rijk Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 anybody looking at individual japanese stocks? somebody will need to rebuild Japan....... how is this not cheap??? http://investing.businessweek.com/businessweek/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?ticker=1819:JP http://investing.businessweek.com/businessweek/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?ticker=5445:JP regards rijk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NormR Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Oh gosh, and with all sympathy and respect to those who lost family/etc., the nuke stuff isn't apocalyptic. Remember, the country survived 2 real nukes in WW2 and the firebombing of many other cities. It may take a little while, but a recovery will happen. The TV news people are sounding like 'panicky idiots' from a disaster flick these days... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubuy2wron Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Oh gosh, and with all sympathy and respect to those who lost family/etc., the nuke stuff isn't apocalyptic. Remember, the country survived 2 real nukes in WW2 and the firebombing of many other cities. It may take a little while, but a recovery will happen. The TV news people are sounding like 'panicky idiots' from a disaster flick these days... The smart ones know they sound like idiots but they do it any way cuz it means their job. If they do not show pictures of the containment building blowing up every 5 minutes the average viewer will switch to watch American Idol or the hockey game in Parsads case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 The smart ones know they sound like idiots but they do it any way cuz it means their job. If they do not show pictures of the containment building blowing up every 5 minutes the average viewer will switch to watch American Idol or the hockey game in Parsads case. No, even if things are blowing up, I'll be watching my Canucks play. I can just PVR the stuff blowing up! ;D Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Perhaps my perspective is off. I just dont watch CNN or Fox or whatever the hell else is on. Charlie Rose is always relatively calm and so is Amy Goodman. The Economist is also quite calm as well. Thats where 95% of my news comes from. If you are gonna panic about something this is it. Beats Charlie Sheen lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbp Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 anybody looking at individual japanese stocks? somebody will need to rebuild Japan....... how is this not cheap??? http://investing.businessweek.com/businessweek/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?ticker=1819:JP http://investing.businessweek.com/businessweek/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?ticker=5445:JP regards rijk I was just wondering the same thing....does anyone know of a screener (free) where one can look at, say, the stocks in the topix? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turar Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I was just wondering the same thing....does anyone know of a screener (free) where one can look at, say, the stocks in the topix? Financial Times has a good screener including Japanese (and other international) companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Oh gosh, and with all sympathy and respect to those who lost family/etc., the nuke stuff isn't apocalyptic. Remember, the country survived 2 real nukes in WW2 and the firebombing of many other cities. It may take a little while, but a recovery will happen. The TV news people are sounding like 'panicky idiots' from a disaster flick these days... Exactly. The present situation is serious, no question, but it is certainly not apocalyptic. Now, it is probably apocalyptic for the workers in the plant. And, it is probably apocalyptic for the future growth of the nuclear industry. Exposed fuel rods dont melt down; and reactor meltdowns are not contagious. The problem with taking this stance that some are over-reacting is that there is some probability that they may be right. Person who recalls TMI and Chernobyl personally, unfortunately.... ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbp Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I was just wondering the same thing....does anyone know of a screener (free) where one can look at, say, the stocks in the topix? Financial Times has a good screener including Japanese (and other international) companies. Thanks! Exactly what i was looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCG Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 It's kind of messed up that arguably the most useful information about what's happening in Japan IMO came not from the buffoons on CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, Fox News and the rest of the major news services, but on Fedex's conference call. They have people on the ground throughout Japan and clarified that while what's happened there is/was horrific, it is a localized area that is greatly effected, and that the entire country is not in the state of peril that the news outlets are portraying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I have decided to withdraw from further nuclear safety discussions. I am obviously far too naive on my assumptions about human nature:o http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-17/japan-s-nuclear-disaster-caps-decades-of-faked-safety-reports-accidents.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 No Al...you're just ethical and believe that most people are. I think incentives in every industry should be aligned with the interests of the general public. Just like pay packages or hedge fund compensation, why aren't energy industry board members, regulators, etc. required to put up their own assets and reputation behind anything they sign. If every nuclear energy regulator, engineer, worker, etc were required to live on the land next to the plant with their families, I bet accidents would go down to zero, and site engineers would be very careful about where they situate a plant even in the worst case scenario. Nothing instills prudence as putting one's own livelihood or family at stake! Then again, there was Madoff and Hitler! >:( Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyleholmes Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 Roman Bridges Sanjeev! