Sam, no doubt you are one of this forum's best stock strategists. However, I will have to disagree with some of your views based on the fact the fundamentals are not there to justify higher stock prices even in a few years down the road.
- First of all you like to use C and BAC as examples that we missed the best buying opportunities. I would argue we really missed GS when it was around $50 or MS below $6. The reason is even today the best bank analysts have to agree they could not analyze C or BAC's balance sheet. On the other hand, for GS, their conservative estimate of GS's earning power is $30 per share next year. Therefore, the chances of C going down to $1 or BAC below $10 are much much greater than GS going back to $50. So, if you bought GS at $50, you would have the same capital appreciation as C at $1 but you would have tremendous more upside potential with GS. If you predict C to go above $10, that would translate GS to be $500. Which one is more reasonable? I would say neither. - Second of all, historical data can be misleading and do not have any comparison to today's price. With the easy credit gone for many years, I just wonder where the earning power comes from for banks? Whitney Meridith still predicts that the house price would go down another 50%. - You rarely talk about your screening metrics for stocks besides historical data. How could you predict you can earn > 100% return? Just remember the best money manager of all times only had about 20% return annually. No offense. Happy investing ! -ffree(aleverage) 2009-9-13