Re: [Fwd: Cramer's Rewrite of His Watch the Bond Market Column]

[petena9090@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

There has not been a lot of comment on the content of Cramer's article.  I
have
not found it helpful to me to get the "my gosh & golly" citing of the
article from
abroad without any real commentary on what he's saying.  That's OK, and it's
OK to comment on the format or lack of editing.  Would someone please take
it seriously at all and explain what is going to happen next and what we
should
do about it?

I for one agree with Cramer except that 1) he may be exaggerating the bond
liquidity situation and 2) he has little to say about what we can do about
it ( how
can we profit from the information).

I can only cite the same kind of concern about the lack of bond buying in an
article
in the Wall Street Journal by Steven Vames and Heather Bourbeay 10/26/98.
This same concern is uttered in an article on America's Credit Crunch on
page 75ff
in the Oct24-30th issue of the Economist.  The spreads are too large and too
few
buyers are stepping up to bat.   We who are planning to use credit in the
near future
or refinance a high rate mortgage (let alone get a new mortgage) may find
the well to be dry.

A flight to quality in the form of dumping stocks and buying bonds or bond
funds
does not seem to be any answer.  Unless this liquidity situation is improved
we should
probably short both stocks and bonds.

Shorting in Seattle


-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Fritz <fritz@xxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, October 26, 1998 6:53 AM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Cramer's Rewrite of His Watch the Bond Market Column]


Norman Winski wrote:
> NW:  It demonstrates how a famous talking head can take three
> pages to say what he could have said in 3 paragraphs.  Some folks
> just love to hear themselves talk. I wonder if "The Street" has an
> editor on its staff and if their editing skills  are utilized?

I think it's clear they're not.  That was some of the most poorly
written rambling I've ever seen published in a "professional" forum.
That's a lot of why I was confused by it.  :-(

Gary