Highest Dow Ever on Tuesday: 14253.77

I'm typing this on Tuesday night, approximately 7½ hours before the opening of Wednesday's stock market. So, the streamers and confetti of yesterday's stock rally could be the leftovers of a sad hangover by now. Or, stocks could be up even more today! Or flat. And all of those things could be explained by the same exact news story with very slight revisions to copy: "Stocks up on reports of. . ." or "Stocks down despite. . ." or "Stocks flat amid. . ."  It's always amusing to read the vagueness of the reasons behind what is happening at any given moment, at least according to CNBC and the rest of the financial press.  More amusing is the fact that it sometimes changes multiple times in the same day, with one report live online while the opposite reality is occurring. It's almost as vague as a horoscope.

But one thing is for sure, and it's the first line of this video. . .

[Excerpt]

Dow Hits Highest Close Ever

The Dow Jones Industrial Average surged to its highest closing level ever, finally overcoming the losses tied to the financial crisis on the back of a tenacious stock rally that began in March 2009. And the blue chips did it with an exclamation point—a 125.95-point blast that left the old record in the dust. . .

Read more at: Wall Street Journal

The Very Skittish DOW and the Vagueness of the Business Press

This is just a quick post to point out the futility of trying to understand the stock market. Yesterday, the DOW Jones Industrial Average was up over 140 points, after being down a bit on Wednesday, and closed on Monday and Tuesday due to Hurricane Sandy. On balance, the scales--as I write this--have barely changed since last Friday. As mercurial as the stock market is, that could change of course, but here is the quote that leads CNBC's reporting of the market at the moment:

"Stocks added to losses across the board Friday, as weakness in energy and materials trumped a better-than-expected monthly government jobs report and amid nervousness ahead of next week's presidential election."

Let's parse: "Stocks added to losses. . ." What? Stocks were up yesterday, so adding to what losses? ". . .as weakness in energy and materials trumped a better-than-expected monthly government jobs report. . ." This is really a bit of tea leaf reading here, isn't it? One was goodish and one was baddish, so the baddish one is why the market is down? ". . .and amid nervousness ahead of next week's presidential election." Hunh? Nervous about President Obama winning? Or losing? After all, the DOW has doubled since Obama's election, Mitt Romney's lauded business experience, notwithstanding. How in the world do they know that traders are nervous about the election?

Anyway, I just kind of find this sort of soothsaying kind of hilarious. This is a fairly mild example of the vagueness usually present in these blurbs. But, if stocks were to pare losses or even unexpectedly surge by the end of the day, they'll just revise all of the above to reflect what happened. No one will hold against them what they sussed out incorrectly, nobody will remember. Usually--on any given day when the market has fluctuated back and forth across the line--you can read these revised blurbs while the opposite reality is happening before your eyes. And tomorrow, they're still writing these "best guess" stories.

Writing for the business press must be the second most secure job after writing on the weather. You never have to guess correctly to keep your job!

Source: CNBC

Dow Soars, Day After Obamacare Ruling!

Image from Bloomberg.com

Hmmm. . .is that headline a little out of context? Is anything else going on today that would make the Dow go up? Yes, there's an EU decision. But you know what? It doesn't really matter. All economic diviners and prognosticators are guessing nearly all  the time.

On Thursday, after the SCOTUS decision on Obamacare, several economic indicators plunged precipitously. Right-wing World--rocked to its core by the decision to uphold the ACA--seized upon that fact, and put up charts and graphs showing the plunge. They were upset, dammit, but they could say, "See! I told you so!" Yeah, not so much. Forget that the Dow can go up or down in 200-point swings on any given day for any--or no--reason. Forget that on Thursday, it only ended up 20-some-odd points down. Forget that when it goes down during good news, business reporters will say it "dropped, despite" the good news. Forget that when something good happens and it goes up, they use imprecise language, like "stocks are up, amid news that. . ." It's all guess work, and they don't have to be right, like, ever.

So, however the twitchy Wall Street investors got after SCOTUS shook the world yesterday, they apparently got over it fast. Today--as I type this--we're up over 200 points, far exceeding yesterday's drop-off. And by the end of business, it could be over 200, under 100, or up 300. I don't know. You don't know. The CNBC and FOX "Business" channel don't know. But the last two will act like they do. Note the imprecise language below. They don't attribute the sharp stock rise to anything. It's "on the final trading day," "as a surprise agreement" happened, and it "overshadowed" the consumer sentiment report. All speculation.

[Excerpt]

Stocks Hold Sharp Gains on EU Deal; RIM Skids

Stocks held sharp gains across the board on the final trading day of the second quarter as a surprise agreement by EU leaders to help the region's struggling banks overshadowed a disappointing consumer sentiment report. . . .

Read more at: CNBC

Dow Drops 777 Points; Largest Point Drop in History

Image from source, AOL News

It's admittedly hard to write this blog, when the biggest stories of the day are in an area I simply cannot speak authoritatively about. I've written a few times already, that I just don't get Wall Street, and all that it entails. And I'd be a bad broker if I did understand it, because the roller coaster ride of the Dow Jones Industrial Average gives me heartburn anyway.

Today's stock market ride was kind of like watching someone spike your bid on eBay. After seemingly being headed back up after a dive, at about one minute until closing bell, the bottom dropped out. I have a stock ticker on my desktop, and when refreshing it every 20 or 30 seconds, it went down each time. And after 1:00 pm Pacific time, it still kept dropping, from the six hundreds to the low seven hundreds, all the way down to minus 777. That's a lot, right? And how does it keep dropping after the market has supposedly closed? Maybe I don't want to know how all of this works.

Oh, and the headline below is rounding to the nearest fraction, but 777 is the number being used most.

