Suze Orman
- KLR
- TonyFromGlendale
- zbidnizmin
- KLR
- KLR
- KLR
- vhehn
- mitelo
- Global_Snake
- KLR
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
« Previous 1 2 3 Next »
» KLR - Suze Says
...As I've said before, the markets of today are not the optimistic markets of 1999 and 2000. If you're in the stock market now, you had better be in it for the long haul, because this turnaround isn't going to be a quick one. Even if the major indexes start moving north again next year, you are looking at two to three years until their upward movement gains momentum and the wounds that have been inflicted on the economy and the markets heal...[If you wanna see Suze's newsletter on her website:
username: asksuze
password: laxsmi
I get 5 bucks a click.]
-- posted by KLR
» TonyFromGlendale - Suzi is everywhere
Every time I turn on the TV I see this woman...I expect to see her on Monday Night Football as a sub-referee when the season begins on ABC TV...There is the too cute Suzi speaking into the camera...15 yard penalty on #25 for "holding" QQQ...Or maybe the penalty should be on Bully-Bob-Brinker for holding and "unnessary roughness."-- posted by TonyFromGlendale
» zbidnizmin - Suze Orman, right
A real Intellectual Giant of the financial services industry.-- posted by zbidnizmin
» KLR - Re: More on Suzie Orman Fesses Up
In response to message posted by Kirk:Suze is as slippery as Brinker...
She didn't go to 90% bonds at all...In fact, at the end of 2000 she was increasing her techs and touting QQQs...Here is what she said.....
First, here are my overall recommendations. Given that no one can predict the near-term future of the stock market, I'm staying firm in my asset allocation and sector weighting models (see below), with one exception: I'm raising my recommended weighting in technology stocks and technology mutual funds from 20 percent back up to 29 percent. But please remember: I'm suggesting that you invest only 29 percent of the amount my allocation model recommends you have in U.S equities, which is only 25 percent of your total portfolio.
If you do the math, that means that you should have no more than 7.25 of your total portfolio invested in technology.
I want you to keep 60 percent of all your assets safely put away in bonds and money market funds so that you will have cash to invest when the market begins to turn around. Please note that this could happen at any time, so stay alert: Anything can happen when it comes to the market.
Why am I suggesting that you invest a little more in technology stocks now? I lowered my technology allocation in October, after the rally in tech stocks had stopped and the stocks were sinking again. Now I believe that these stock and funds (some of them truly great investments) may have sold off nearly as much as they are going to. Here's the precedent: During the great bear market of 1973-74, the NASDAQ lost 59 percent of its value.
As of last week, Nasdaq briefly was off its year's highs by nearly 50 percent. It's my opinion that we don't have a lot further down to go. I believe there is money to be made by careful reinvestment now.
If you don't know which technology stocks to buy, I would play it safe and buy shares of ticker symbol QQQ on the American Stock Exchange. The QQQ is a tracking share that invests in the Nasdaq 100, a group of Nasdaq's largest stocks, which are mainly technology stocks. QQQ is sold like a stock itself, and as of this writing it is selling for about $65 dollars a share. I would look to buy QQQs as long as they are under $70 a share.
-- posted by KLR
» KLR - Now remember, Suze was previousl recommending QQQs at 70.
Now remember, Suze was previousl recommending QQQs at 70...She appeared on Larry King January 2, 2001 and said...."...when Larry King asked me what stocks I would buy in light of all of this, I answered that I would buy shares of what are known as the QQQs.
The QQQs are tracking shares that are traded on the American Stock Exchange and that simply follow the top 100 stocks in the NASDAQ composite index.
The next morning the QQQs were selling at $53 a share. Three weeks later they were selling at $67 a share, for an almost 30 percent increase.
{So Suze is patting herself on the back for a 30% increase to $67??? Hell, she was buying earlier at $70!!!]
At that point, if Larry King had asked me what I would do, I would have told him that I would sell the QQQs. Now the QQQs are back down to about $58 a share..."
