Are You Still In?

[TheDuke]

Jim: I sure don't understand about being Money Market for over 2 years. Since MM don't pay anything, what is the worth of your money for the last 2 years?

Inflation alone must have ate up at least 3 percent if not more.

I agree about the 'sleeping at night' comment, but there are a lot of other possibilities other than stock.

2014 was a great year to be in the market at just about any time. This year also has been a good year overall if you had been in at the very beginning.

For those that have been in stock mutual funds for a while, now is a good time to sell out of those and get the capital loss (if any) and buy into a similar fund thereby taking advantage of buy low and possibly sell high some time in the future. Of course, this has to be money outside of 401K etc.

[KandJBm]

Somehow, the stock market seems like it is suffering from inflation.

Another spirited article about the "inflation" of the stock maket. This one is about the inflating effect due to corporate stock buybacks. http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/28/looting-made-easy-the-2-trillion-buyback-binge/

 

But the better question is "where do I put (lets say) 500K if not in the stock market? Assuming one wants reasonable growth. Mostly this is rhetorical.....

 

Roughly, an S&P 500 index fund worth 500K today would have been worth approximately 200K in 2009! Do you think that is just "reasonable growth" and do you expect that kind of "reasonable growth" over the next 6 years too? Maybe I am just too pessimistic?

 

 

Interesting times we live in.

Jim

Actually I am developing the opinion that these are very confusing times if not frustrating times if not infuriating times. If this is another stock market bubble bursting then that makes three since 2000! How is anyone suppose to know what the "fair," long run value of their retirement funds is at any point in time? If this bubble inflating is mostly due to the Fed's tinkering with interest rates in their attempts to offset each and every slowdown in the economy or the stock market then I find we are living in infuriating times.

Edited September 3, 2015 by KandJBm

[Jim & Alice]

Jim: I sure don't understand about being Money Market for over 2 years. Since MM don't pay anything, what is the worth of your money for the last 2 years?

Inflation alone must have ate up at least 3 percent if not more.

 

Well... in hindsight, I would have been better off If had stayed. But back then, in foresight, I recalled the market collapses of past history. To be sure, I rarely have trouble sleeping , and the reason I decided to park the funds is simple - I had just retired, my earning days were over, and I have very little confidence in the stock market with the Fed maintaining near zero rates.

 

Things may change if we get back to an economy that is not fueled by low rates, but for now, I just hope we do not enter a recession or worse. Lowering rates is the first line defense of the Fed fighting such... and that defense is currently neutered. I think after the next presidential election will be a good time to review my personal 'cautious' management approach. For my kids... maybe sooner.

Jim

Edited September 2, 2015 by Jim&Alice

[KandJBm]

The market is still over valued - but only a little compared to previous highs.

It seems the P/E ratio is one of the statistics that should be included in the next update of the classic book, "Damned Lies and Statistics."

 

It is fairly well known that there is more than one way to calculate the P/E statistic and none is easily shown to be the "correct" method. But one of these methods appears to be the most prone to "misuse" (I won't say lying) and it just happens to be the one used by many financial analysts, especially by bullish analysts.

 

Stockman does a critical analysis of the "misuse" in this article, http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/this-is-not-a-retest-its-a-live-bear/?utm_source=wysija&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Mailing+List+Mid+Day+Thursday

 

I wouldn't like to be labeled an empty headed "conspiracy theorist," but this article in the Washington Post along the lines of the Federal Reserve tinkering with the economy and stock market was too interesting not to point to: http://nypost.com/2015/08/31/why-the-federal-reserve-should-be-audited/

Edited September 3, 2015 by KandJBm

[Smitty77_7]

Should I have stayed 'all in'? Or, should I have 'parked it all'? Or, should I have done a mix of both?

 

Those are the questions that come up in conversations with friends, and on forums like this. And, being a bit of a Smart Arse myself, I quite often reply 'I'll let you know next year!':)!

 

Many of us on this board are no longer in the major 'accumulation' part of our financial earning lives. We're in the 'preservation and harvesting' phase. All of us have different levels of comfort for investment risk. Thus we see such wide swings of opinions. Doing what you and your significant other, if in the picture, feel comfortable with - is always appropriate.

