attempt to blitz him into submission.
Still, flaws and all, the Vikings will be participating in the playoffs this coming Sunday. Should be fun. (Unless they lose).
Monday, December 29, 2008
Join The Party!!!
In keeping with the rest of the world, here is my Top Ten List of things that happened to ME this year. (keep in mind my life is, thankfully, VERY mundane)
DRUMROLL.................................
10. Got a server for my dining room
9. Won a Gift Certificate for laser hair removal
8. Went to six flags for the first time
7. Got a swingset
6. My oldest started High School
5. (I would love to write learned to drive a stick, but a certain someone never taught me...)
4. Was in a film
3. Went on vacation with MBB for the first time in two years
2. Had a healthy happy year with my family and friends
1. Started this blog
Feel free to compile your own list in the comments section of this post.
DRUMROLL.................................
10. Got a server for my dining room
9. Won a Gift Certificate for laser hair removal
8. Went to six flags for the first time
7. Got a swingset
6. My oldest started High School
5. (I would love to write learned to drive a stick, but a certain someone never taught me...)
4. Was in a film
3. Went on vacation with MBB for the first time in two years
2. Had a healthy happy year with my family and friends
1. Started this blog
Feel free to compile your own list in the comments section of this post.
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Welcome to the Soothsayer's Ball
We've entered the last week of the calendar year, which (to me) can only mean one thing:
We're about to be inundated by "Top 10 _____ of 2008" lists.
I've always found these lists to be quite amusing, if not pointless. On the financial markets side of things, does it really matter which story was #1, and which was #7? I wonder, if someone lost $100MM in Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme, and then reads that the Madoff scandal was the #1 financial story of 2008, does that provide any comfort? Conversely, if the poor fellow sees that the Madoff scandal is the #6 story, behind the overall market drop, the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, the fire sale of Bear Stearns, the AIG bailout and the collapse of the housing market, does that add insult to injury?
While these lists seem silly to me, thay do serve one important purpose. A person could space out for 51 weeks, and then catch up on everything over the last few days of the year. That's pretty neat.
The really pointless exercise lies not in the sundry annual "wrap up" stories, but in the "prediction" pieces that also typically run at this time of year. In stock market terms, different media outlets will assemble a formidable collection of pundits who will polish their crystal balls and tell us where the market will be at the end of the next year. Invariably, you will get a very wide range of predictions. One guy will say that he expects the stock market to rise by 35% in the next year, while some other person will call for a 40% drop. One thing you can be certain of is that anyone who lobs a prediction at us will be sure to back it up with an impressive-sounding argument.
Over the years, I've struggled with the question of which prediction to follow. Several years ago, when I was working as a stock analyst, a colleague of mine gave me this sage advice: "When in doubt, go with the guy who is wearing a bow tie." This made a great deal of sense to me at the time, so I made a mental note to do so going forward. About a year later, my illusions were shattered when our firm's bow tie-wearing chief economist showed up 30 minutes late to a meeting, sheepishly saying, "I thought this meeting was called for Thursday, not Tuesday." I realized that this guy couldn't figure out his schedule for the week ahead, let alone predict the stock market's level 12 months out.
Flamboyant neckwear aside, I think that it's rather obvious by now that even the "pros" have a difficult time accurately predicting the future. So, I figured that we should just have at it ourselves.
I am therefore pleased to introduce The First Annual IcebergCarwash Stock Market Prediction Contest.
To join, use the "comments" section to register your prediction of where the S&P 500 Index will be at the end of 2009. For reference, consider that the Index is currently at 865.42. It ended 2007 at 1468.36 (ouch).
We will keep track of everyone's predictions, and at the end of 2009, we will award a prize to the person whose prediction came closest to the actual closing level of the S&P 500 Index at the end of 2009. (Please read the disclaimer below). You've got until the market opens on January 2, 2009 to join. Good luck, everyone.
Disclaimer
This contest does not represent an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security. It is open to anyone in the world, provided that the jurisdiction in which the entrant primarily resides does not expressly or implicitly prohibit joining contests of this nature. There is no fee to join this contest. IcebergCarwash disavows any connection to any individuals, including, but not limited to, the Governor of the State of Illinois, who might attempt to solicit fees from those who join this contest. The contest is open to relatives, friends or enemies of the operators of IcebergCarwash. The contest is not open to anyone named Charles who chooses to be referred to by the nickname "Chaz." In such instance, either "Charlie" or "Chuck" is acceptable. IcebergCarwash reserves the right to award a truly stinky prize to the winner of this contest. Reference to the term "stinky" in relation to the proposed prize includes any prize which could be deemed to be inadequate for the winner of such a contest, generally unattractive, or possessing a particularly foul odor, whether such prize is the actual source of said foul odor, or if the foul odor was derived from something which came in contact with the prize, thereby imparting - temporarily or permanently - the odor upon the prize. Taxes will be the sole responsibility of the contest winner. IcebergCarwash makes no representations whatsoever regarding the tax liability arising from winning the contest's prize. Each participant is advised to consult with his/her tax adviser to determine any potential tax liability, prior to accepting any prize awarded by IcebergCarwash in connection with this, or any, contest or promotional event.
