Comments on: Miss Mark-to-Market Catches Mr. Market’s Fancy

By: Mark E Hoffer

Mark E Hoffer — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 22:15:01 +0000

I don’t have much more to add to the others’ comments, other than: I concur.

I’d post the whole of it again, but I’ll just note that Jack’s piece should be re-read..

Jack,

it’s a great help to have another mind, about, seeing through the miasma..

By: karen

karen — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 17:30:14 +0000

Jack, imo, this was one of your best ever… you even skewered Kaplan, thank you, thank you. I would kiss you if i could! Truer and simpler words were never spoken about gold, as well. Hope others get it. Thank you, again.

By: usphoenix

usphoenix — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 15:57:58 +0000

Agree. Markets are called “efficient” theoretically because “everyone” has the same information and acts upon it in a somewhat “rational” fashion. Using that “belief” sucks the little guys, the idiots and the gamblers in and creates a play for traders.

Changing the mark to market rule, as you point out, simply subtracts/confuses/distorts information from the marketplace, and probably increases the likelihood that some now have more and better information than others. Less transparency.

The powers that be obviously expect to benefit from this. And seeing as how Miss Mark expects to get hers on the top and the bottom, and Mr Market, not being the generous sort, imposes a zero-sum game on all the players, someone’s about to get fleeced.

Care to guess who?

Thanks Jack for another good job. Well said. Great analogy.

By: peachin

peachin — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 13:43:40 +0000

Mark to Market is a basic tenant in GAAP (General Accepted Accounting Principles) and part of the
Going Concern Concept – “If perception can then morph into belief” isn’t that what got us into trouble
in the first place? A Drug, if you will – and probably the best move for the time – How much Morphine (sic) can you absorb before you are hooked, once again.

By: leftback

leftback — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 12:57:50 +0000

Mr Market should be careful that he doesn’t contract an unfortunate infection from Miss Mark.
Miss Mark may look exceedingly pretty at the moment, but there’s an awful lot of lipstick on that pig.

By: Simon

Simon — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 08:27:51 +0000

I like the “Miss Mark to Market” analogy. In the case of the “public private investment partnerships” The little Miss seems to have been hired very much to cause Mr Market to miss by a wide Mark. Although according to some she’s actually a double agent. Which probably just serves to make her more attractive in the mean time.