 

In this thread back probably 25-20 pages ago, I shared that my wife and I shifted into a retirement mode. As part of this, and the 'buy in' of my wife. I parked the great majority of our accumulated 401K's Roth 401K's and about 75% of our Trading Account into a mixture of vehicles with the key goal of very conservative preservation. Even put some hunks into different forms of The Much Dreaded and Sand Kicked its faces - Annuities... And, a hybrid cash accumulation life insurance policy too.

 

On the small amount that I left in our trading account, I harvested 75% of the gains over from January thru March, parking those funds. I have been moving about 50% of those parked funds, back into specific stocks that I felt were attractive for the long haul. Another 25% I put back into stocks that I expected to see bounce back quickly, with sales orders placed to jump back out and take the short term gains. (13 out of those 20 stocks, have already sold and yielded the returns I had wanted/hoped/expected t receive.).

 

I do not 'day trade', but I do 'swing trade'. I do not try to time the bottom to jump in, or the top to jump out - I try to time the swings, and get somewhere close to those bottoms and tops. And all of this, is with funds that though I'd prefer not to lose, would not jeopardize our retirement if all of it were lost.

 

So what? Doing what is comfortable for you and what you are trying to achieve, is I feel the key to sound investing.

 

This has been a fun and informative thread, with a vast group of knowledge and different perspectives on how to, or not to, invest:)!

 

Great group of members sharing their thoughts. I thank you all, as it always good to read different opinions, especially from varying backgrounds.

 

My best to you all,

Smitty

[Smitty77_7]

On investment tools. Was wondering if anyone has run across and have opinions on David Woodyard?

 

http://www.rdwoodyard.com

 

A fellow RV'er has been funding their travels and maintenance by using his, I'll say system, but it's really just harvesting data, and looking at the numbers to make investments.

 

Note: I've been off and on looking at his site, and have no first hand experience with it. So, not endorsing, or saying to to use - I have formed no opinion as of yet:)!

 

Anyone ever follow and use David's data?

 

Best to all,

Smitty

[Mariner]

Just too much free money floating around that's turned into a drug for wall street. It's WAY over bought. My gut told me to get out 3wks. ago, and as it's turned out, it was the smart move for us. Since I'm now 70yrs. old I'm really not sure I'm going to get back in. I might create my own annuity to make sure we don't run out of money, and I do mean my own, not through a company. It's easy to do by knowing how much you have, how much it will earn(Which isn't much nowadays) and what percentage you want per month. Then you can calculate how long that lump of cash will last. In our case we're actually able to increase our withdrawal rate to a point that it won't run out in our lifetime. Of course nothing will be left for the kids, but that was never the plan anyway.

[KandJBm]

Just too much free money floating around that's turned into a drug for wall street.

And it seems very likely that tomorrow the Federal Reserve will announce that it will keep the cheap money (new debt) flowing, although it won't say it exactly that way.

 

Another Stockman article tries to explain why the F.R. keeps it flowing and why that will be so detrimental. But the stock market is loving it, until it ends (if it ever does!) http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/the-truly-stupid-case-for-more-zirp/?utm_source=wysija&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Mailing+List+AM+Wednesday

[justRich]

Will a 1/4 point sink the stock market? My guess is "probably" for a short term. . .just long enough 'till people realize that they still have a job, the help wanted posters are still in windows, the TV commercials are still pimping new cars and drugs, and people are still eating out.

Let'er rip!

[KandJBm]

So "they" didn't. So when will "they?" What's your guess?

 

Mine is that "they" won't raise interest rates until well after the stock market crashes and is well on its way recovering and the coming recession is fully over and well on its way to full recovery and I mean a real recovery not today's pretend recovery. In other words, a long, long time.

[RV_]

The disruption is coming, but not in the way being discussed:

 

Excerpt:

 

"There are now solid indicators that Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) will obtain much higher energy, much less costly batteries from their GigaFactory. These advanced batteries will be so good that Tesla's Model 3, even versions with 300+ miles of range, will be lighter and less costly to manufacture than similar size and performance ICE (internal combustion engine) cars.

 

This is hugely important because once electric cars become both better and less costly than ICE cars, the car industry will disrupt and the oil industry will collapse. We now know this disruption will arrive much sooner than many expect.

