Financial Pugilism and Offbeat Analysis
Proinsias O’Mahony:
“Blogs have gone from being eccentric postings to become essential financial reading:
SOME OF the savviest and most in-depth analysis of the global banking crisis has come from the financial blogosphere. Luminaries like Nouriel Roubini, Nobel economist Paul Krugman and former IMF chief economist Simon Johnson are all active bloggers while equally valuable material is penned by less well-known financial experts.
Their growing influence and popularity is evidenced by the US Treasury’s recent decision to hold a conference call discussing the latest bank rescue plan with high-profile financial bloggers. Here’s a taste of some of the very best financial blogs.”
Another nice mention of TBP in (of all places Irish Times):
“Second only to Calculated Risk in terms of monthly web traffic, it’s not hard to understand the popularity of Barry Ritholtz’s blog. A market strategist and frequent commentator on CNBC and Bloomberg, Ritholtz’s informality and no-holds barred style is made for blogging.
Prescient in his predictions of large-scale financial meltdown, Ritholtz has also made a number of timely calls on the bullish side, correctly predicting a big rally at the beginning of March.”
Here is the full list:
- calculatedriskblog.com
- ftalphaville.ft.com
- irisheconomy.ie
- krugman.blogs.nytimes.com
- tradersnarrative.com; traderfeed.blogspot.com; tradermike.net
- baselinescenario.com
- nakedcapitalism.com
- ritholtz.com
- bespokeinvest.typepad.com
- clusterstock.com
Congrats to all on the list . . .
C>
Source:
Financial pugilism and offbeat analysis vie for space in blogosphere
PROINSIAS O’MAHONY
Irish Times, Friday, April 17, 2009
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2009/0417/1224244900698.html
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Financial pugilism? I must say I would buy tickets to see Barry Ritholtz fight Don Luskin.
Larry Kudlow looks like he would be a good cut man for Luskin.
At some point the blogs will become the mainstream and we will all refer to the “Papersphere”.
The fact is, by the time Sulzberger and Murdoch have OK’d their content, it’s already The Olds.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:11 pm
http://market-ticker.denninger.net
Read it.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:11 pm
BR,
Have you bought a bigger hat yet?
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Long live Ritholtz, the financial pugilist.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Denninger nails Mankiw, for sure. Mankiw actually proposed negative interest rates.
At first I thought it was an April Fool. Mish went ballistic.
Speaking of pugilism, wonder if Chris Whalen could fight franklin411 on the undercard?
We could have a whole TBP Fight Club thing going here.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:30 pm
I read part of that Mankiw article and had to put it down mid-way through. Unreadable. Insane. Mish was right – he should resign immediately but then again he works at Harvard, so his brilliance is automatically assumed by too many, so that won’t happen.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Proinsias O’Mahony
Gotta love those Irish names, almost as good as Angus McAngus.
Congrats Ritholtz
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Jack Cooper @ 3:11
From the link you provided:
“The reason is … [that] nobody in their right mind will loan you money at a loss – that is, at less than the risk-free rate of return…”
However, I don’t see why the Fed couldn’t lend to (well capitalized) banks at a negative interest rate with the proviso that the money has to be lent to individuals or small businesses.
…………
Leftback @ 3:25
I saw what you’re referring to on Mish’s site; I actually made a comment (on his site) similar to the above, and Mish actually went to far as to send me a nasty email in response.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Congrats on the kudos, Barry, by the way. Very well deserved. Your site is rendering many traditional publications borderline obselete.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Mannwich @ 3:39
These blogs collectively are undermining the power of the MSM to shape public and investor opinion.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Looks like the PPT is losing the battle. I’m still waiting on confirmation of the trend (daily). They needed a close above 865.30 to create another turnaround. I’m also wondering if MA’s date (4/23/09) is helping with the rush to the exists.
Also congratulations Barry Ritholtz on becoming ESSENTIAL reading. I think so.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:44 pm
@DL: Agreed. Look what we have here – PPT appears to have taken the day off today. Well, still 15 minutes left.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:45 pm
The Denninger article could have been written by Lefty, Manny, Crumudgeon, Okie Lawyer, B in Tn, etc. and etc.
When you’ve run your own business for decades, you see how debt can be your enemy. We all use debt when we have to, but it is Medusa, and all can falter. The old ones who lived through the depression were of one mind that debt was an anathema, and it looks like they were right.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:46 pm
So when is/was this Conference Call? Was I asleep and missed something?