We're about to be inundated by "Top 10 _____ of 2008" lists.
I've always found these lists to be quite amusing, if not pointless. On the financial markets side of things, does it really matter which story was #1, and which was #7? I wonder, if someone lost $100MM in Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme, and then reads that the Madoff scandal was the #1 financial story of 2008, does that provide any comfort? Conversely, if the poor fellow sees that the Madoff scandal is the #6 story, behind the overall market drop, the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, the fire sale of Bear Stearns, the AIG bailout and the collapse of the housing market, does that add insult to injury?
While these lists seem silly to me, thay do serve one important purpose. A person could space out for 51 weeks, and then catch up on everything over the last few days of the year. That's pretty neat.
The really pointless exercise lies not in the sundry annual "wrap up" stories, but in the "prediction" pieces that also typically run at this time of year. In stock market terms, different media outlets will assemble a formidable collection of pundits who will polish their crystal balls and tell us where the market will be at the end of the next year. Invariably, you will get a very wide range of predictions. One guy will say that he expects the stock market to rise by 35% in the next year, while some other person will call for a 40% drop. One thing you can be certain of is that anyone who lobs a prediction at us will be sure to back it up with an impressive-sounding argument.
Over the years, I've struggled with the question of which prediction to follow. Several years ago, when I was working as a stock analyst, a colleague of mine gave me this sage advice: "When in doubt, go with the guy who is wearing a bow tie." This made a great deal of sense to me at the time, so I made a mental note to do so going forward. About a year later, my illusions were shattered when our firm's bow tie-wearing chief economist showed up 30 minutes late to a meeting, sheepishly saying, "I thought this meeting was called for Thursday, not Tuesday." I realized that this guy couldn't figure out his schedule for the week ahead, let alone predict the stock market's level 12 months out.
Flamboyant neckwear aside, I think that it's rather obvious by now that even the "pros" have a difficult time accurately predicting the future. So, I figured that we should just have at it ourselves.
I am therefore pleased to introduce The First Annual IcebergCarwash Stock Market Prediction Contest.
To join, use the "comments" section to register your prediction of where the S&P 500 Index will be at the end of 2009. For reference, consider that the Index is currently at 865.42. It ended 2007 at 1468.36 (ouch).
We will keep track of everyone's predictions, and at the end of 2009, we will award a prize to the person whose prediction came closest to the actual closing level of the S&P 500 Index at the end of 2009. (Please read the disclaimer below). You've got until the market opens on January 2, 2009 to join. Good luck, everyone.
Disclaimer
This contest does not represent an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security. It is open to anyone in the world, provided that the jurisdiction in which the entrant primarily resides does not expressly or implicitly prohibit joining contests of this nature. There is no fee to join this contest. IcebergCarwash disavows any connection to any individuals, including, but not limited to, the Governor of the State of Illinois, who might attempt to solicit fees from those who join this contest. The contest is open to relatives, friends or enemies of the operators of IcebergCarwash. The contest is not open to anyone named Charles who chooses to be referred to by the nickname "Chaz." In such instance, either "Charlie" or "Chuck" is acceptable. IcebergCarwash reserves the right to award a truly stinky prize to the winner of this contest. Reference to the term "stinky" in relation to the proposed prize includes any prize which could be deemed to be inadequate for the winner of such a contest, generally unattractive, or possessing a particularly foul odor, whether such prize is the actual source of said foul odor, or if the foul odor was derived from something which came in contact with the prize, thereby imparting - temporarily or permanently - the odor upon the prize. Taxes will be the sole responsibility of the contest winner. IcebergCarwash makes no representations whatsoever regarding the tax liability arising from winning the contest's prize. Each participant is advised to consult with his/her tax adviser to determine any potential tax liability, prior to accepting any prize awarded by IcebergCarwash in connection with this, or any, contest or promotional event.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
You Want Me To Do WHAT?!?!? II
In a recent post (there haven't been too many of those lately), we spoke of the need to help other people out even if it's not really something you're thrilled to do. I believe that, but I don't think that gives people the right to assume that others will do things for them, and put them on the spot.