 

the disruption is decades away, or if it is clear the market will ignore disruption for a long time to come, then Tesla shares are wildly overpriced. If disruption is near at hand, and the market likely to recognize it in the near term, then Tesla shares are a bargain.

 

It is not the purpose of this article to explore how expectations will drive share prices during an ICE to BEV disruption. What we will do is look at some interesting data, that taken together show that the ICE to BEV disruption will occur, what the first definite, specific indicator will be, and when that indicator will appear."

 

It goes on in depth in the article here: http://seekingalpha.com/article/3537486-its-game-over-tesla-wins?auth_param=ee6s6:1b0ipqd:059aa12cf27ca308f1129d191f82690e&uprof=46

 

I think that we are approaching a great buy opportunity as Tesla drops in price due to uneasy markets and uncertainty. But the disruption detailed in the rest of the article says how much it will effect the demise the ICE cars and trucks, and the rise of the BEVs.

 

Extrapolate that into commodities markets, auto manufacturer stocks, oil exploration, fuels production, futures speculation, and factor in the fears and inadaptability of

The major players and we've some great opportunities presenting in the near future.

[KandJBm]

Wow! What a day for stocks as the economic data continues to disappoint (or does it?). Can this mean QE4 is right around the corner with the next poor GPD report?

 

Probably the FED will come up with a brand new name, maybe something like: monetary alignment (MA1) or perhaps money refreshment (MR1)? They are much better than I at naming and playing these "easy money" policy games. It will be an interesting quarter.

 

Did you see that the Atlanta Fed's GDP-nowcast for the 3rd quarter is estimated to be around 1%?

[pinger]

Been in the market since 1967 and rode it all the way till now with no regrets. No reason to leave now. Its had a lots of ups and downs but in the long run it has made a lot of money.

[RV_]

The old saw of sell in may and go away is also still practiced and can account for buying back in this time of year. That despite it being proven wrong.

[KandJBm]

I try to read both sides of the argument that: "stocks are in a bubble" versus "stocks are fairly priced and going higher." But I must admit that I have been more taken with the "bubble" side of the argument. So I post what I think are some good, easily read articles on that side.

 

So here is one that I like.

 

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/when-wall-street-gets-defanged-look-out-below/

[RV_]

Good article. I do believe that reaching back to 2002 and then using that as a comparison to back up that we are heading exactly where we headed then is like saying that a clock was showing the correct time now and every 12 hours when checked. Overlooking that the fact is the clock is not running is a correlational error I believe is on the same order of magnitude as that article. I will check out his website more often because while some avoid the fact of crony capitalism he does not. In his about page he is portrayed as an angry writer who is also an investment guru, from my home area of Greenwich CT. I disagree with that one as he extrapolates those four stocks as foretelling the market. The old adage that no one can time the market is true. They can fix it, pretend they are honest brokers, never taking any advantage they can, as long as the risk is worth the returns. Thus 2007/2008.

 

But that is an opinion as neither he nor I have any crystal balls, (Let alone brass) I am not an individual stock investor but twice was struck with a feeling about a company whose tech I was into as a watcher. Those were Apple in 2005 when they announced they were changing to evil Wintel's last half for their hardware, and Tesla when they finally IPO'd after two years of successful full production of the Roadsters, intentionally competing in the super car class as was stated years before they even had a full prototype in 2005. They stated in the early development days that they were going to make a super car , then a mid priced Luxury sedan in the Mercedes/BMW/Audi top lines, and then hoping the economies of scale have kicked in would build a more affordable consumer priced car. Most folks who were not following Tesla or Musk missed that. Crying that they are too expensive is the same as crying that Mercedes are too expensive, but the roadster was in the class of the Ferrari and Lambos. Try lambasting Ferrari or Lamborghini for producing cars that are too expensive.

 

So most folks do the same with Tesla. They miss that Tesla is selling the hell out of their cars by any standards for any start up in any industry, but with no, zero, zip, advertising costs! They compare them to the big three automakers who can't do one with the same performance or range anywhere near the price of a Tesla. They are four time less range, not even close in performance either. The big three goofed because they did not listen either. Tesla intentionally started at the top down. Let's see them build a full EV top of the line and even stay close to Tesla's Model S.

