THE SECOND HALF OF THE PRIMARY BEAR MARKET?
Some interesting comments here from Richard Russell and John Hussman who both believe we’re in the early stages of the second half of the primary bear market that started in 2007. Hussman writes:
“As for my opinion about market conditions, I have to agree with Richard Russell, who said last week “I think we’re now in the second half of the primary bear market that started back in 2007. It won’t be pretty.” Richard is undoubtedly the pre-eminent authority of Dow Theory, which is often disparaged, but actually holds up nicely in historical data if you make Rhea and Hamilton’s writings operational. As a side note on this, from a signal extraction standpoint, you can think of the Transports as carrying a signal about demand and distribution, and the Industrials carrying a signal about production, and both carrying a common signal about more general factors like risk aversion and so forth. From that perspective, the initial weakness we saw in the Transports, coupled with resilience in the Industrials, has been consistent with the buildup of unsold inventories we’ve seen in recent months. The groaning weakness of both indices in recent weeks – breaking simultaneously below the sideways channel that Hamilton refers to as a “line” – is a classic Dow Theory sell signal. While we don’t use Dow Theory formally in our own work, it does provide some interesting confirmation of our analysis at times, for example, in early 2003 when we removed about 70% of our hedges (see the April and May 2003 market comments, also see Notes on Risk Management for a discussion of why we did not respond similarly in 2009).
My impression is that Richard’s comment about the “second half” of the primary bear market reflects the view that – unlike most bear markets and economic downturns – the downturn that began in 2007 was never really resolved, but was instead just pushed off and deferred by massive monetary interventions, accounting changes, and the like. This, in addition to the fact that the S&P 500 remains below its 2007 peak. So rather than being a distinct primary bear market, and a distinct economic downturn, what we’re likely to observe ahead will be largely a continuation of the original unresolved mess of bad credit and unrestructured debt, now also writ large across Europe.”
I wish I had a crystal ball that allowed me to see market cycles like this. As for what I do now, which is the here and now (I don’t believe in forecasting much more than a quarter in advance because I think it’s mostly impossible), there does not appear to be recessionary signs in the USA. But the risk of both a profit and real recession are rising substantially as we move into 2013. We’ll revisit as we move into the year….
Cullen Roche
Mr. Roche is the Founder of Orcam Financial Group, LLC. Orcam is a financial services firm offering research, private advisory, institutional consulting and educational services.
Follow Me:
53 Comments
Here’s a good counter to this ridiculous bearishness….
http://www.raymondjames.com/inv_strat.htm
I hate to point this out, but the bulls have not had a great track record for quite a while either, something like twelve years? How many times to we need to listen to these “optimists” macho experts to declare that the good thing to do for the nation is to be fully invested in equities?
Dr Hussman’s problem is that he is more of an economist than a trader, but the investment community has very little to show for on either side of the bull/bear debate.
In case it has gone totally un-noticed, the markets strongly react any time the “big” of the earth whisper the word “monetary stimulus”.
I’ll tell you a version of what I told VII a few months back: you can like or dislike Saut and question his calls or accumen, but I think you make a mistake by dismissing him off-hand.
One reason I give him more credence is that he combines multiple outlooks – both trading and investing – and moves from bullish to defensive to bearish and back again. That is much more valuable to me than the guy that is always bullish or always bearish.
Like most good writers, he usually uses enough double-speak to avoid getting too much egg on his face if he gets the direction entirely wrong, but he will admit to getting too enthusiastic one way or the other.
@ PN
I like Saut. Mad respect for him.
Read what he says. He references a “mini-crash” he says this many times. Why is he using this as his one disclaimer?
He is also recomending moving in slowly here.
He must see something-
I’ve moved into some areas I put on Friday and I may close them out if they continue higher tomorrow.
@ BJM..Thanks for that piece.
I think Jeff Saut’s piece on March 05 should also be looked at.
To Writ:
“Finally, in the mature stage of the bull market, the recently active and speculative accounts would tend not to overtrade or try to pick “tops” using short-sales, but would resolve to buy and hold. So many times previously they had sold only to see their stocks dance higher, leaving them frustrated and angry. The customer who months ago had been eager to take a few points profit on 100 shares of stock would, at this stage, not take a 30-point profit on 1,000 shares of the same stock now that it had doubled in price. In fact, when the stock market finally broke down, even below where the accounts bought their original stock positions, they would actually buy more shares. They would not sell; rather, the tendency at this mature stage of the bull market and the public’s mindset was to buy the breakdowns and look for bargains in stocks.