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEast Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 I take a somewhat cynical and contrarian view on the current media spin cycle for radiation disaster. From my chair, the longer the story runs, the more likely that things are going to be acceptable. One - recognize that this particular design for each reactor is 40% the size of a normal reactor. Two - power was cut off and though one could have a catalyst reaction, inertia says that it is normally going to cool on its own (relatively). This is not to pooh-pooh the event, but to take an objective view from afar. Of course if I where the one next door, I may have a different view! I also take some issue of what is behind the spin. Did the media pushers forget about the middle east and north Africa? And is it not ironic that Germany now used this opportunity to shutdown their nuclear program. What are they thinking? Do the Germans really what to depend more on the Russians for imported gas!! The battle is on for the public mind. Now the push comes for scare mongering the California populace. Any agenda behind this? Oh well, use your own judgement. Next week the story may turn to a 24hr cycle on the no fly zone in Libya. Cheers JEast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Partner24 Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 This nuclear situation is a shame to mankind. Nothing less than that. I'm sorry if I look drastical, but you need to be that way when something drastical happen. You would have think that mankind would have learned far more than that after the Tchernobyl nuclear disaster. We have learned, but not enough. Brave people have died or suffered very serious diseases because of that and some brave people could still die because of what happen right now. We think that we are long term thinking people when we invest in a business for a decade or two, but it might take more than 200 000 years for some of the Tchernobyl nuclear waste to go away. Have we learned enough? 25 years later, a nuclear plant is on the side of the cliff once again. You might tell me that this is not Tchernobyl. I guess (and hope!) History will prove you right. But we are on the 6th level on a scale of 7. It's a shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysinvert Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 This nuclear situation is a shame to mankind. Nothing less than that. I'm sorry if I look drastical, but you need to be that way when something drastical happen. You would have think that mankind would have learned far more than that after the Tchernobyl nuclear disaster. We have learned, but not enough. Brave people have died or suffered very serious diseases because of that and some brave people could still die because of what happen right now. We think that we are long term thinking people when we invest in a business for a decade or two, but it might take more than 200 000 years for some of the Tchernobyl nuclear waste to go away. Have we learned enough? 25 years later, a nuclear plant is on the side of the cliff once again. You might tell me that this is not Tchernobyl. I guess (and hope!) History will prove you right. But we are on the 6th level on a scale of 7. It's a shame. I take the polar opposite view, and with all respect for the suffering in Japan, say that much of our perception of this nuclear situation comes from fear-mongering. Still, the cost of nuclear power seems to be far less than that for the alternatives, like coal and oil, even when counting risks in running old plant types with much lower safety than new breeder reactors. After all, the direct deaths from the absolute and utter catastrophe (7 of 7 on the scale) in the corrupt and malfunctioning Soviet Union, where the meltdown went on for months, was a 'mere' 57 people and at the very most 4000 cases of cancer. Here in Sweden, we stopped building, upgrading and researching on nuclear power after a referendum following the Harrisburg incident. The public paranoia was massive and the debate climate a joke. Decisions on this matter should absolutely not be taken in connection to this incident or to satisfy public opinion in any way. An old type of reactor, which are being phased out, gets hit by first an earthquake, then a tsunami and even then the situation probably won't measure up to that of Tchernobyl. I honestly don't think that's a very bad grade for nuclear power. Meanwhile, fossil fuels kill multiples every year of what Tchernobyl did in a, up to this point at least, incomparable event. So what are we going to do, hope for fusion power and solar energy while we keep our oil and coal dependency? Cliffs: The word meltdown sells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smazz Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 Alwaysinvert, I tend to agree with you. If we didnt have the nuclear power we have now (especially in NA and some Euro countries) the alternative would be nothing less than environmental waste land - not to mention the inability to maintain any similar degree of productivity. Withl the nuclear that is out there producing huge proportions of nations power, we really need to look at these situations in perspective. Im never one to overlook human loss but the realities of our lifestyles are that we live with risks everyday. Just driving on the hiway to work for alot of people - they are at real risks which they dont think of day to day. In the Japan case, some time down the road we will see why these plants were built where they were. Was it a perfect storm or just cutting corners? Who knows. One thing we do know for almost certain about the current climate, and this is not to be a fear monger, but we know government agencies no matter which will only communicate the absolute minimum reqd. Partly to not fuel the fear but also to cover their ass as long as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NormR Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 It's rather frustrating that honest discussions of power options don't seem to be possible. All energy sources have their upsides and downsides. But the money involved is huge which seems to spawn various nutbar groups to argue for anything but energy source X and for source Y. My personal preference is for cheap, clean, and diversified where practical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NormR Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 Going bananas over radiation Damn, now I want a banana and nutella sandwich. Please pass the geiger counter ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnub Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 What we know, and don't know, about Japan's reactors Panel of MIT nuclear engineers aims for clarity about the state of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/nuclear-panel-japan-0136.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finetrader Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Tim McElvaine adding to his japanese holdings http://www.gurufocus.com/news.php?id=126622 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sswan11 Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Barrons says buy Japan: http://online.barrons.com/article/SB50001424052970203757604576204523501069008.html#articleTabs_panel_article%3D1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericd1 Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I sold my iShares Japan Small Cap today (SCJ) +10% in a week...Initially thought I would be holding for 6-12 months. No fun making money on a disaster so I'm making a donation to UNICEF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smazz Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 With some estimates now coming in at anywhere between $200 - $300B (and historically estimates for disasters are always on the load side) - I guess from a financial standpt the question arises, what percentage will insurers be on the hook for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyten1 Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 to honest, i thought some of etf for japan would fall more for example EWJ, and didn't expect it to bounce back so quickly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now