TNR BLOGS

July 05, 2009 | 4:05 PM
July 05, 2009 | 12:13 PM
July 04, 2009 | 11:18 PM

March 09, 2009 | 5:19 PM
March 09, 2009 | 5:16 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM

July 05, 2009 | 12:02 PM
July 01, 2009 | 10:33 PM
June 30, 2009 | 8:42 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

July 03, 2009 | 10:13 PM
July 02, 2009 | 12:57 PM
July 01, 2009 | 7:02 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
20.11.2008
The Great Unraveling

I’ve been doing some research on the explosion in U.S. capital around the turn of the last century; it’s pretty amazing. In 1897 the total capitalization of all companies with a book value of over $1 million was $170 million; in 1900 it was $5 billion, and in 1904 it was $20 billion. It’s not exactly a parallel, but I remembered those numbers this morning while reading a frightening Reuters article (hat tip to the New York Times’ incomparable Andrew Ross Sorkin). It notes that as of yesterday 101 stocks in the S&P 500 are selling for below $10 a share, far outpacing the 59 stocks that fell below the $10 mark in the last recession and the 35 that tanked in 1987. A mere five firms had stock prices over $100, and more than a third of the S&P 500--186 companies--have dropped below market caps of $4 billion, the line for inclusion on the list.

Normally, this would be a great moment for buyers, with the potential to boomerang the market upwards. But there are a few reasons why it’s a little too early to expect such an outcome. First, as the Reuters article notes, many institutional investors are barred from buying stocks below $10, which means some of the only people left with cash on hand are unable to participate. Second, we’re moving into the end of the year, the time when investors will be looking to unload stocks to take tax write-offs, and with the S&P 500 off 45 percent this year, a lot of blue-chip stock will be up for sale. Of course, they could use the proceeds of those sales to buy cheap blue chips, the so-called “January effect.” But given the aversion to risk that has overtaken even the savviest of investors, I’m not hopeful that a lot of that money will be coming back into the stock market.

Of course, this is all idle speculation; I’m no Jim Cramer (and I thank God every day for that little bit of grace). So, readers--what do you think? Anyone gearing up for some deals?

--Clay Risen

Posted: Thursday, November 20, 2008 10:31 AM with 5 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

satyendra said:

If 1/3 of the stocks no longer fit the requirements to be in the index, does that mean that it will become the S&P 333?

November 20, 2008 10:50 AM

boxofrox said:

Right now the market is trying to decide whether we are looking at a deep recession or a bonafide depression. So many valuation conventions have been thrown out the window that it is difficult to have any confidence as an investor. The Big 3 bail out is the latest depressing consideration for the market to digest. It seems as if the market is waiting for the next shoe to drop. Convention would say if you need to be in the market to buy staples and health care since these aren't discretionary needs. That said, trust has been profoundly breached. It will take some time to digest the dislocations which will bear out over the next year or so. I personally am keeping my powder dry and a keen eye on the market. These are tough times but they could present some incredible opportunity.

If you are a trader then looking for a year end bounce is probably a reasonable pursuit. The hell of it is those rallies happen so quickly that the average investor is usually out of the sweet spot. Good luck, Clay. May the force be with you.

November 20, 2008 11:34 AM

colablease said:

Just a note on the history--I'm not convinced that there was an "explosion in capital" around 1900; more likely there was an explosion of capitalization in publicly held companies.  Prior to the 1890s The late 1890s saw the so-called "Great Merger Movement," in which numerous manufacturing industries consolidated into a handful of giants.  The poster child was U.S. Steel, formed in 1901 by a merger of J. P. Morgan's Federal Steel with the privately held Carnegie Steel Company.  It was the first corporation in world history with a capitalization of over $1 billion [$1.4 billion, in fact]; that one firm alone would account for a sizeable chunk of your 1904 figure.  I'm also wondering if you're including railroads; I can't lay my hands on an 1897 figure, but I suspect the Pennsylvania Railroad alone had a capitalization in 1897 exceeding your total figure.

November 20, 2008 11:50 AM

Rhubarbs said:

In the long run, most of today's blue-chip companies will either go out of business soon, or see their stock prices increase significantly later. That's actually a reasonably good environment for equity purchasing, if you can afford to hold the stocks in your portfolio for a decade. However, I'm about to sink way too much net worth into real estate, so no, despite my inclinations, I'm not going to go on a speculative stock binge. I would if I could, though!

November 20, 2008 11:56 AM

singlespeed said:

I'm just waiting for shares of Berkshire Hathaway to drop a little more before I pony up for 1/10th of one share.

November 20, 2008 1:05 PM