Last night at 10:42 I went to pick up my daughter from a school party. I came a little late, because she told me the party was over at 10:30, but that I shouldn't come before 10:40 the EARLIEST. So trying to be a nice Mom, and overcome my need for punctuality I got there at 10:50. The party was now "officially" over for 20 minutes, and unofficially for 10 minutes. Through the window I could see my daughter still dancing and having a good time, she looked really happy. After about a minute she came outside, opened the door to the car, and said "Mom, there's some kids who need a ride home, can you take them?" So of course I said yes. I was really tired, and these kids live in my general neighborhood, but not "on my way" and not on my block. Granted, all told it was a seven minute difference, but I was annoyed.
Not at the kids. At their parents. How do you send your kid off to a party and just basically abdicate your responsibility to pick them up to some anonymous person, because you don't feel like coming out to get them? If I live two houses away from them, sure. We could have arranged it in advance, but no problem if we didn't. But this? This is just so....I can't even think of the word. Oh, wait I got it. Selfish. Both houses I went to were completely dark, so those parents didn't have to wait up to go pick up their kids, they just assumed someone else would do it. I could have said no, and the kids would have asked someone who lives even further away, or GASP! called their parents, but I felt bad. For the kids who were put in the situation. Because, really, how hard is it for the parents to make a phone call and ask someone to do something, as opposed to ambushing them at 11 at night.
What's the difference, you may ask, if you would do it either way? Good question. AND I HAVE THE ANSWER!!! Aside from it being the more courteous thing to do,I think the main reason people DO NOT call to set it up in advance (it was a three hour party there was ample time to call and ask)is that they don't want to feel like they asked a favor, or need to return one. So they have their kids ask, at the party, spur of the moment, and that way they are beholden to no one. Not that I feel there needs to be a quid pro quo,and I'm happy to help someone out, but I can't think of another possible reason not to set it up in advance. They may feel they're not "close" enough with me to ask the favor, so they let the kid do it instead? It's just weird. the whole thing is just weird.
THEY'RE YOUR KIDS TAKE CARE OF THEM!!!!
Last night at 10:42 I went to pick up my daughter from a school party. I came a little late, because she told me the party was over at 10:30, but that I shouldn't come before 10:40 the EARLIEST. So trying to be a nice Mom, and overcome my need for punctuality I got there at 10:50. The party was now "officially" over for 20 minutes, and unofficially for 10 minutes. Through the window I could see my daughter still dancing and having a good time, she looked really happy. After about a minute she came outside, opened the door to the car, and said "Mom, there's some kids who need a ride home, can you take them?" So of course I said yes. I was really tired, and these kids live in my general neighborhood, but not "on my way" and not on my block. Granted, all told it was a seven minute difference, but I was annoyed.
Not at the kids. At their parents. How do you send your kid off to a party and just basically abdicate your responsibility to pick them up to some anonymous person, because you don't feel like coming out to get them? If I live two houses away from them, sure. We could have arranged it in advance, but no problem if we didn't. But this? This is just so....I can't even think of the word. Oh, wait I got it. Selfish. Both houses I went to were completely dark, so those parents didn't have to wait up to go pick up their kids, they just assumed someone else would do it. I could have said no, and the kids would have asked someone who lives even further away, or GASP! called their parents, but I felt bad. For the kids who were put in the situation. Because, really, how hard is it for the parents to make a phone call and ask someone to do something, as opposed to ambushing them at 11 at night.
What's the difference, you may ask, if you would do it either way? Good question. AND I HAVE THE ANSWER!!! Aside from it being the more courteous thing to do,I think the main reason people DO NOT call to set it up in advance (it was a three hour party there was ample time to call and ask)is that they don't want to feel like they asked a favor, or need to return one. So they have their kids ask, at the party, spur of the moment, and that way they are beholden to no one. Not that I feel there needs to be a quid pro quo,and I'm happy to help someone out, but I can't think of another possible reason not to set it up in advance. They may feel they're not "close" enough with me to ask the favor, so they let the kid do it instead? It's just weird. the whole thing is just weird.
THEY'RE YOUR KIDS TAKE CARE OF THEM!!!!
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Leading off, and playing center field, Charles Ponzi
As more information emerges about the stunning fraud perpetrated by Bernard Madoff, we have begun to hear about some of his bigger victims.
It is important to note that while Madoff's "fund" had a relatively small number of investors, many of these investors were hedge funds, who in turn had many investors. It seems that thousands of people were caught up in this scam.
