2009年7月4日星期六

枯草

有網友提到丁校長的見解過分偏激,反而對其他分析員模稜兩可的意見更對投資有好的幫助。

可能過去三個月的股市升浪委實驚人,很多的經濟分析很多時變成了看似不懂時勢的廢話。

不過由克魯明、魯賓尼、When Markets Collide作者艾爾阿里安、以至本港的羅家聰、丁世民、黃元山都告訴我們綠芽其實只是枯草時,大家可以置之不理嗎?

事實上,經濟數據已經被救市措施扭曲得面目全非,根本難以辨認。

消費信心好了兩個月後,最新又再回落,而周四公布的就業職位,又將上月本已憧憬的就業市場幻想打破。

美國公布嘅就業數據,特別係減嘅職位,遠多過預期,觸發擔心衰退會延長問題。

美國六月失業率,升到百分之9點5,雖然比預期略低,但就係二十六年高位,就業職位就減少左46萬7千
分,比預期嘅跌36萬分、差好多。

雖然失業率一向被視為滯後數字,企業一般都是待生意好轉,人手應付不了才聘請額外人手,不過就業數據中的每周工時,其實都有一定前瞻性,原因是企業在增聘人手前,都會用盡現有員工的生產力,即係「做到你死」。華爾街日報說,最新的員工工時,下跌至每周33個小時,創下歷史新低。

更重要是失業率表面雖然只有百分之九點五、比預期低,不過這個失業率其實只是反映過去四個星期沒有工作、可以重返工作崗位、以及正在搵工的人。相反,如果單睇一個叫「U-6」數據,失業情況就可能遠比想像惡劣。

所謂U-6 ,是指正式失業人數以外,再連同其他口頭想找工、但沒有實際行動的人,以及目前統計上已界定為就業,但實際上只返緊兼職的人。如果用U-6的標準,失業人數實際上高達百分之16!

仲有一個不利數據是源自諾貝爾經濟學獎得主克魯明的觀察。克魯明話,除左削減職位令人憂慮,佢留意到薪酬
水平指數由舊年十月大跌左八成以上,由於物價指數通常會比薪酬仲要低,佢擔心美國會陷入日本九十年代式嘅通縮。

奧巴馬話,非常關注失業率上升問題,克魯明已經提出,政府需要第二輪刺激經濟方案,聯儲局幾乎可以肯定會繼續維持低息環境。

29 則留言:

匿名 說...

股市引人入勝之處,在於無人可以事前話自己百分百對,只有事後才能定錯對.總之要凡事小心,量力而為.

匿名 說...

講野模稜兩可都搵上黎..有咩獨特見解可言呢...好心cable搵分析員上黎應該搵d質素高d啦...我比左錢嫁...大佬..

匿名 說...

你俾0個二百零蚊,好心就唔好咁俺尖啦!
不過cable個 會計系統就水皮0左D, 我限期前成十日,就係屋企樓下間7-11交0左月費, 佢依家仲不停用機器人電話提醒我,話我未交!!

Bill 說...

模稜兩可 即係冇意見 冇講過野 個市點行都當自己講岩的人

香港環境又會否同美國一樣咁差呢

匿名 說...

Does it mean we pay HKD 6 for newspaper everyday or free radio services and we ought not care what are the content inside it? We have to understand economic performance and stock market are two separate things thought they might converge end of the day but for how long and which the direction is heading first, God knows. The commentors like Mr. Ting, Mr. Wong and many others claimed to be experts alike have to some extent mixed up these two-economics and stock market and painted very dark pictures of the stock market ahead. What their commetns can really kill a lot of investors and index traders.I have friends who were really burned out by following what they feel from the shows. Mind you many investors in general are not so informative and to some extent they rely on what they heard from the radio, messages from the TV and comments from newspaper to make their investment decision. Otherwise there is no need to have phone in show in Cable TV to Miss Wu after at 4PM and 10.14 to others every evening. What the facts to support oil price must down to 55 and equity market could down by 3,000 points are simply based personal opinions on the gloomy outlook of the US & Western economy. Though he might be right but when is right is totally another story.The talk show is more like a threat than giving opinions. Also when they give opinions, there facial expression are so scary too freak you out of your positions. A note of caution I would like to give to the guest speakers is when they give comments they should also need to tell the opposite side of the market if they are wrong and if so where are the exit points. No one in the world could be perfect. So, to commit one's mistake of wrong view is nothing sin. I would also like to take this opportunity to give credit to Sky who is a real trader of both long and short terms. He is also able to form opinions both from the fundamental and technical side. He is able to tell you the degree of bullishness and bearishness not like others simply to suck you how bad is the economy. On top of that, Sky can advise you the investment/trading strategies if anything goes wrong. For those who watch Money Cafe, I strongly advise those viewers worth takeing the views from Sky but for others please do not take them seriously as they will make you lose the skirt & ultimately your house. Anyway, thanks to Sky.