 

There is no correlation when there is a fundamental paradigm shift in any industry. They are always disruptive to the current way of doing things if the owners of that current methodology are intransigent. The last buggy whip manufacturer likely was not able to manufacture accelerator pedals for Ford.

 

Here is one I think is not one paradigm or another about the markets that is perfectly accurate from my perspective, and funny/ironic to boot:

http://www.tflguide.com/2011/04/how-investors-react-in-different-market-situations.html

 

This thread is now 4 years old and active. Go back to 2011 posts till now and see how many were predicting the market bust any minute the whole time. He was and is one of them. Here is commentary about his proclivity for saying that the sky is falling. http://realmoney.thestreet.com/articles/08/07/2015/david-stockmans-just-wrong-so-buy-stocks

 

I think we all tend to the emotions in my link above and read what agrees with our feelings. I also believe lots of folks got burned by the bankers crash so badly that they have IPTSD (Investment PTSD,) and I am not being funny or sarcastic, but very serious. People are slow to stop being afraid to lose it all again, if they kept any. Got milk? Got Enron?

 

I am not being sarcastic so please don't read that into it. I did enjoy some parts of Stockman's rants and will look into some of his historical archives. I believe he has his major failure leading to his IPTSD.

[Barbaraok]

This thread started in August of 2011. August is almost always a month where the market takes a big drop - it gets hot in August and all the players sell, take profits and go to the seashore to cool off. Then in the fall the market rebounds, some years slowly, other years quickly.

 

We were in then, we are still in now. Take some time, look at how allocations are, look to see whether you need to take some profits out in the year ahead and determine what conditions will be favorable to you to do it, otherwise, let the day-to-day worry be about something important, like whether or not Yu Darvish's Tommy John surgery has worked and will he be back strong next spring.

[RV_]

Hey Barb read the link on investors. Tell me it isn't hilariously spot on as the friends of mine across the pond are fond of saying.

[Barbaraok]

Really fun link.

[KandJBm]

I don't think looking backwards in time (history!) and seeing something that you think is similar to the present, "is like saying that a clock was showing the correct time now and every 12 hours when checked."

 

The article you refer to in this quote, "Here is commentary about his proclivity for saying that the sky is falling. http://realmoney.the...g-so-buy-stocks is replete with inaccuracies. For example, the author says, "...only this time he was furious because he said that the Fed was "keeping interest rates artificially low." Stockman and others have been saying for many years that the FED (under Greenspan, Bernanke and Yellen) has been keeping interest rates too low for many, many years, even 2 to 3 decades depending on the authors.

 

Another example is here, quote, "He was ranting about the debt and how the Chinese wouldn't "finance" us pretty soon. He had all those false beliefs like the rest of the people who are still stuck in gold standard thinking. Our dollars come from us, I tried to explain to him, not the Chinese. He wouldn't buy it." Really? Can you imagine that a past Director the the US Office of Management and Budget does not know where money comes from? Does not understand what he is saying when he says China is financing our US debt when it buys US Treasuries? The author is rather unbelievable to my way of thinking.

 

Last example, quote, "I realize that some people will say, "Oh yeah, but you can't predict when these things will happen, but they will happen." This is useless information. It's like saying someday the earth won't be revolving around the sun anymore. Where does that get you?" Well isn't that a humorous comparison! Of course that is useless information. I would guess, however, that a 6 year bull market that has stormed upward while the economy (as measured by GDP) has grown at its lowest rates ever (outside of outright recessions) is most likely to suffer the fate of the last FED induced bulls (2000, 2008) a tad sooner than the earth stops revolving around the sun. And that could get you somewhere. It gets me to a less risky portfolio, simple as that. Only the future (a ticking clock) will show how it turns out. Perhaps the author is more like someone using a stopped clock, i.e., the stock market hasn't crashed yet (well since 2000 and 2008) so it won't.

[TheDuke]

When writting or talking about the stock market, there are two axioms that hold true.

The past cannot predict the future. (Shown on every ad to buy funds).

And

Those who ignore the past are bound to repeat it. (See any historian's comments).

And a third one.

Buy and hold.

[Ron]

I try to read both sides of the argument that: "stocks are in a bubble" versus "stocks are fairly priced and going higher." But I must admit that I have been more taken with the "bubble" side of the argument. So I post what I think are some good, easily read articles on that side.

