Merry Monday Morning – Will Santa Come to Town?

ilene's picture

Merry Monday Morning – Will Santa Come to Town?

Courtesy of Phil of Phil's Stock World

Is it time for the Santa Clause Rally?

For something people seem to take for granted – they never seem to know what time (or day) it's supposed to start or how big it's supposed to be, or how long it's supposed to last. That doesn't stop the MSM from obsessing over the "Santa Clause Rally" each December. The closer it gets to Christmas, the more likely they are to claim any forward market movement is a rally – much as my daughter used to call any old man with white hair and a beard Santa when she was five.

If you believe in something hard enough – you can see it. Some call that faith, some wishful thinking, some madness and hallucinations. There's a lot of all of that in Stock Market Technicians and the truly "faithful" are put on television and given the task of recruiting others to their cause. Sometimes they share visions of the futures and sometimes they even show signs of the prophesies being fulfilled – and who doesn't love being shown a quick and easy way to get into heaven?

At our PSW Conference in Las Vegas last month, we spent a lot of time extolling the virtues of slow, steady investing strategies. While it's fun to "bet" on short-term market moves, Santa Rallies, Fiscal Cliffs, etc (whatever the fad of the moment is) – investors often lose focus in WHY we are investing in the first place – and that's to BUILD a future for ourselves.

There are two ways to build a building. One way is to save up money each month, buy materials, make plans and set aside time to put in labor and keep repeating the process week after week, year after year – until the project is completed. The other way is to save up money each month, gamble it – and hope one day you win enough to buy a building. The first way has a 99% success rate and lets people retire in buildings they built and earned through years of hard work. The second way has a 15% success rate and lets people retire in buildings they lucked into. Unfortunately, most "investors" prefer method number 2.

We spend a lot of time with new Members at PSW trying to break them of these bad habits. This morning, for example, in our Member Chat, we discussed a trade idea for T in which we buy 100 shares for $34 and sell a 2015 $30 put and call for $8.50 (combined) for a net entry of $25.50.

If the stock is called away at $30 in Jan 2015, we'd make $4.50 but we also collect (assuming it doesn't change) $3.60 in dividends for a total profit of $8.10 against our $25.50 entry. That's a 31.7% return over two years. Our worst case is we are forced to buy another round of T at $30 (from the put), if the stock is below $30.  Then we'll have twice as much T at a net entry of $27.75. We still collect our $3.60 in dividends so net/net it's $26.15 per share, which is 23% below the current price.

So here's an INVESTMENT, where we may make 31.7% over two years (if T holds $30). Alternatively, we would buy 2x worth of T over two years at a 23% discount to the current price, and THEN we would roll into a similar spread to further reduce the costs.  This is, I realize, VERY BORING but, if you invest like this regularly, the returns can be VERY EXCITING over time.

We discuss more on this subject in "Dividend Investing – Giving Yourself and Automatic Edge" but what you have to be willing to give up to be this kind of investor is the excitement of short-term investing.

There's nothing exciting about building a portfolio of blue-chip stocks and working your way into long-term, inexpensive entries over time.  In fact, what we are taking advantage of by being the sellers of long-term premium, is the IMpatience of others – who would rather pay $4.80 for a 2015 $30 call on T, for the thrill of leverage, than just buy the stock for $34. That $1.80 of premium they pay is what we collect as a bonus for actually being willing to buy the stock and BE PATIENT.

Our advantage is we know that we will collect that $1.80. Whether T goes up, down or sideways. That means that if we ALWAYS own T and we ALWAYS sell that premium, that after 19 sales cycles, we will have collected 100% of the stock price back in premium. That's money for nothin' (and chicks for free).

Is it possible everything we ever needed to know about long-range investing was explained to us by MTV 30 years ago? I guess so…

That ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Money for nothin' and chicks for free
Now that ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Lemme tell ya them guys ain't dumb

Them guys on Wall Street are not dumb. They built these casinos and they charge their fees win, lose or draw, and that built up a tremendous Financial Industry in the US.  The mistake they made – that many make – is simple greed. In going public they went from being long-range, goal-oriented investors to short-term gamblers who felt forced to outperform themselves quarter after quarter and we know how that ended – the wealth accumulated over generations of investing squandered in just a few years – gambled away like it was nothing.

