In partnership with CBSSports.com
The home for discussion on USC athletics
FightOn247 message board for off topic posts
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Okay. Since you have a fascination with the Dow and some time, I will ask you a trivia question. Do you know the difference between the theoretical high/low and actual high/low of the Dow and the history of the usage of the two?
Until 1992, the theoretical high/low was used. It would take the high of each component stock for the day and the low for each component stock for the day. They would add the highs to get the index high for the day and the lows to get the index low for the day. The only actual figures were the closes. Of course, each stock probably did not hit their highs or lows at the same time. The reason that this lousy method was used was that the component stock prices were not captured together throughout the day. Starting in 1992, they starting capturing all the component stock prices simultaneously every 10 seconds giving them the actual price of the Dow components throughout the day. Since then, the actual highs and lows are typically used. However you can still occasionally find reference to the theoretical highs and lows for the day.
That is interesting. I've never heard anything about this.
I started following the markets for a 4th grade project. From there it became something that me and my grandfather could always talk about. He lived for this type of stuff.
I got interested in the stock market when I took a tour of the NYSE as a teenager. At that time, they gave tours and it was before they put plexi glass on the balcony over the floor (they later put plexi glass there when a person threw dollar bills over the balcony and people on the floor scrambled for them. The exchange was not computerized back then. They literally did trading through specialists' books. People were running all over at a crazy pace. It was very exciting. It is what caused me to get in this industry when I got out of college.
During the project I mentioned earlier, my class took a trip to a branch of The Pacific Exchange in Downtown LA. I thought it was one of the coolest places I had ever been.
I had been to the new P-Coast Exchange right after they moved into it. I suspect that you are about a generation younger than me and could not have gone to the older one. I used to go to the conference rooms at the entrance door to the P-Coast for arbitrations many years ago. I was an arbitrator in cases and represented parties in arbitrations. The P-Coast was dead compared to the NYSE. The P-Coast was always more automated and had less action. It was also much smaller and specialized in options rather than equities. It was common for specialists to be sitting there with their feet up on the tables watching their screens.
Unfortunately, the NYSE is now so automated that it is not very exciting any longer. Also, more stock gets traded off the exchange by ATS than on the exchange now. A couple of years ago, I went to the exchange after hours and had a picture taken of me ringing the bell.
This post was edited by Morethanafan 17 months ago
The one I went to was just west of the 110, somewhere in between 3rd and 6th. I don't believe it is still there. Off the top of my head, I want to say that there is a very nice condo/apartment building there now.
Back in 2007, I got to tour the London Stock Exchange. That was pretty cool, but I am kinda bummed I didn't think to take a picture of me ringing the bell (not that I even know if there was a bell there, but you know what I mean).
This post was edited by cstory80 17 months ago
You went to the relatively new PSE. I believe they moved there in 1986. The old one was on Spring Street. I do not know what happened to the physical location, but the PSE is no longer there.
I hate to sound really shallow, but for anyone near a TV, turn to CNN.
Today Brooke Baldwin looks as perfect as she has ever looked.
You hate to sound really shallow, but your are?
I never look at attractive women.
You got your 14,000 Dow. The next stop is a new record. The stop after that is 15,000.
We did it!
Its too bad main st. isn't doing near as well as wall street. More taxes should keep that the same for awhile.
Really, where else is there to put money that will earn anything? I've heard the Bond market is heavy and most don't want to put more there. Banks give nothing. I put some in gold a few years ago but don't want to do more now. Real estate is showing a short term bump. That doesn't leave much else but Wall street. It should be doing well.
"...an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough jobs or enough profits" JFK
we still have a demand slump while people try to deleverage. The numbers built up by personal and corporate debt (especially the banks obv) were epic. Anyone who took the time to work out what happened in our Great Recession knows that. The question is whether we stall, worry about the debt at the expense of getting out of this situation first, or whether there is the political will to get the economy moving again. My opinion on that changes daily.
Real Estate seems good. The overhand has been mostly absorbed. Of course, it will face headwinds in a few years when interest rate rise, but I believe it will do well in awhile. If we have hyperinflation because our debt gets out of hand, it seems like a great place to be. It is similar to god as a hedge against inflation except that it can get you revenue as you hold it.
MeMBeR SiNcE 9/11/2011
MaY GOD BLesS ThE U.S.C. TROJAN'S, AnD AMeRiCA,---FoR ALLL ETeRNiTY!!!
JuST A MiRaGE!!!
NoThiNG Of SuBSTanCE, To BacK It Up.
I think RE is only good right now because inventory is extremely low. A large segment can't qualify like they used to be able to. And another segment needs the prices to go up significantly before they are no longer upside down or can make enough after expenses to make a move worthwhile. I don't see RE taking off in any big way. However, your point about utility of RE is correct.
The total number of people collecting Unemployment Benefits is now at a 4.5 year low. From the article:
"Thursday's report showed that continuing claims for unemployment benefits stood at 3.1 million in the week ended Feb. 2. That is lowest since July 2008, before the worst of the recession hit and the job market began to tumble."
WASHINGTON further signs of the gradual recovery in the labor market.
Remember when we all (heh) celebrated the Jan 24 print that was supposed to be the lowest since 2008? It was that way because the DL "estimated" claims for California, proven by the surge the following week (for which we somehow did not get a report).
This week? The "blizzard" disrupted the collection process in Connecticut and Illinois, so data was estimated.
So the DL makes up numbers then seasonally adjusts. Sounds perfectly reliable!
How will conservatives spin us having less people on unemployment under Obama than when Bush was President? I suspect they'll turn their attention away from that and only continue with food stamps. Of course, Obama suggested a partial remedy for that, a higher minimum wage.
What do you consider more reliable for unemployment numbers?
I would say the revisions every week are more reliable. Emphasis on the 'more'.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports