Aren't stocks and bonds contrary indicators anyway?

Post #341,720 by drook 4/20/11 2:21:22 PM Reply	Aren't stocks and bonds contrary indicators anyway? I thought what's good for stocks tends to be bad for bonds and vice-versa. This news was allegedly bad for the bond market, so they shouldn't have been reporting on moves in stocks in any case, but if they did report stocks in connection with this announcement, they should say the move indicates strength in the bond market. Second, S&P didn't reveal any original research or information, just their conclusion based on the same info everyone else already had. The only reason to care what they say is if they have a good track record. Let's see ... housing bubble, Enron, Bear Stearns, Lehman ... yeah, not so great. -- Drew
Post #341,728 by Another Scott 4/20/11 6:47:52 PM Reply	All good points. I think the movement in US stock prices on Monday was mainly another indication that day-to-day prices have almost nothing to do with fundamentals of the stock or the company in question. It's all about trying to be ahead of everyone else in a trade, not investing for the long(ish) term. I also thought it was very strange that the news stories were pointing to the stock market when it should have been the bond market reacting if there was anything new and important in the S&P report. There wasn't, of course. Cheers, Scott.
Post #341,735 by boxley 4/21/11 7:49:57 AM Reply	you just figured that out? sheesh It's all about trying to be ahead of everyone else in a trade, not investing for the long(ish) term. its no different than a craps table in vegas except in vegas the odds are better Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #341,738 by Another Scott 4/21/11 8:07:21 AM Reply	I'm not the one writing for TV and the WSJ. ;-)

Welcome to IWETHEY!