Comments | the_recession: Next Week's Heavyweight Economic Data

cieldumort in the_recession

Next Week's Heavyweight Economic Data

Mar 27, 2009 15:44

Reports Date Time For Median Estimate Last Period Chicago PMI Tuesday, Mar. 31 9:45 a.m. March 34.9 34.2 Consumer Confidence Index Tuesday, Mar. 31 10:00 a.m. March 25.4 25.0 ISM Index, Manufacturing Wednesday, Apr. 1 10:00 a.m. March 36.0 35.8 Construction Spending Wednesday, Apr. 1 10:00 a.m. February ( Read more... )

auto sales, nonfarm payrolls, ism manufacturing index, leading indicators, u3, unemployment rate, pmi

Comments 14

sophiaserpentia March 27 2009, 20:57:28 UTC

Enough indicators are starting to level off that i'm beginning to hold *some* hope that we're bottoming out.

There's still an awful lot of ARMs out there set to explode, though.

cieldumort March 27 2009, 21:02:27 UTC

It will become more challenging for adjustable rate mortgages to "explode" if the Fed and the administration continue to have some success sending longer term rates lower and lower. They are conducting shock and awe preemptive strikes, after all.

echelon March 27 2009, 21:30:46 UTC

I wonder if things are starting to level for real, or if the headline numbers are "perked up" a bit, only to be revised drastically later when no one's really looking.

Take, for example, 4Q GDP. Initial headline number in January was -3.8%
February it was revised down to -6.2%
Yesterday it was revised yet again to -6.3%

That's a hell of a revision from start to finish. I'm not entirely comfortable on counting that the indicators are truly leveling. =/

cieldumort March 27 2009, 22:15:07 UTC

However, of all of the headline numbers, GDP is arguably one of the most subject to massive revisions. I've posted on this quite a lot in the com.

Initial, preliminary GDP estimates have too much assumption built in to them. That Q4 number of 6.3% is even likely to get revised yet again, upon the next significant annual benchmark revision. My best guess goes something like this for GDP (eventually), based on what I have seen so far

Q4 2007: Revised lower
Q1 2008: lower
Q2 2008: about the same, or slightly higher
Q3 2008: lower
Q4 2008: about the same

It's also a really good reason never to use that supposed golden "2 back to back quarters of negative GDP" definition of recession. It's a totally bogus way to determine if you're in one or not.

Thread 10

floundah March 28 2009, 03:01:03 UTC

Clarifying:

1. I'm thinking slightly worse than expected;
2. The official figures will probably be ~8.7% to 8.9%, but actual unemployment will, of course, be significantly higher.

capthek March 28 2009, 05:42:29 UTC

I am saying slightly better than expected, but any news that is not absolutely horrible is greeted with applause these days.

cieldumort March 28 2009, 06:58:16 UTC

My take is for a mix of about as expected, somewhat better than expected, and somewhat worse than expected, with the whole bag coming out, roughly as expected, in aggregate ( ... )

capthek March 28 2009, 19:33:55 UTC

"Obama bounce" ya it is quite interesting because I largely agree. If you want my opinion, the word on the street is that many businesses have rapidly reduced production because they can't get credit for the inputs they need even though there is in fact demand for their products and buyers with cash in hand. Obama has slightly loosened credit markets and in turn buying and selling have slightly increased and I believe they will continue ( ... )