[Excerpt]

Bailout Vote Sacks Dow by Record 778

The failure of the bailout package in Congress triggered a historic selloff on Wall Street - including a terrifying decline of nearly 500 points in mere minutes as the vote took place, the closest thing to panic the stock market has seen in years. . .

Read more at: AOL News

Another Rough Day on Wall Street: -449 Points

I've already confessed that--like John McCain--I don't know a whole lot about the "fundamentals" of the economy. I never have really understood Wall Street, or exactly what is going on when stocks rally or crash. I sorta get it, but nowhere near will enough to write authoritatively about it.

But today, I installed one of those desktop tickers, just out of curiosity. As you know, Monday was the worst day on Wall Street since September 11, 2001. Yesterday, stocks went up a bit, enough for FOX "News" to try and put a smiley face on it. So, I was interested what would happen today. After installing the widget, I very quickly became obsessed. . .and verklempt.

My God, how do stock traders with actual money and careers on the line do it day after day? I watched the stocks go down--they never went above the opening number all day--to minus 150, minus 200, minus 229, minus 275. . . Sometimes only seconds went by, and suddenly, minus 350. They bounced around a while, I think getting all the way "up" to minus 125 or something, then took a steeeep dive to minus 449!

I realize that a day like today is rather extrodinarily bad, but I don't think I could take that as a career.

[Excerpt]

Wall Street plummets after AIG bailout fails to ease jitters

US shares went into a new freefall Wednesday after the Federal Reserve's massive bailout of insurance giant AIG failed to calm a financial market storm and investors rushed for safe haven assets.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average slid 449.36 points (4.06 percent) to end at 10,609.66 in the second massive loss in three sessions, and as global markets saw more turbulence. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

The Big Wall Street Headache

Image from source, Raw Story

Like John McCain, I don't know much about the economy. Then again, I'm not running for President, am I? So I steer clear of Wall Street stories, and stocks and bonds, because I just can't speak authoritatively on the subject.

But a day like today doesn't happen very often (thank goodness), so it is difficult to let the day go by unacknowledged. It looks bad. Alan Greenspan thinks it's bad. I'll just go with a line from The Stephanie Miller Show: Thank you President Hoover!

[Excerpt]

'Bloodbath' in global markets as Wall St. has worst day since 9/11

Troubled Wall Street giant Lehman Brothers sought bankruptcy protection Monday after a frantic weekend of talks failed to find a buyer for the firm ravaged by credit and real estate woes in a shaken financial system. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

Is FOX "Business" Channel Killing the Market?

Image from source, News Corpse

I don't know diddly about the stock market, so I will defer to the people at News Corpse, who have an interesting theory. . .

[Excerpt]

Fox Business Network Jinxes The Markets

Murdoch’s machinations of late have not met with the success to which he is normally accustomed. Fox News is presently the slowest growing cable news network. FBN got off to a pathetic crawl. And I wonder if anyone else has noticed this sign of the Apocalypse: When the Fox Business Network launched on October 15, 2007, the Dow Jones had just hit its all-time high. Since then the markets have collapsed, diving 15% in the four months since FBN’s debut.

Read the whole post at: News Corpse

Rupert Murdoch Gets Wall Street Journal

I confess, stocks and bonds, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, bears and bulls. . .it's a foreign language to me. I've had smart people try to explain it to me, but I just don't understand it.

I don't have to be a financial genius to understand this one though: Rupert Murdoch owning the Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones is a bad thing. This modern-day William Randolph Hearst (without the cool house and Hollywood mistress) tarnishes everything he touches. The New York Post was once a respected newspaper. Rupe's version is only slightly above the now defunct Weekly World News in credibility. FOX "News" is seen by most sane people to be barely more than a subsidiary of the Republican Party.

It doesn't bode well. And since I am out of my depth when it comes to the details of why this is bad for America (just a gut feeling, like Michael Chertoff), I'll give you a taste from somebody who knows.

[Excerpt]

Murdoch: Bad for Journalism, Bad for Democracy

Today's news that the Bancroft family has agreed to News Corp.'s $5 billion dollar buyout offer for Dow Jones, is a powerful reminder of how media consolidation is constantly eroding the foundational structures of our democracy.

America's founders understood that a truly free press -- enlivened by diverse perspectives and beholden to the public interest -- is the keystone to a flourishing democracy. With the purchase of the Dow Jones Co. and its flagship Wall Street Journal another vital voice is brought under the umbrella of one conglomerate -- and one man -- that already controls too much of what Americans see, hear and read every day.

When is Enough, Enough? Since Rupert Murdoch's offer was made public, volumes have been written on what this historic deal might mean to journalism in America. A fair bit of the criticism and concern surrounding News Corp.'s bid for Dow Jones has focused on Murdoch himself and his well-documented penchant for employing his media outlets to advance his personal and business interests.

Read more at: HuffingtonPost.com

Rupert Murdoch buys Dow Jones/Wall Street Journal

Original photo from dKosopedia.com

Oh, jeez. I was really hoping this wouldn't happen. The FOX-ification of the media is damned near complete now, isn't it?


[Excerpt]

Rupert Murdoch buys Dow Jones, owners of the Wall Street Journal

Rupert Murdoch has succeeded with his $5 billion bid for Dow Jones, owners of the Wall Street Journal, according to sources acting for the Dow Jones board. Negotiations on price and matters of principle have been completed, though some details remain to be resolved. None is regarded by either side as a deal-breaker.The Dow board is confident that the terms of the deal will be accepted by the Bancroft family, which controls a majority of voting shares in Dow Jones, over the next few working days. A formal announcement is expected next week.

Read more at: The Business

UPDATE: Then again, maybe not:

Dow Jones denies it's forged News Corp. deal

Sphere: Related Content