The book’s author concluded that the public’s investing methods had undergone a pronounced, and obvious, unintentional change with the progression of the bull market from one stage to another — a psychological phenomena that causes the great majority of investors to do the exact opposite of what they should do! As stated in the book:
The collective operations of the active speculative accounts must be wrong in principal [such that] the method that would prove profitable in the long run must be reversed of that followed by the consistently unsuccessful”
My point is. The decline has been orderly. We’ve looked at similar declines and drilled granualarly into various aspects of this one. And when you do this you find that…when you have declines that move like this it is the beginning not the end. It is more consistent with what Saut wrote then. That investors wrongly or rightly feel protected by QE or whatever and have not panicked to form a bottom. After 3 years of being wrong with every red wiggle down only to see it rally..this go around their holding tight. I don’t pretend to know what many other investors are thinking but having looked at the data this type of move is more consistent with a larger trend change similar to what he wrote about.
Regarding the excessive bearishness. I disagree. What would have happened had their been NO LTRO, Operation Twist and BOE, BOJ easing in September 2011-January 2012. Can we not say these temporary injections like any other injection when faded then revert back to the trend.
WE ae loaded up to buy SPY and we are loaded up to play defense. I don’t dismiss the bears or the bulls and at some point stocks will need to be hated to form the bottom that is needed to launch the next great bull market. This final stage is a long slog down. We don’t get their by buying 10% dips over and over again.
One dissapointing note was to see Dr. J Hussman Quote Zero Hedges-Tyler Durden in his Sunday missive about a month ago. What the hell is Dr. J doing trolling around Zero Hedge for information?
Yes, and too many indicators confirm that notion. We’re in a “”post bubble”" credit contraction. And QE, QE2, QE3 & LTRO only have postponed the inevitable downturn.
E.g. this interesting article on US energy consumption. See especially the graph on electricity consumption. Electricity has one nice feature. It can’t be stored, it must be consumed
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogfeb12/energy-consumption-dropping02-12.html
Recession, anyone ?
The graph on electricity consumption is a yoy plot. The general downtrend in energy consumption since 2006 is easily explained by higher prices for energy. If prices are higher, people use less of it to the extent practicable. It simply shows that markets work.
This economy is based on consumption. If less energy is consumed, and even we have price hikes, this should be telling something. Like there are structural problems with the economy.
Off course we can still see the market rise, as well as inflation. The equity and. in a lot of cases, credit markets have failed to beat inflation for years. This is also a sign of problem.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/bartiromo/story/2012-05-18/nouriel-roubini-global-economics/55094776/1
Roubini makes some good points here about what the world economy is facing going forward. The expiration of tax cuts along with unemployment programs expiring will have an impact.
Add to that the economic problems in Europe and their impact on the multi-national corporations who are employers here in the US.
When their overall profits are hurt, the reaction will be cutbacks and layoffs in the US.
Add to that the slowing in the BRIC countries.
None of this is bullish for the markets, and if by chance we do see the market begin to correct, that effect begins a feedback loop into the economy.
Many of us have held the view for some time that any improvement in the economy based on the massive amounts of government spending would be unsustainable, and would only temporarily postpone the continuation of the deleveraging that must eventually reach parity with incomes.
I personally think the wheels are coming off the bus. Greeks are going to exit Euro. And Chinese seemed to be going to a hard landing (there was an article just today on Bloomberg that they started refusing coal and iron ore shipments). Of course, my track record is as good as of those other prognosticators )). I am usually months early. Markets just don’t work as fast as I expect them to.
Agreed. Have been a pound the table bull for some time but absolutely believe the cycle top is in.
Until something changes if I can get 1360-1370 to re-up shorts it will be a gift….
Believe there is an outside chance we actually crash (again) – could see 950 before the end of the month (yes, May) and/or Oct-11 lows by July. If we reverse today’s gains and more tomorrow I feel like that chance would increase…
You’re kidding right? Just a few weeks ago you were saying 1800 on the S&P was guaranteed. Now you’re calling for a crash?
