<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Kommentare zu: HÃ¶here Renditen wÃ¤ren nicht immer schlecht fÃ¼r die Aktien &#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boersennotizbuch.de/hoehere-renditen-waeren-nicht-immer-schlecht-fuer-die-aktien.php/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boersennotizbuch.de/hoehere-renditen-waeren-nicht-immer-schlecht-fuer-die-aktien.php</link>
	<description>Ein seriÃ¶ses, aber lockeres GesprÃ¤ch Ã¼ber die BÃ¶rse</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 08:20:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Von: Saviano</title>
		<link>http://www.boersennotizbuch.de/hoehere-renditen-waeren-nicht-immer-schlecht-fuer-die-aktien.php/comment-page-1#comment-8852</link>
		<dc:creator>Saviano</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:16:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boersennotizbuch.de/hoehere-renditen-waeren-nicht-immer-schlecht-fuer-die-aktien.php#comment-8852</guid>
		<description>Hier noch die Zusammenfassung von Barry Ritholtz (The Big Picture) der Auswirkungen steigender Zinsen auf die BÃ¶rse:

    1) &lt;strong&gt;Valuation&lt;/strong&gt;: Models such as the so-called Fed model that have been declaring equities undervalued rely on comparing the earnings yield with the 10 Year yield. As the yield spikes, what was &quot;undervalued&quot; by this measure suddenly is much less so.

    2) &lt;strong&gt;The M&amp;A / LBO Put&lt;/strong&gt;:  One of the firm bids supporting this market has been the manic pace at which public companies have been taken private of by Private Equity (soon to be public themselves). Some have argued this was based on cheap stock prices, but we shall soon find out that it was based in fact on cheap money. As that gores away, so too will the LBO Put.

    3) &lt;strong&gt;Competition&lt;/strong&gt;:  If you could get a guaranteed 5.5% or 6% on your money -- risk free -- would you? The answer depends on your personal situation, but for many institutions and wealthy investors, the answer is absolutely.

    4) &lt;strong&gt;Profits&lt;/strong&gt;: If it costs more to borrow or finance, that bites into profits. Indeed, this has been one of the primary complaints about the Fed model, it double counts low rates this way, and can makes apparently cheap looking companies more expensive-looking in fast order as rates rise.

    5) &lt;strong&gt;Share buybacks&lt;/strong&gt;: Much of the share buybacks we have seen have been financed with cheap borrowed money. This is another leg of the bullish stool that is about to leave town on the same stagecoach as low rates. (cue music, sunset)

    6) &lt;strong&gt;Consumer spending&lt;/strong&gt;: WIth MEW sliding, we have seen an increase in consumer credit driven spending. Watch that crimp if rates stay near 5.25%. Indeed, we could see a move towards 5.5% by Summer&#039;s end once people realize Bernanke is serious about a rate hike by year&#039;s end.   

&lt;a href=&quot;http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2007/06/why_bond_yields.html&quot;&gt;Why Bond Yields are a Sextuple Threat&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hier noch die Zusammenfassung von Barry Ritholtz (The Big Picture) der Auswirkungen steigender Zinsen auf die BÃ¶rse:</p>
<p>    1) <strong>Valuation</strong>: Models such as the so-called Fed model that have been declaring equities undervalued rely on comparing the earnings yield with the 10 Year yield. As the yield spikes, what was &#8220;undervalued&#8221; by this measure suddenly is much less so.</p>
<p>    2) <strong>The M&#038;A / LBO Put</strong>:  One of the firm bids supporting this market has been the manic pace at which public companies have been taken private of by Private Equity (soon to be public themselves). Some have argued this was based on cheap stock prices, but we shall soon find out that it was based in fact on cheap money. As that gores away, so too will the LBO Put.</p>
<p>    3) <strong>Competition</strong>:  If you could get a guaranteed 5.5% or 6% on your money &#8212; risk free &#8212; would you? The answer depends on your personal situation, but for many institutions and wealthy investors, the answer is absolutely.</p>
<p>    4) <strong>Profits</strong>: If it costs more to borrow or finance, that bites into profits. Indeed, this has been one of the primary complaints about the Fed model, it double counts low rates this way, and can makes apparently cheap looking companies more expensive-looking in fast order as rates rise.</p>
<p>    5) <strong>Share buybacks</strong>: Much of the share buybacks we have seen have been financed with cheap borrowed money. This is another leg of the bullish stool that is about to leave town on the same stagecoach as low rates. (cue music, sunset)</p>
<p>    6) <strong>Consumer spending</strong>: WIth MEW sliding, we have seen an increase in consumer credit driven spending. Watch that crimp if rates stay near 5.25%. Indeed, we could see a move towards 5.5% by Summer&#8217;s end once people realize Bernanke is serious about a rate hike by year&#8217;s end.   </p>
<p><a href="http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2007/06/why_bond_yields.html">Why Bond Yields are a Sextuple Threat</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