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:47 pm
I meant Curmudgeon…sorry….(you know, Irritable would be easier for me to spell…how about it, Curmudgeon?)……
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Interesting developments unfolding here. Excellent analysis by leftback and AT earlier.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:51 pm
The action today and Monday is suggesting a change in tenor.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Me-thinks an important turn may (MAY) be upon us. Let’s see what Apple’s news brings tomorrow though.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:57 pm
>>However, I don’t see why the Fed couldn’t lend to (well capitalized) banks at a negative interest rate with the proviso that the money has to be lent to individuals or small businesses.<<
I could get on board with that if you’re talking about lending to the well managed banks/CUs that didn’t run their businesses into the ground with poor lending practices. That doesn’t leave many but I’d like to reward their good behavior through all of this and get money out for lending to credit worthy small businesses and individuals using good old fashioned conservative underwriting guidelines. Unfortunately I’m not sure what net effect that would have. I don’t imagine the numbers would be all that large.
Re: the Mankiw piece, it’s complete crap. It’s ridiculous in it’s premise specifically (to the point where one wonders if he’s being facetious about the dollar bill serial number thing). And the idea of punishing people by forcing them to spend their hard earned money or have it perish is just flat out immoral. Harming the prudent, frugal savers in order to save the irresponsible, greedy debtors is unconscionable. I know the counter argument is that we need to do it for the greater good, but I say B.S. to that. We need to take our medicine. The prudent and responsible are taking enough of bath in this fiasco.
Enciting inflation in order to ease our debt burden (at the expense of those prudent savers) is bad enough. This is just beyond the pale.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Why not just have the feds lend directly to credit-worthy people/businesses for a specified time period? I know that’s fraught with risk but it’s far better than what they’re doing now.
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Mannwich @ 3:58
When they buy bank assets, that’s essentially what they’re doing.
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:04 pm
@DL: But the failing banks that are getting taxpayer money (our money!) are turning around and not passing on the discount they’re getting from the feds to consumers (read: the taxpayer). Some, like BAC, are actually raising rates on credit cards for credit worthy borrowers in a pathetic attempt to goose earnings, so the taxpayer gets whacked twice. Makes no sense. That’s what I’m driving at.
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Onlooker from Troy @ 3:57
“I could get on board with that if you’re talking about lending to the well managed banks…”
That’s why I used the phrase “well capitalized”.
“Re: the Mankiw piece, it’s complete crap”
I agree that idea of using serial numbers to invalidate dollar bills is silly, as is the idea of punishing savers (by essentially confiscating their money).
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Mannwich @ 4:04
“But the failing banks that are getting taxpayer money (our money!) are turning around and not passing on the discount they’re getting from the feds to consumers”.
I agree… but that’s got more to do with politics than economics. Bush and Obama want to give money to the politically connected banks that have failed, rather than to the small and mid-sized banks that have succeeded.
“Some, like BAC, are actually raising rates on credit cards for credit worthy borrowers”. I have a close personal friend who’s getting badly screwed by BAC with her credit card.
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Congrats BR- just don’t get too popular or your comment section will suffer. CR used to have a great comment section but now it has so many people going off on tangents and rants or linking to unrelated crap that it is difficult to have an intelligent conversation. So far you have preserved a great comment environment.
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:14 pm
R. Timm @ 4:13
I would add that quantity is not quality.
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:14 pm
>>Mannwich Says:
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Why not just have the feds lend directly to credit-worthy people/businesses for a specified time period? I know that’s fraught with risk but it’s far better than what they’re doing now.<<
I understand the sentiment. I really don’t like the idea of steepening the yield curve even more and enriching the banks as a result. But you really can’t go there. It’s already a source of much of our problems (FNMA, FRE, SLM, etc.). The moral hazard of the govt subsidizing and backing even more debt is just too great. Not to mention further politicizing the whole process.
Nope, we just have to take our medicine. There is no magic potion to get out of this mess. It’s hard for people to accept that because of the American Dream myth that’s been propagated (every generation living better, being richer than their parents, etc.), and the fact that the Fed has been there every time over the last couple of decades to soften the blow. But the jig’s up. And we still have a chance to redeem ourselves in history’s eyes by owning up to it and not passing it on to our children’s children (and theirs, and on an on).
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:17 pm
>>R. Timm Says:
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Congrats BR- just don’t get too popular or your comment section will suffer. CR used to have a great comment section but now it has so many people going off on tangents and rants or linking to unrelated crap that it is difficult to have an intelligent conversation. So far you have preserved a great comment environment.<<
VERY good point. Same thing could be said about Mish’s comments section. They’re both just about unreadable as you have to sift through so much garbage. It’s not worth the effort. Silly stuff like, “first!” (i.e. first post) What are they, in 1st grade?