We have had the following over the past 12 yrs; would love to know what about the following makes believing a 30% rally to 1800 or a 25% crash as ridiculous as your contempt for me implies:
-50% tech bear
-100% debt/housing related rally
-60% financial panic bear
-28% peak / trough decline in Oct 08
-100% Fed rally 09-11
-20% two month sell-offs in back to back summers with 2 mini crashes
-30% rally from Oct 11-Apr 12
So really SS, explain to me why expecting SPX 1800 or 1000 is so worthy of ridicule again??
He’s ridiculing your flip-flop. If you change your opinion on a dime what’s the use of having one?
You guys just don’t get it. For the last time, I’m not trying to impress you with being “right” on market calls. I could care less. I want to make MONEY! This isn’t politics, I can flip flop as much as I want. Why don’t you grasp that?
And this is the final comment I ever make on this site because I’ve had it with the ignorance and “told you so” commentary, especially from the likes of SS (kudos to Cullen for continuing to run this site and putting up with people’s incesant unwillingness to embrace functional truisms like MMT…not sure how you do it Cullen)…But I’ll leave you with the following from the House of Money – it’s from a trader who used to work for Paul Tudor Jones, one of the greatest fund managers of all time…on Jones’ epic flexibility…
“There are famous stories of Paul’s flexibility…You’d talk to Paul in the morning and he’d be long something. The next day that market would have gone down and you would fear he had lost money, but when you spoke to him again you would find out he had changed his mind and decided to go from long to short…however strongly you believe in something you need to 1)be willing to accept that you might be wrong and 2) be able to take the position off even if you may not be wrong in a medium term sense”.
And from the 1988 Market Wizards book interview with Jones…
There was insufficient time to complete the interview at our first meeting. I returned about two weeks later. Two things were notable about this second meeting. First, whereas he had been strongly bearish and heavily short the stock market at the time of our first conversation, jones’ short-term opinion on the stock market had shifted to bullish in the interim. The failure of the stock market to follow through on the downside at the price and time he had anticipated convinced him that the market was headed higher for the short term.
“This market is sold out,” he emphasized at our second meeting. This 180-degree shift in opinion within a short time span exemplified the extreme flexibility that underlies Jones’ trading success. He not only quickly abandoned his original position, but was willing to join the other side once the evidence indicated his initial projection was wrong.
B Ferro – I’ve enjoyed your and VII’s takes on the market recently, and am equally surprised at your quick AND severe change in opinion. But you and VII explained yourselves quite well (making money vs. being right or political) during your bullish commentary, so the ridicule now from the trolls are just people who didn’t actually read your past commentary. Hopefully you can ignore them and stick around because I’m sure I’m not the only one who appreciated reading a contrarian take on the market from you and VII
You’re not being flexible. You’re making very extreme calls AFTER the market has rallied and then doing the same AFTER it has sold off. You don’t look like a flip flopper. You look like you don’t know what you’re doing and you’re just chasing moves and riding the sentiment wave. 2 weeks ago you were here guaranteeing that we’d see 1800 on the S&P. That’s a bold call. Cullen and a lot of us were bearish and you were ridiculing the call. Then the market sells off 9% and you’re all bearish. If you don’t like being called out on your bad calls then don’t make calls.
SS – I wish I could show you how wrong your comments are. How far off base you are. You’ll just have to take my word…you have no idea what your talking about with B- Ferro. Back when I was a kid we had some rules. When you were wrong we got to throw a raquetball at your underside, pants down. Based on what I’ve seen I can tell you I think B Ferro would hit the mark enough times that you’d regret ever questioning his process.
From what I can gather your telling Gumbi he’s not flexible. As he wraps his hands around the Bear and Bull and picks your wallet.
But what do I know.
B Ferro –
You are not here to impress with your calls, so don’t let a few negative comments deter you when they are unimpressed. A couple of people criticizing may be the vocal minority while many more people enjoy reading your thoughts as a compliment or contrast to Cullen and others on here.
If anything, some reference to _why_ your stance has changed – even if something as vague as “the short-term quantitative trading indicators I use turned negative this morning” – might be more helpful.
‘If you change your opinion on a dime what’s the use of having one?’