匿名 說...

模稜兩可的意见跟有保留的意见是两回事.
我们要看是观点, 我同意以上网友的看法就是凡事特别在投资上每个人都不能百分百肯定和确定, 假如看错了,应该怎样处理才是好的嘉宾主持.

MoneyCafe 說...

我們經常說,其實不太介意嘉賓的觀點到底會否有錯,大家都知道投資市場是經常變幻,除非大家是神,否則就算曹Sir都有看錯市的日子。

最重要是在大原則沒有變的時候,能否堅持己見; 在面對客觀因素有變化時,到底能否總結今天的錯誤,對未來作出更有觀點的分析。

我們尊重的,就是這一些嘉賓。

匿名 說...

此言差了!!!
作为电视台财经节目,不光是清谈,而是每一句话都带出信息着影响看节目的人投资决定.要知大部份观众都是普通股民,看迷里债券就是一个好例子. 银行是直接影响,电视台和电台是间接影响. 最终结果都是一样.

当嘉宾或是主持人坐了坏盘或是累了人家或自己客户输了钱,应尽量不要把这些坏心情带进节目内.因为会他们的意见已经带有偏见 看来嘉宾门应该尽量在节目里申报利益和很高的EQ & FQ.

匿名 說...

It's important one is responsible for one's view, forms his view based on well-researched information and communicates his rationale properly to his viewers.
In case, however, such view does not materialize eventually, so long as he acknowleges his mistakes and rectifies as promptly as he can, I think he is a good speaker.
The worst are those who keep pretending they have been right all along no matter what views they had presented before.

匿名 說...

投資市場無專家,
點樣落注最終係自已決定,
輸贏自已負責,
"普通股民受人影響"???
賭仔姓賴咩!
輸唔起就唔好落場啦!

睇財經節目係一種娛樂,
唔係投資參考,
係睇D主持同嘉賓點樣將一個財經話題演繹得吸引人,
所以肥仔,C老闆成日做明燈,賣花贊花香,我地仍然收睇!

匿名 說...

難得Money Cafe能找到一些在公開場合講真說話的分析員,竟然還有人在說三道四,擾亂視聽... 唉...司馬昭之心路人皆見。

匿名 說...

我一路都很喜歡看MoneyCafe的, 多謝你們的付出.

啲嘉賓上去個節目到講自己的論點, 冇問題架喎, 他們不是神, 無人知道明天發生什麼事, 每個投資者都應該為自己的買賣負責, 贏錢或輸錢, 都不應該怨天尤人.

我覺得丁世民先生的見解很獨到, 他將自己所見所聞無私的奉獻, 希望啲散戶唔好成為大鱷的點心, 但往往忠言逆耳.希望各位將眼光放遠一點.

匿名 說...

我絕對支持有線電視,支持Money Café blog主及丁世民先生。

偏激??? 我真的唔覺喎!反之,我覺得作出這批評的人比較偏激點。還有,最怪他們反而對其他分析員模稜兩可的意見覺得更對投資有好的幫助??? 這是怎麼道理? 唉!司馬昭之心,路人皆見………

我地會繼續支持丁Sir, C老闆, 肥仔、Andrew,沈大C,黃元山, 青姐……

匿名 說...

一個做得好既財經節目,並唔係靠嘉賓有無俾位做買賣黎衡量,而係視乎嘉賓或主持是否用心去做節目!能否為觀眾與聽眾帶來真心、獨到既見解,並以擴闊普羅大眾既視野為首任。

嘉賓已經講述了自己對股市、商品與外匯等大趨勢既見解,那還不足夠嗎?觀眾就連止蝕位也不能自己定嗎?何況丁世民先生其實每週還有在其他報紙、雜誌、電台等發表意見,很多買賣也有預先提供止蝕位,請大家不要以篇蓋全。自己既金錢,自己既投資,好歹也做多點資料搜集吧!不要只寄望不勞而獲!要完完全全地飯來張口,錢來伸手?

還有,MoneyCafe不是已經一早作出節目介紹嗎??內容是這樣的: "這節目和一般財經節目最大分別是,我們沒有任何投資建議,觀眾可以選取喜愛的資訊、分析,自助地作出投資選擇。"

本人覺得MoneyCafe是一個用心製作既好節目,往後都會繼續支持,謝謝版主及各位工作人員既努力!

Zoemama

frances 說...

Under such volatile market situation,Mr Ting has given us his professional advise and explained to us clearly and frankly the rational behind.
Whether the investor(s) will follow or not will depends on their own judgement.

匿名 說...