-- posted by KLR
» KLR - Re: Suzie Orman Fesses Up
In response to message posted by Kirk:{Suze]she went to 90% BONDS in January 2000"
She lies...she never went to 90% bonds...Perhaps her weasel out is to say "personal" money...what a bunch of crap!!!
Here is where she was in April, 2001...
"...My recommendations as of April 21, 2001 for those who have at least ten years until they will need this money.
65- 70% in stocks (55% -60% in the United States and 10-15% overseas)
20%-25% in bonds, not going out more than 10 years in maturity
10% in cash, held in a money market fund ...'
-- posted by KLR
» mitelo - Re. No Votes
I can't say much positive about this one either. I agree with all of you. To me, she often comes across as condescending and almost patronizing.I usually go for the remote when she comes on.
But, remotes are "guy" things. I think her target audience is that group of women who may not have any investment background and find themselves in a situation where their financial situation is tenuous.
-- posted by mitelo
» Global_Snake - Ole Suzy is not a guru folks
she's a failed broker and brings nothing new to the table. Everything she says or writes has been said 1,000 times over.-- posted by Global_Snake
» KLR - Suze Says.....
Suze's E-Newsletter - February 15, 2002--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suze's Market Outlook
What's in store for us in the year ahead? I want to share my best thinking with you about the markets and the economy, remembering all the while that the outlook could change dramatically if there were to be another terrorist attack on our homeland, or if the war against terrorism widened, or if the kind of accounting malpractices we saw at Enron turned out to be widespread in corporate America. If any of those things happen, all bets are off. Otherwise:
Even if issues of national security and corporate honesty stay exactly as they are, I believe that the largest part of the move in the stock market has already taken place. I think that we'll have at most an 8-percent gain in the S&P 500.
I think you'll see the Fed funds rate increase from its current 1.75 percent to between 2 percent and 2.5 percent. Alan Greenspan did not lower rates in January, which means that the lowering of rates is probably over for now. We'll probably see interest rates stay the same for a while and eventually start to head back up.
Inflation is virtually nonexistent. If we see an increase in inflation of more than 1 percent or 2 percent by the end of the year, I'll be shocked.
We said in the January 15 newsletter update that—surprise, surprise!—we thought the economy had already turned a corner and was out of recession. Later in the month we learned that during the last quarter of 2001, gross domestic product (see The Road to Wealth, page 339, or Ask Suze about Stocks and Bonds, page 7) had gone up, even if only slightly; and now all we need is one more up quarter to be officially out of recession.
But what does this slight growth in the economy mean to us? Not a lot, because something else is starting to happen. In the last year, we have gone from a huge federal surplus to a serious deficit—as much as $100 billion or more for 2002. We are spending huge sums for security on things like the Olympics and the Super Bowl, huge sums to bail out the airlines, and even huger amounts for defense spending going forward. When you add it all up, you get a $2.13 trillion federal budget. Part of the reason for our prosperity in the 1990s was getting rid of federal deficits. Plus, all the experts are saying that in order to fund that budget we're going to have to take money from the Social Security "lock box" and from Medicare. This seriously concerns me. It points to one thing: As we get older, we are going to have to carry ourselves along our own financial road. So even if you start to earn more in 2002, you are going to have to save more, too.
Even though things are looking up, please be very careful in the year ahead. Given Enron, and the fact that only five months ago the country was attacked by terrorists, and the fact that the economy is just beginning to recover, the stock market is still full of unknowns. Unknowns are risky. I'm of a mind that you let facts come to the surface before you act. When I swim, I want to know what's underwater. If I can't see the bottom, I'm not so sure I want to swim. The markets are like that now.
When in doubt, there's nothing wrong with keeping your money safe. If the upside of the market this year will be about 8 percent, which I think it will be, and if you can get a 5 percent return from a Treasury note or a municipal bond with no risk, as you can, then you might want to consider how much uneasiness that 3 percent difference is worth. You might just want to choose peace of mind.
-- posted by KLR
« Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.