Double Eagle, the moment I began to divorce my ‘opinion’ from my trading, I started making money. A trader has to know what his opinion is based on. If its source is a pre-determined inflexible world-view, or a constant need to be ‘right’, or prejudice, personal psychology or emotion rather than objective evidence, the market will eat him alive.
@B Ferro
@OntheMoney
I wasn’t criticizing flexibility especially in regards to trading. In fact I flip too. However, calling 1800 SPX and then turning to 1000 SPX will open you to ridicule and the fact that you can’t handle it tells me you shouldn’t be making those comments publicly.
Re: Jones, flipping from bullish to bearish in a day isn’t equivalent to fliping from SPX will rally 30% this year to SPX will fall 30% this month. It’s the MAGNITUDE SS was getting at and I agree with him. You sound like Ben Graham’s Mr. Market right now.
@Double Eagle
‘I wasn’t criticizing flexibility especially in regards to trading. In fact I flip too. However, calling 1800 SPX and then turning to 1000 SPX will open you to ridicule…’
So you admire flexibility, but not too much flexibility? That would seem illogical since, by definition, a target must flip dramatically once a you believe a bull market is turning into a bear market.
You do your research, you analyze the technicals, you recognize that the facts have changed and so you change your mind – it’s as simple as that.
Share some work together?
I’m at bferro04 at gmail….
Would enjoy getting a dialogue going…email if you’d like.
The wheels may be wobbling and chipping off very slowly, but I am almost expecting the mother of all monetary interventions soon. Merkel is up for election in 2013 and she can’t afford to let the wheels come off. So she has to hit the accelerator so the bus doesn’t get below doom speed.
Another thing I forgot to mention is the fiscal cliff (wich everyone talks about) but also the expiring long term unemployement benefits ( which go mostly unreported). It is going to be a net negative for the US towards the end of the year.
NO point in mincing words anymore-
Watch the F$$$ out-
Were on crash warning-
Hey Seven, relax. A crash isn’t likely to happen when so many people are expecting it.
there is no point discussing this one
@ Geoff BTW- it’s not seven. V is the first letter of my first name. II because I’m the second. My grandfather did many great things..he passed away when my father was 17. I never met him.
I use VII to remember him. Because I’m the second. Improved on the first and my two companies are named V2.
I sign my name VII.
And..lastly…my favorite movie has a character named V in it. I like to think what I do sheds the sunlight on what has been a very opaque financial world.
Even though this post isn’t so sunny.
V the 2nd it is! Thanks for the explanation. I was curious.
I’m troubled by the use of the word “Crash” or “Crash Warning”
Most “Bull Markets” end without a crash.
What is of concern is the Administrations attack on Capitalism
It appears BO has spent to much time reading Lenin and Marks
and not enough time reading Ayn Rand’s “Capitalism”
Someone send him a paperback copy
Michael Gayed of Marketwatch sees both sides and says it could go either way, bull or bear, but the next few days are critical. See:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/reflecting-on-reflation-and-the-spring-switch-2012-05-21?link=MW_TD_latest
Gayed thinks it is more likely that we will get a huge stimulus, followed by a monster rally fueled by reflation. But he acknowledges that it could easily go the other way, and equities could go south. Will the CB’s pull it their bazooka?
They better hurry up
From Mike Krieger: 2Good
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_GS_pvhcI5c
Meant to say: will CB’s pull OUT their bazooka?
I suspect we have one final and unexpected rally to new $SPX highs left in this bull… but if I’m wrong (and I believe I was wrong once) check out points 26, 27 & 28 in the video chart, because that’s where we’re heading next.
http://jamesgoodeonthemoney.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/return-to-dome-of-doom.html
OntheMoney, since we’re going at it tooth and claw here tonight, I might as well add my vitriol:
I can’t tell you how sick I am of people that say “the markets going down, but just after an upcoming bounce”. That’s just saying the market could go up or it could go down!!
LOL nothing like the smell of vitriol in the morning!