I tend to agree that the speakers should not bring their personal emotions into the programme, expecially for those who had conflict of interest either from himself or with his clients. One can't be stubborn when go into the market to give view to others. On top, incurring big lossess could blind one's eyes to speak something bias that might affect many of the investors who watched the show. I can agree no more that high EQ & FQ are required. I shared the same views of above that the facial expression and way of speaking of Mr. Ting ( no persoanl attack) are trying to freak you out and quite bias to one (down) side of the market. It is true one should take side when speaking but also one has to admit that even with a crystal ball in front of him, reservation of view is required. What the speakers said could affect many investors who are viewing the programme. Of course, one might argue why to invest if you know they are just personal views of speakers. Then I rebuff to ask why we need Money Cafe or talk shows or dial in-if for entertainment-why not tune to TVB. The quality of the dail-in could tell you clearly of the facts.

匿名 說...

这个世界没有无私奉献.只有来取利益.
特别在投资市场.所有都是大鳄.他们决对是有目的而来.
嘉宾门可以在大气电波中曾加知名度, 同时间可帮他门的投资帮一手. 看大行报告已知一二. 什么CHinese Wall 只是给监管机构交功课罢了. 看来很多人原来还是那么幼稚那么天真. 当然看这些 talk show 可以用另类分析来看投资形势.-reverse analysing

匿名 說...

上面的网友说
"賭仔姓賴咩!
輸唔起就唔好落場啦!"
放在這给讨论中绝对是错的.

假设这个网友的指控是对的,那么我们是不是应鼓励不是专业投资着或是其他普通投资者不应看有线的 Money Cafe or 财经清谈节目呢!

我也留意到丁先生在节目内的情绪和表现.他应该尽量小心谨慎地表达他的观点,不应受个人的利益的影响.

匿名 說...

What the rational behind the points put forward by Mr. Ting is just one side. Hardly we can say that they are no personal conflict in it.

匿名 說...

我们不需要神, 我明白评述员要给他们的看法,但看淡看好也应该保持客观,好让观众自己有足够的资讯作投资分析.

匿名 說...

为了公平不偏不倚, 我同意嘉宾应该每次需要申报利益-如short how many oil contracts, or long how many bullion futures, or bond futures.
如可能的话, 同时间应简述他们客户持仓情况.

匿名 說...

I fully support Sky too. Hope he can be in Money Cafe show more frequent than now. Though his views are taking side, the strategies for both entrance and exit points are good.

匿名 說...

Good speakers: Leung Siu Kei, 孫柏文、李兆富 ,施永青, 張士佳,馮孝忠,李家祥

Neutral: 雷鼎鳴 ,曾淵滄,王永平,李永權,羅家聰,郭思,黃元山


Bad Speakers:丁世民,黄伟康,沈振盈

匿名 說...

樓上的排序倒轉才對
Good speakers: 丁世民,黄伟康,沈振盈

Neutral: 雷鼎鳴 ,曾淵滄,王永平,李永權,羅家聰,郭思,黃元山


Bad Speakers:Leung Siu Kei, 孫柏文、李兆富 ,施永青, 張士佳,馮孝忠,李家祥

匿名 說...

Please do not reverse of my order please:

Good speakers: Leung Siu Kei, 孫柏文、李兆富 ,施永青, 張士佳,馮孝忠,李家祥

Neutral: 雷鼎鳴 ,曾淵滄,王永平,李永權,羅家聰,郭思,黃元山


Bad Speakers:丁世民,黄伟康,沈振盈

2009年07月08日 星期三 下午3:04

匿名 說...

有無人可以告訴我張士佳(Sky)邊一次得嫁? 我覺得好唔惦囉!!

匿名 說...

Please spend time to digest, if do not enough knowledge to understand, buy few books to read what he said:

http://cablenews.i-cable.com/webapps/program_video/index.php?video_id=50320

http://cablenews.i-cable.com/webapps/program_video/index.php?video_id=48585

匿名 說...

Dun waste time to argue, I guess time will tell, and you will see who's speaking the truth.

It's difficult to say who z good or not, different person with different listening/digestion capability may interpret the info with difference even though it is the same speaker (Either Mr.Ting or Sky). One cannot always blame who's good or who's bad, be fair mates, how good is yourself on reviewing their proofs before making your own investment decision!

匿名 說...

If Sky is no good, please point it out. That's the point.
The blog-links that I gave have proved it already. What I said Sky is good is he is able to demonstrate the gaps, traps,moving averages, RSI, resistance & support levels and many others figures from various techncial tools for you to consider. Also, he is able to explain well of the leading & the lagging indicators and how the markets reacted and if reacted how much the market have been discounted. He never said he is 100% bullish but if anything wrong, he will asked you at what level one should quit & go. He did admit his mistakes but for Mr. Ting is only 100% bearish, he is just one way and if the market movements were against him, he just gave terrible face to the audience and said the whole world is wrong. His stubborness could easily to bring one to lose all his fortune. It should not be the way a commentor should behave.
OK go back to Sky, I suggest for who cannot digest what he said, buy few relevant books to read. Sky is a definitively a technical guy that one need to acquire certain level of technical knowledge to understand what he said.