It's easy to get rich. Take $10,000. Put it in an account that makes 6%.  Add $1,000 a month.  Wait 20 years.  $500,000. There – that wasn't hard, was it?  Won't inflation wipe it out?  NO.  Did you have $1,000 a month to put away for the past 20 years?  Would $500,000 be nice now?  Well, then inflation wasn't an issue, was it?

Keep going for another 20 years and that same plan grows to $2M and, 20 years after that, $7M.  Now, go smack your kid in the back of the head and tell him to open up a savings plan – NOW!  If you are well off – set one up for each of your children or grandchildren – $10,000 down and $12,000 a year for your baby grandchild and you've given them $1M on their 30th birthday. That's all it takes to be an INVESTOR – is it worth being a gambler when investing pays so well?

The blue-chip dividend strategy we discussed with T and other stocks can return 15-20% on a fairly regular annual basis. Call it just 12% a year and it's only 20 years till your first million by sacrificing just $1,000 a month to "boring" investments.

I would encourage you to play with the compound interest calculator and think about making an investment plan for your FUTURE – that means not next year, but for the rest of your life. Where do you want to be in 10 years, 20 years, 30 years and how are you planning to get there with your current investments?  Let's spend December looking for those long-term opportunities that will be under our tree for many years – not just the poppers that give us a quick thrill and are gone.

Of course there's room for both – but let's all try to build something that will last this year.

Try Phil's Stock World for free here >

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
LongSoupLine's picture

what a load of fucking shit.




this reads like a 1980's investment letter, or like a current book talking CNBC "market master".

let me wake you the fuck up ilene...the fucking Fed and it's Primary fucking Stealers own the market.  it's based upon lies, worthless fiat, and trillions in fucking utter worthless derivatives stuffed up our asses 24 hrs a day.  take your fucking financial convention travelling horseshit "investing" advice and shove it up your fucking, better yet, take that brainless lemming trap of brilliant advisory drivel and shovel down the fucking throats of the yahoo finance boards.  hell, they'll eat it up like Monsanto GMO gut rotting swill.

TraderTimm's picture

The main problem with the investment thesis is that there will be a 'token' worth redeeming it in, or that there will be a market that exists as it does today.

Given the trends and monetary policies of the present, I don't see much of a future for conventional financial instruments.

You're all welcome to try, of course. The system requires you pay your tithe so it may stay alive.

I say starve the fucker instead.


neidermeyer's picture

"T" is near worthless , they gave up their R&D decades ago and in a money crunch people will keep their mobile phones (ATTWS) , landlines are dead. This trade assumes that the dollar will be worth anything near the current value ... the biggest asset T has is all the copper in it's transmission lines and circuits and that will be stolen by local "entrepreneurs" if things go that far.


Other than that I like his approach ,, it was good in the past.

Setarcos's picture

Yep, nothing is as it was ... let's just allude to the present as a shift from "capitalism" to "financialism", whereby derivatives (for instance) and HFT have more or less eliminated (now) old fashioned conventions of the stock markets and, of course, banks which are no longer allowed to fail: well if they are BIG enough to hold hostage once-independent nations.

Nothing actually new, because major banksters have always lent money to monarchs, etc. and demanded their "pound of flesh", but now that has gone global and totally out of control, even by the banksters theyselves, e.g. their frontman Bernanke admits to not knowing what he is doing.

What a mess!  And what odds for a truly global war?  So-called WW1 was largely confined to Europe.

So-called WW2 was more widespread, but was not really a WORLD war.

But now there are no limits to the expansion of "financialism", e.g. Libya recently got destroyed because Qadafi tried to buck the NWO (as did Saddam Hussein) so now it is the turn of Syria to be destroyed ... followed by Iran, Russia and China.  Just Google PNAC and follow the trail to discover how Wall Str./bankster dominated Washington has planned all this for decades.

I agree with the opinion that Israhell comprizes an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" for Washington hegemon ... not unlike the lawless frontier forts used to carve out the mainland Washington Empire during the 19th Century.

But now the Empire has gone global and totally destructive ... so don't be surprized when Israhell gets ditched, if that entity no longer serves purpose.  (Well why have London and Paris satraps been let off the Washington leash, to criticize Israeli settlements in occupied territory?)

BTW I do not believe that Zionist Israel wags the dog, because the creation of Israhell goes way back to at least the London/Paris Sykes-Picot agreement to divide and conquer the ME.