 

So here is one that I like.

 

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/when-wall-street-gets-defanged-look-out-below/

IMO David Stockman is not a very credible source of financial guidance. After working in Government for several years he tried finance and investing. His results in those fields were not exactly stellar. Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia:

 

 

Business career[edit]

After leaving government, Stockman joined the Wall St. investment bank Salomon Brothers and later became a partner of the New York–based private equity company, the Blackstone Group.^[13] His record was mixed at Blackstone, with some very good investments, such as American Axle, but also several large failures, including Haynes International and Republic Technologies.^[14] During 1999, after Blackstone CEO Stephen A. Schwarzman curtailed Stockman's role in managing the investments he had developed,^[15] Stockman resigned from Blackstone to start his own private equity fund company, Heartland Industrial Partners, L.P., based in Greenwich, Connecticut.^[16]

On the strength of his investment record at Blackstone, Stockman and his partners raised $1.3 billion of equity from institutional and other investors. With Stockman's guidance, Heartland used a contrarian investment strategy, buying controlling interests in companies operating in sectors of the U.S. economy that were attracting the least amount of new equity: auto parts and textiles. With the help of about $9 billion in Wall Street debt financing, Heartland completed more than 20 transactions in less than 2 years to create four portfolio companies: Springs Industries, Metaldyne, Collins & Aikman, and TriMas. Several major investments performed very poorly, however. Collins & Aikman filed for bankruptcy during 2005 and when Heartland sold Metaldyne to Asahi Tec Corp. during 2006, Heartland lost most of the $340 million of equity it had invested in the business.^[17]

Collins & Aikman Corp.[edit]

During August 2003, Stockman became CEO of Collins & Aikman Corporation, a Detroit-based manufacturer of automotive interior components. He was ousted from that job days before Collins & Aikman filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 on May 17, 2005.

Criminal and civil charges[edit]

On March 26, 2007, federal prosecutors in Manhattan indicted Stockman in "a scheme ... to defraud [Collins & Aikman]'s investors, banks and creditors by manipulating C&A's reported revenues and earnings." At the same time, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought civil charges against Stockman related to actions he performed while CEO of Collins & Aikman.^[18] Stockman suffered a personal financial loss, estimated at $13 million, along with losses suffered by as many as 15,000 Collins & Aikman employees worldwide.

Stockman said in a statement posted on his law firm's website that the company's end was the consequence of an industry decline, not fraud.^[19] On January 9, 2009, the U.S. Attorney's Office announced that it did not intend to prosecute Stockman for this case.^[20]

---ron

[KandJBm]

Actually, I don't use Stockman for financial investment advice. I do read him for his knowledge and perspective on how the macro-economy works especially concerning the FED and its influence on the financial sector or industry and stock market.

 

On the other hand, I am surprised with the comments that seem to be examples of that debating term, ad hominem arguments.

 

From Wikipedia: An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"^[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attack on an argument made by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the argument directly. When used inappropriately, it is a logical fallacy in which a claim or argument is dismissed on the basis of some irrelevant fact or supposition about the author or the person being criticized.^[2] Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact or when used in certain kinds of moral and practical reasoning."

 

My personal goal at this forum would be to hear someone's reasons for disagreeing with an article I have posted rather than attacking the author. Like I think I did in my comments on http://realmoney.the...g-so-buy-stocks

Edited November 22, 2015 by KandJBm

[Ron]

Actually, I don't use Stockman for financial investment advice. I do read him for his knowledge and perspective on how the macro-economy works especially concerning the FED and its influence on the financial sector or industry and stock market.

 

On the other hand, I am surprised with the comments that seem to be examples of that debating term, ad hominem arguments.

 

From Wikipedia: An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"^[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attack on an argument made by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the argument directly. When used inappropriately, it is a logical fallacy in which a claim or argument is dismissed on the basis of some irrelevant fact or supposition about the author or the person being criticized.^[2] Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact or when used in certain kinds of moral and practical reasoning."