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:18 pm
@Onlooker: I agree 100%, but if I had to choose between the two, I’d rather the Fed lend directly to the people or support the healthy banks with subisidies that should be rewarded for their competence and responsibility. In this instance, they’re being penalized for behavior that should be rewarded. It’s completely upside down. That way, those banks who are doing well wouldn’t need to turn around and try to screw the customer again like the big banks are doing (after getting our bailout $, how about them apples?). It’s insane.
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:21 pm
“Second only to Calculated Risk in terms of monthly web traffic, it’s not hard to understand the popularity of Barry Ritholtz’s blog……”
Well, I am thinking “Cage Match”…maybe in Detroit…winner take all…no hitting with chairs, etc. (you know)…if we have enough time to train him…then Barry in the first round!!!
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:27 pm
May be of interest to some here:
http://nymag.com/news/businessfinance/56151/
A line from the article I appreciated: “In a witch hunt, the witches have feelings, too.”
All I can is “Don’t pitchfork me, bro!”
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:42 pm
http://zerohedge.blogspot.com/ is simply a must!!!
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:46 pm
Some of the comments on CR are O’Looney Tunes. Real tinfoil hat in the tub stuff.
Hope it doesn’t happen here, I would hate to have to dredge for the substantive.
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:57 pm
EAR -
I can only assume that you have been assigned disruption duties on this board by TPTB. Too much truth was getting put on the table and the Man can’t have that. Well, as long as I’ve my google and a closet full of Reynolds Wrap, it will be on!
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:01 pm
BR has employed the penalty box to good effect, not to mention spraying the site with “Troll Be Gone”.
Credit markets are still showing concerns over weakness in the financials.
http://zerohedge.blogspot.com/2009/04/what-are-credit-markets-implying-for.html
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:17 pm
Leave Mankiw where he is. I wish Larry Summers was still in Cambridge.
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Tinfoil people need to wake up and realize that the CEO of Alcoa is on the Citi board! Wake up, tinfoil people! Wake up! This so-called “Meltdown” is all a plot to create a panic around reynolds wrap! Do you really all believe that this is a COINCIDENCE???
You should call Geithner, TINY TIN!
————-
How’s that?
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Proinsias? Wow I’ve never heard that one before. And I have a nephew who’s named Eamon (and who’s half Japanese).
But wait:
http://www.babynamesbase.com/meaning_Proinsias.html
Proinsias is apparently no more than the Gaelic for Frank. Who would have thunk it.
I think it was reading Flann O’Brien’s _At Swim Two Brids_ that made me realize to what extent, in the context of the ‘European population at large’ to just what extent the Irish are outliers. By the way it’s a very good book – a wonderfully weird book. Sui generis even.
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:41 pm
I recall me sainted granfar saying sumting laik “Proinsias O’Mahony” when Ay wuz but a child. I always assumed he wuz grumblin’ about sum flaky skin on hes heiney.
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:55 pm
And if you want to know more precisely (by which I mean more scientifically) just what I meant by outliers you might google:
wikipedia haplogroup R1b (y-dna).
And you might actually learn some pretty interesting science. Science, moreover, that’s having real effects on business – which will only grow.
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:57 pm
A bit of trivia from WSJ recently:
There are 20 million bloggers, out of which 1.7 M make part of their income from blogging and for nearly 0.5M bloggers, it is their primary source of income! There is no specific break down re Fin Blogs.
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Congrats to Barry!!!
The next big question to debate is whether the people that have become famous for being out front for this bear market will they be able to get positive when the time comes? Can Roubini call the recovery? Seems hard to believe, or at least that is the case we made here:
http://moneyneversleepsblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/bear-market-all-stars-who-will-blink.html
It just seems like the stars of the next big trend will not be the stars of this trend.. so the question is how long will people hang on every word out of Roubini, Whitney, Taleb.. etc…
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Thanks for keeping it up! It is one of the few sites that I used multiple times a day. It’s like having an extra set of eyes on all the news/blogs/etc.
I do miss the jazz though. Hope you bring back some of the fun with the new version
April 22nd, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Clearly, CalculatedRisk must be dealt with.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Hey BR! How about some crumbs for the pigeons, like another “significant directional change” call?
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:36 pm
Barry,
Your blog is my only source for the news I need.
Thank you !!
April 23rd, 2009 at 8:54 am
Financial pugilism and offbeat analysis vie for space in blogosphere?
Comment::
——————-
Agreed. I used to be a namby pamby passive financial neophyte who got his ass kicked every time he acted on something he read in the financial press or heard on CNBC. Now look at me. I’m handsome and not broke. I’m a winner, thanks to TBP.
April 24th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
[...] http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/04/financial-pugilism-and-offbeat-analysis/ [...]