Looking at the list of prominent investors who lost money, one name in particular stands out: Fred Wilpon, the owner of the New York Mets. It has been reported that Wilpon's real estate company, Sterling Equities, might have lost hundreds of millions of dollars in Madoff's fraud.
What makes the Wilpon case interesting is that this hardly represents the first time that he has been duped. My preliminary analysis has revealed that over the past ten years alone, Wilpon has invested tens of millions of dollars with certain individuals, and has little to show for his expenditures. Some of the people who have taken millions from Wilpon, and left him "holding the bag" include:
* Mo Vaughn
* Mike Hampton
* Carlos Baerga
* Pedro Martinez
* Luis Castillo
Perhaps most sad is the fact that Mr. Wilpon continues to throw his money at investments with a less-than-certain future. Earlier this month, he committed to pay a certain Francisco Rodriguez, of Caracas, Venezuela, $37 million over the next three years. Mets fans are surely hoping that Wilpon doesn't get Madoffed again in regards to this investment.
Wilpon's losses in the Madoff scam prove yet again that the New York Mets are at the epicenter of the current financial earthquake. (An earlier post detailed how the Mets brought Citigroup down).
It's bad enough that this team has now choked away a division title in each of the past two Septembers. Must they also destroy everything in their wake?
At this point, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that Mr. Met was running the credit default swap (CDS) desk at AIG. I imagine that the hiring decision-making process went a little something like this:
Trading manager: "Thanks for coming in today, Mr. Met. It was nice meeting with you. We'll be in touch."
Mr. Met leaves, and walks two blocks to the parking garage where he left his extra-large golf cart with the Mets cap on top. Upon paying the cashier, he is dismayed to learn that he has been charged an extra $20 for an "oversized vehicle." He decides then and there that he will not tip the garage attendant who retrieves his car.
Trading manager (to the head of derivatives trading): "Well, what did you think of the guy?
Head of Derivatives Trading: "I'm not sure. He gave me a funny vibe. What do you think?"
Trading manager: "I thought he was great. He's a genius. We should hire him."
Head of Derivatives Trading: "A genius? Why do you say that? Is he a Phd.?"
Trading Manager: "No. But he must be a genius. Just look at the size of his head."
Head of Derivatives Trading: "You're right. He's our guy."
It is important to note that while Madoff's "fund" had a relatively small number of investors, many of these investors were hedge funds, who in turn had many investors. It seems that thousands of people were caught up in this scam.
Looking at the list of prominent investors who lost money, one name in particular stands out: Fred Wilpon, the owner of the New York Mets. It has been reported that Wilpon's real estate company, Sterling Equities, might have lost hundreds of millions of dollars in Madoff's fraud.
What makes the Wilpon case interesting is that this hardly represents the first time that he has been duped. My preliminary analysis has revealed that over the past ten years alone, Wilpon has invested tens of millions of dollars with certain individuals, and has little to show for his expenditures. Some of the people who have taken millions from Wilpon, and left him "holding the bag" include:
* Mo Vaughn
* Mike Hampton
* Carlos Baerga
* Pedro Martinez
* Luis Castillo
Perhaps most sad is the fact that Mr. Wilpon continues to throw his money at investments with a less-than-certain future. Earlier this month, he committed to pay a certain Francisco Rodriguez, of Caracas, Venezuela, $37 million over the next three years. Mets fans are surely hoping that Wilpon doesn't get Madoffed again in regards to this investment.
Wilpon's losses in the Madoff scam prove yet again that the New York Mets are at the epicenter of the current financial earthquake. (An earlier post detailed how the Mets brought Citigroup down).
It's bad enough that this team has now choked away a division title in each of the past two Septembers. Must they also destroy everything in their wake?
At this point, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that Mr. Met was running the credit default swap (CDS) desk at AIG. I imagine that the hiring decision-making process went a little something like this:
Trading manager: "Thanks for coming in today, Mr. Met. It was nice meeting with you. We'll be in touch."
Mr. Met leaves, and walks two blocks to the parking garage where he left his extra-large golf cart with the Mets cap on top. Upon paying the cashier, he is dismayed to learn that he has been charged an extra $20 for an "oversized vehicle." He decides then and there that he will not tip the garage attendant who retrieves his car.
Trading manager (to the head of derivatives trading): "Well, what did you think of the guy?
Head of Derivatives Trading: "I'm not sure. He gave me a funny vibe. What do you think?"
Trading manager: "I thought he was great. He's a genius. We should hire him."
Head of Derivatives Trading: "A genius? Why do you say that? Is he a Phd.?"
Trading Manager: "No. But he must be a genius. Just look at the size of his head."
Head of Derivatives Trading: "You're right. He's our guy."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)