/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>18027310
If that's all you know Schiff for then you have been sorely missing out. His analysis on macroeconomics has been fucking spot on.

inb4 broken clock, been saying it for years, etc. Fuck off. He made no predictions about WHEN the collapse would happen, but almost every underlying flaw in the economy that he predicted has been proven true. While Fed was raising rates he flew in the face of every analyst saying it would never work and they would pivot back to cutting rates, then they did. Then everyone thought Fed would start raising rates in 2020 again and Schiff flew in everyone's face again and said they'd cut to zero, then they did.

So far the dollar milkshake theory is strong and in the short term there might be deflation and a rise in the USD, but sooner or later the whole house of cards will collapse and stagflation will reign again. I don't think it'll get to hyperinflation, I think Powell will be ousted and the new Fed chair will be forced to raise rates and intentionally crush the markets Volcker-style when that becomes apparent.

>>16658522
>Men when taking photo of something
>Cats when taking photo of something

>>16424022
>>16424561
So it cost them $2 billion to offload $300 billion into CRUs, they just made a deal to offload $50 billion, and they have another $1.45 or so to get rid of? It seems mathematically and logically impossible that they are going to be able to do that without first blowing up. The valuation of the company is already down 95% from when this turmoil started, and every quarter gets worse. They also have a similar problem to WeWork in that they literally cannot fire people quickly enough because of Germany labor laws. Not to mention that these deals are extremely difficult to make because there is NO MARKET for these assets. Nobody wants them unless DB sweetens the deal by including a bunch of good profit-making assets along with them in a CRU.

Also, these derivatives aren't magically gone after DB gets rid of them. They're now just on JPM's books, or Goldman's, or Morgan Stanley's, or BNP Paribas'. They're still just as toxic and at risk of blowing up.

You can call this doomposting, but these are just the facts. As they are forced to take billions in revenue losses every single quarter to get rid of these assets, the valuation of the company as a whole goes down and down as more stockholders dump. Something like 30% loss every single year for over a decade? It will almost certainly be bankrupt or bailed out long before they are able to spin off enough of these "bad banks".

>>16419865
The crash is inevitable. The melt-up rise? Who knows, we may have already had it, we may have more to go. Impossible to time it because it's an irrational part of the cycle. Better to be a year early than a minute too late

>>16195620
Not unless it's significantly worse. The """consensus""" is -0.1%, other forecasts are saying -0.2%. If it surprises at -0.4% or worse that'll be a pretty big shock for the market in general. But I don't think DB itself would fail because of it. DB will fail once they run out of money, which is happening quickly. Impossible to say when though as we don't know all the internals

>>15839592
Just a little bit longer I'd wager. QE + rate cuts, and especially if a "resolution" in trade wars (mainly China, but also France/EU/Iran) is reached, stocks will rally again in 2020. But it won't last much longer than that. Liquidity is drying up, banks are failing, public debt is astoundingly high. It's all a house of cards and this next year we're going to attempt to place the final cards up on top.