Comments on: THE A.D.S. BUSINESS CONDITIONS INDEX ROLLS OVER

By: Leslie

Leslie — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:25:16 +0000

Gtown did do well in the THIRD game of the year against SU. At least we will be rested for the final four. (Yes, I’m knocking on wood right now)… Those Patrick Ewing rivalry years…
Leslie

By: roger erickson

roger erickson — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:43:42 +0000

I was told that this was a very useful, realtime indicator. However, reading the fine print, I see that is not the case at all:

“The vertical lines on the figure provide information as to which indicators are available for which dates. For dates to the left of the left line, the ADS index is based on observed data for all six underlying indicators. For dates between the left and right lines, the ADS index is based on at least two monthly indicators (typically[?] employment and industrial production) and initial jobless claims. For dates to the right of the right line, the ADS
index is based on initial jobless claims and possibly[?] one monthly indicator.”

reminds me of pro-forma accounting statements; i.e., speculation promising to be adjusted later

too bad this doesn’t plot entire history for the 1-indicator, 2-indicator & 6-indicator curves; THAT would be interesting
what use is a control indicator if variance estimates are not supplied as well? Only as good as guesstimates plus or minus reality! Why bother?

We actually run our country this way? Advise our economic policy this way? Remind me NEVER to allow the Fed to manage a nuclear power plant!

By: Pal

Pal — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:18:44 +0000

Sorry I am a small timer but I believe little in the way of information published from the US government. There are just way to many examples of government, wholesale misrepresentation of so called ‘government data’. Even unemployment is so manipulated as to misrepresent real unemployment by as much as 30% IMHO and is consistently reassessed correctly after the news media is not longer paying attention to old figures. I abhor more government but how about an application of Sarbanes-Oxley to government employees and elected officials.

You lie and we fine you; you lie big enough and you got to jail.

But thanks for the website.

By: TMoore

TMoore — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:52:55 +0000

As an armchair economist I am far more interested in what will happen next. The graph shows what happened in 2008 and 2009, but not how the trend is going. My experience with business (vis books) is that there are bookshops going under because of lack of sales, following the trend of falling rent values in housing. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that the consumers’ interest in avoiding credit is to blame, and as long as the credit lenders continue to gouge interest and other extraneous fees out of its good debtors, no one is going to take out another direct investment loan anytime soon under the current conditions. By the same token, the banks are not willing to relax their hold over liguidity, so those already in debt are not able to get themselves out by consolidating and paying off the principal. What we have here is failure to communicate. I will be glad when the legislation designed to correct the imbalance does so, and the economy can get back to some degree of normalcy.

By: DKBailey

DKBailey — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:14:39 +0000

Indirect investment is the key to all this. Watch the secret fed throwing funds overseas and that will show the correlation.
From various of those who deal with these central banks, you will see certain reinvestment from these same areas. No need to audit and out the fed’s secrets.
Do as I did, follow the money. By the way, I did get that report into the official senate finance committee records too…it’s still causing problems.
Asset fluctuation reports of central banks will show everything one needs to know about the ring around the rosy BS ‘they’ are pulling.
Fed sends money, foreign feds loan, and these buy US debts.
Simple enough?
I recommend 40 – 60% assets in ‘direct’ commodity- those that are and will be in demand, metals, oil, food are the top three.

By: AWF

AWF — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:08:14 +0000

Hardley the “Definitive” Indicator

The govrnments reports are “Revised” yearly and monthly– these “after the fact” benchmark revisions have an impact on this indicator.

Value to trader—worthless.

Value to investor—useless.

Do I believe the govrnment reports

That be a ” negatory good buddy “

By: gaius marius

gaius marius — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:41:30 +0000

good data catch, chris. also interesting -- .pdf of ADS back to 1960.

By: TPC

TPC — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 00:11:08 +0000

Thanks for pointing out the thinness of the indicator to the right of the line. I overlooked it somehow.

By: chris

chris — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:45:53 +0000

st johns destroys uconn by over 20…didnt see that one coming, at least not from the johnnies; i would take the female over the male huskies in a dogfight.

By: TPC

TPC — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:17:27 +0000

Am I reading this correctly? Did you really just insult Gtown? We pulled Syracuse in the second round of the Big East tourney. Playing at MSG I fully expect to get clobbered.

I am calling sweet 16 in the tourney though. We’re not deep enough to make a run at the final four though.