Rankings   Forums   Features   Help    

pelcmarek's picture
Who cares about macro !


NEW YORK (AP)   

Standard & Poor's Index Services on Monday said preliminary figures show second-quarter operating earnings for the S&P 500 companies fell 29 percent, the fourth straight quarterly decline for the index of large companies.

With data available from 96 percent of the companies in the index, S&P said the aggregate results show operating earnings at $17.08 per share, compared with $24.06 per share for the 2007 second quarter.

"As reported" earnings, which reflect results that are not adjusted for special charges and gains, fell to $13.32 per share. That's down 39.1 percent since hitting a record of $21.88 per share in the first quarter of 2007.

Energy companies in the S&P 500 contributed the greatest percentage to operating earnings for the second quarter, at 25.1 percent. Industrials followed at 16.3 percent, with the health care sector close behind at 16 percent.
 
The financial sector was the only sector to have a negative result for operating earnings, showing a loss of 4.1 percent. A year ago, the financial sector contributed by far the largest percentage to operating earnings, at 28.4 percent, with energy companies second at 16.4 percent.

Excluding the financials, S&P 500 operating earnings rose 3.2 percent for the quarter. There are 88 financial companies in the index.

By pelcmarek at 2008-08-25 17:14 | Stocks | pelcmarek's blog


Temporary condition

I see this as a temporary problem/condition.

Commodity price increases hit a bunch of companies.

Over time, they will raise prices as their existing contracts expire and get pricing (read as profits) back to where it should be.

It's inflation brought on by deficit spending.

- Vooch
By Vooch at Mon, 2008-08-25 21:29 | login or register to post comments

Temporary condition

I see this as a temporary problem/condition.

Commodity price increases hit a bunch of companies.

Over time, they will raise prices as their existing contracts expire and get pricing (read as profits) back to where it should be.

It's inflation brought on by deficit spending.

- Vooch
By Vooch at Mon, 2008-08-25 21:29 | login or register to post comments

Temporary?

Vooch:

If you see this inflation as brought on by deficit spending, then what do you think is going to happen in the future? Pundits are already calling for government spending to replace consumer spending in GDP.

Have you seen the size of the treasury's issues lately? They are setting records. Either they are having revenue shortfalls (bad) or they are spending more than usual (bad) or both (very bad).

Also, if you see companies passing PPI onto consumers, and consumer income is dipping this year, won't higher prices + less disposable income be bad for earnings? Note that many defensive companies have already said that they can't pass on the higher costs to consumers; instead, they are offering a lesser product for the same price (I bet the BLS doesn't consider that in its hedonics model).
By smtkr at Tue, 2008-08-26 15:53 | login or register to post comments

>   Note that many

>   Note that many defensive companies have already said that they can't pass on the
>   higher costs to consumers; instead, they are offering a lesser product for the same price

When you're talking about defensive companies, are you talking about Kraft and Bud?

If so, they are all raising prices.

- Vooch

By Vooch at Tue, 2008-08-26 17:03 | login or register to post comments