 

My personal goal at this forum would be to hear someone's reasons for disagreeing with an article I have posted rather than attacking the author. Like I think I did in my comments on http://realmoney.the...g-so-buy-stocks

I don't think what I posted was irrelevant. At any give time you can find any number of "experts" with totally divergent interpretations of how various financial issues will affect stock prices. There are always those who see only gloom and doom. Once in awhile they're right and they never let you forget it. You might look at my post as an attack on Stockman that is irrelevant but if you "do read him for his knowledge and perspective on how the macro-economy works especially concerning the FED and its influence on the financial sector or industry and stock market." then he is probably influencing you own decisions and assumptions. My point is that I'd rather be influenced by someone with a better track record than Stockman. After all, Stockman probably used his "knowledge and perspective" to guide his own decisions when running all the failed funds with which he was associated.

[RV_]

Kand JBm,

(could you perhaps put a name in the sig block or sign them please? Easier to reply to.)

 

I commented on Stockman's comparisons to explain his position in the article about today, by cherry picking examples that support his premise, from far in the past. 13 years ago, you will have to agree was appropriate in that the war on terror was begun and we as a country were thinking Afghanistan would be a short intervention. I found his writing and website interesting.

 

Are you saying that Stockman has not taken a position in the years since Reagan, consistently, every year, that the market/stocks/the economy would experience an imminent crash every year for the past 15 years at least, and been wrong 14 years and right once? The fact that they did in 2008 but not in every year he has predicted crashes, is my example of the clock being right once in 15 years. No one is attacking Stockman. I am attacking his prediction track record. Not you, not him personally.

 

You can like him without my or our agreeing. I can predict that I will say we are in a crash when we are in one. Heck I was fat dumb and happy with a decent retirement in addition to my savings then the interest rates were yanked out from under my savings after I had several years previously paid off the short term loan on my property and house in 2006, and bought all the fund shares I could at USAA all through 2007/8/9. Does that make me a good prognosticator. Nope, and I was right and writing about them and Tesla as well a Space X here all through this decade. That and 3 bucks will get me a cuppa. I am the last person to listen to about investing in individual stocks except for twice when in 2010 I actually told all to invest in Tesla and hold through the posted business three year development plan. Now it is hold until 2018 -2020. I bought Tesla initially at $17-22.50. It closed last Friday at $220.01. And I already took my initial investment plus $5k off the table just to put it to use elsewhere, with plenty of shares remaining. The other was Apple. Being right twice out of twice getting interested is batting 1000. But that was research and interest not investment savvy. Now it is just ride and smile as it goes on its now well established roller coaster ride. We forget to check it for days at a time because we will sell it only after the Model 3 and the Gigafactory are done, and the Powerwall technology has begun to mature, along with economies of scale kicking in. 2017 - 2020.

 

So that is all I know. I thought you had started a decent discussion.

 

 

When writting or talking about the stock market, there are two axioms that hold true.
The past cannot predict the future. (Shown on every ad to buy funds).
And
Those who ignore the past are bound to repeat it. (See any historian's comments).
And a third one.
Buy and hold.

 

Duke,

Agree, I can add a fourth.

 

Buy low (as possible), sell high.

Warren Buffet

 

You have not lost, or made, one penny until you sell. Barring a company failing, a real risk with IPOs not preceded by established leadership in their field and production long before IPO.

 

I have heard many bandy about rules like pigs get slaughtered (Staying too long (greedy) and watching it drop)

 

And on and on.

 

The article I posted as humorous is exactly how I see investors sported and sorted, it was not intended as a comment on anything other than that investors are really funny to watch from the outside looking in. The humor is in how true it is with any sense of humor.

 

I am not putting myself out as knowing anything about the stock market really. I just studied one man and his groups, and the need for those groups today. I have only bought one individual stock in my life, and will likely stay with it, or sell and invest in SpaceX if it ever IPOs, another privately held Musk company.

 

Selling high, to me, simply means picking your exit point, not letting the market scare you out. Of course if it is a startup with no track record it could actually fail. And we have seen established companies like Enron drop out of flight unexpectedly until we find the plane was stripped and even the engines were stolen before the crash. But seeing established companies go completely out is rare. As long as Musk draws breath, Tesla, with its already in place free worldwide Supercharger charging stations allowing long distance travel with 20 minute charge times to be reduced to ten minutes in the near future, its Powerwall technology, and it Gigafactory, will not fail. We all get to watch and see.