Gary, I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’ve never read any of my posts. But just so that other readers don’t run away with the idea that your criticism is warranted, I’ll suggest you check my record
here, where I told readers Emerging Markets would drop at least 26%
http://jamesgoodeonthemoney.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/curse-of-domed-house.html
here, where I told readers to expect a crash in US stocks
http://jamesgoodeonthemoney.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/risk-rises-dramatically.html
here, where I told readers at the August low that it was too early to buy and too late to sell
http://jamesgoodeonthemoney.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/too-early-to-buy-too-late-to-sell.html
here, where I precisely nailed the October ’11 low
http://jamesgoodeonthemoney.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/bullseye-now-what.html
here, where I told readers they had a massive risk/reward edge and to buy SPY above the 200SMA
http://jamesgoodeonthemoney.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/year-of-cat.html
and here where I told readers risk/reward for buyers was poor and to expect a correction or major top
http://jamesgoodeonthemoney.blogspot.co.uk/p/stock-market-update-february-10th-2012.html
I also read plenty of fence-straddling pundits saying ‘stocks may go up but then they may go down’ – that’s why I’m not one of them. But we’re grown ups here, right? You and I let go of a belief in Santa a long time ago. There are no seers in markets, because there are no certainties.
Blog comment sections are filled with the cries of disappointed traders looking for gurus who will express absolute certainty, but they’re pursuing an infantile illusion. We’re simply in the business of judging and managing risk and reward. Great traders may sometimes express certainty, but there’s a big difference: when they’re wrong they minimize the damage through smart risk management, and will flip that certainty 360, on a dime.
FWIW, I now happen to think we’re heading for a bear market, in which $SPX will revist 1076 and may ultimately go much lower. My only question is whether in the run-up we merely approach the April highs and turn lower (confirming that we’re already in the bear market) or exceed them and go into a longer topping process.
So Gary, you’re quite right: I am saying that stocks will go up, and then they’ll come down
OTM- Good Stuff!
I’m really blown away by the level of dire warnings in the above comments… Cullen – does your algo concur? Or do you care to chime in? You seem to be saying the economy isn’t faltering (yet), but we all know the stock market and the economy are two different animals.
You also commented elsewhere that the April Gov surplus was more a function of tax day, and that you wouldn’t be surprised to see record deficits soon after… but some of the comments above point to expiring payments from the Gov.
As for VII and B Ferro – can you elaborate on what signs have you running for the exits? During your bullish commentary I mainly read “because it is what it is” sort of a “well it’s going up, therefore it will keep going up until it doesn’t” the “trend is your friend”. So… now it isn’t going up, therefore it won’t??? I’m sincerely interested. I just have to believe you’re looking at something deeper than just the current trend to be so confident to say “watch the F$$$ out”. Thanks.
I’m in the no recession and bull camp. Algo went bullish on Thursday/Friday. So I guess I am pretty universally optimistic right now….At least more so than others….
Cullen, thank you for sharing your algo change to bullish. Just want to ask, pls correct me if I am wrong – is the duration of your algo intended to be for a 6 week to 8 week period of time?
Thanks again.
That’s the average duration, but there’s nothing certain about that. It could last 12 weeks. It could last 4 weeks. I don’t know in advance. I just follow the signals….
Go back and read Hussman’s prior “warnings” – he is ATROCIOUS at making money. He’s been jumping up and down on the table just as recently as this past December and look at where the market is….Go back and read his commentary in 2005 and 2006 – 100% hedged while NDR was calling for a cyclical bull market. He is 100% ignorant to be fully hedged for so long while there are very credible market timers such as Saut and Ned Davis making money hand over fiat making their opinion more than well known.
Plus, Hussman is WAY underestimating the earnings power of the market with his expected return calculation. The Schiller EPS number is currently $63 using the ten year AVERAGE. Guess what, that takes into account an utter collapse in reported earnings back in late 2008/early 2009. It’s IGNORANT to use that figure. IGNORANT. Using the ten year MEDIAN, that EPS number is $70.55. That EPS number affects both the fair value AND the normalized dividend calculation. Hussman and Rosenberg both cite the low dividend yield of the market as a bearish signal – well guess what, corporations have the capacity to pay out $35 per share versus the current $27, but due to low tech and financial sector payouts the yield is currently depressed. You never hear this from the raging bears. I’m not saying the general market is a screaming buy, but it is not NEARLY as bad as Hussman would lead you to believe. Hussman currently estimates the ten year prospective return on the market is 5.2% – I get to 7.4% without batting an eye. That is a MASSIVE difference over ten years.
I’m telling you, things are not as and as Hussman would lead you to believe. Just from a common sense standpoint, how can this market be as dangerous as it was in late 2007 when PEs were over 25 and now they are less than 20, and financial system leverage is now far lower???? Hussman also cites the 1974 market crash as a comparison – look at where interest rates were back then!!!!! The cost of capital matters!!!
@ hangemhi
The SPX needs to move quickly from these levels or receive injections soon. That would be a start.
Well know soon. Ill go over as much as I can in a post later if the SPX can get out of where it is. It needs to click off some good prints and rebuild quickly with a handoff of QE3.
Look either the SPX is a out to rip or it’s going to crash. Your either going to make a killing shorting the 10yt here or it’s about to break a 27 year trend line.
We had friends over tonight and I kept from eating the food for the dinner party. Wasn’t in the diet. But here I sit at 10:41 listening to everyone talk story after too many spirits. No drinks for me but no one is leaving. And I’m supposedly texting clients sitting right next to a jar of peanut M&Ms and truffles. Like the SPX if I don’t get out of this spot I’m taking down a 1lb of crap at 10:45 at night. It’s not my opinion it’s a fact.
Just because a bear market would naturally have occured had it not been artificially postponed,does not mean that it can not be postponed a lot further – presumably by money-printing/quantitative easing.It is all very well to theorise that it cannot be postponed forever. However,this is not of immediate practical value if shares are likely to outperform bonds and cash – to the extent that when the bear market does turn up,it is too late for the bonds and cash to catch the shares,due to inflation.Even if the shares prove unable to match inflation due to an economic downturn,that still does not mean we are in what most people would recognise as a bear market.
Just because a bear market would naturally have occured had it not been artificially postponed,does not mean that it can not be postponed a lot further – presumably by money-printing/quantitative easing.It is all very well to theorise that it cannot be postponed forever. However,this is not of immediate practical value if shares are likely to outperform bonds and cash – to the extent that when the bear market does turn up,it is too late for the bonds and cash to make up the ground lost to the shares,due to inflation.Even if the shares prove unable to match inflation due to an economic downturn,that still does not mean we are in what most people would recognise as a bear market.
“I keep telling hedge fund buddies its not their job to be policy wonks. My job is to assess the seas, winds and tides, and sail into the right direction. That’s the role of any asset manager.” Barry Ritholtz
Hussmaan’s statistical analysis is meaningless if the data used for calculation doesn’t include ZIRP and other FED intervention. Don’t fight the FED….
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/03/window-dressing-or-something-more/
A number of indicators have not gone above their 2011′s highs. And a number of credit indicators, after going down in 2009, 2010 and even 2011, have started to go up again. And that makes me worried. After all, we’re in a “”post bubble credit contraction”" and as long as that contraction continues, I don’t see how we can avoid a second leg of the bear market.
The problem is the housing market. As long as housing prices don’t go higher we’re NOT “”out of the woods”". The number of people owning a house (perhaps with a mortgage) is far larger than the number of people owning securities. In other words, for most people the biggest item they own is a house. And that makes the world economy so “”vulnerable”".
Perhaps that is why TPTB will not let banks foreclose in NYC. That fish is too big to go down.
I never doubt the bulls ability to hit a 3 pointer at the end. They have a chance. They need to get up and over some levels quickly and hold those. That’s step 1.
The term “contained depression” that Jerome Levy coined regarding the last few years is pretty telling of where we are today.
The market has been trolling you guys. Everyone expecting crashes and it has slowly and calmly sold out. I saw this first in the spanish market, I’ve you have done your homework you know this has been happening for over a decade now. And saw this coming again in commodities so tried to position myself for it.
A lot of people being trolled by market makers, expecting a crash and ‘holding’ to sell is a recipe for failure. We have been in a bear market for ages and it’s not necessary to have crashes for the markets dropping 10-15-20% before you realize expecting crashes. Meanwhile big hedge funds like GS and JP are posting record trading gains (even after total failures like the recent bad proprietary trade by JP). They always win by trolling 99% of the speculators in the market.
Anyway, what the hell is a crash, is an other of these random words for which there are as much definitions as persons. Declines in slow motion are also crashes.