Finally, Greenberg Shares His Views on the Market

What has happened to me? That's all I can think about these days. Where's the old skeptic? Where's the old bear? Where's the dubious Greenberg whose skeptical writings on the market, thanks to some of the most bearish and most sensible prognosticators I've ever known, would've had you stuff your money under a mattress for the rest of the millennium?

Surely, this must be the sign of the top when Greenberg appears to be bullish.

Or am I? (Never mind that I'm merely a messenger who does get to pick which messages he wants to deliver.)

I got to thinking about that this weekend when two things happened: The first was Saturday when a buddy left a message to say he had watched "TheStreet.com" on Fox News Channel and that it was so bullish, it was surely a sign of a top if there ever was one. The second was Sunday when I read Cramer's Cutting Room about the show, and he said that nobody on the show was a bear. Nobody. That means not even me!

Sure, there I was playing a mini-grinch when I read that old adage about the market: "If Santa Claus should fail to call, bears may come to Broad and Wall." But I didn't point out that a "Santa rally" is officially defined (thank you Yale Hirsch's Stock Market Almanac) as a rally that occurs in the last five days of the month -- not the first five. And I didn't point out that Santa failed to arrive 10 times in the past 46 years, and of those, the bear markets of 1957, 1962, 1966 and 1977 were not preceded by a visit from Santa. (A good, dyed-in-the-wool skeptic would've surely pointed that out!) I also didn't jump all over Cramer, as I should have, when he brought up that nonsense that there has been speculation that DoubleClick (DCLK Quote) might split its stock. I should've hammered him, but I didn't, just as I don't hammer him or anybody in my column when it comes to the market.

Herb's Latest: Join the discussion on TSC message boards.

Don't know if you've noticed, but my column rarely, if at all, gets into market logic anymore. One reason is that we have a staff that does that. There are Justin Lahart and the market goonies. And there's the TaskMaster, who makes a daily point of it. And then there are Cramer and Jim Griffin and all of the other commentators on our site -- all of them smart, and so many of them disagreeing with one another.

Oh, and then there's me: I'm the guy who wrote an article in Fortune a few years suggesting that the Nasdaq's long rally was over. (The only difference, I noted, was that this rally lasted longer than all the others.)

It made sense at the time!

And that's my point. Anything and everything makes sense at some point. If I can tell you the number of times over the past decade that sensible people have told me that either "this" or "that" were signs of a top, and that this market has got to come tumbling down, I'd be too busy counting to write. "I've never seen anything like this." "It's getting scary." "One day the market will dip and keep on dipping!" Over and over, that's all I've heard and it has made fabulous copy.

But reality is that it has been wrong. Nobody, and I stress nobody, can say with any certainty what will happen to this market. And most old-fashioned indicators are wrong. There was the 3% dividend rule -- that stocks will fall when the dividend rate falls below 3%. How many years ago was that? And the list of new-lows rule: that the market will fall if and when the list of new lows in the newspaper gets longer than 12 inches. (A good sign for traders, maybe, but not investors.) And there's the Greenberg rule: When I go one way, you should go the other!

When Gary Schreier, our TSC on Fox TV producer, says we're gonna talk about the market, he knows that my reaction will always be the same: That again?! Please, anything but that. What the market did or will do bores me. It's a ticking time bomb. We all know that. But nobody knows the time on the clock! Cramer, the trader, can talk about the market as if it's a sport, and it is. (Another sign of a top?!) But at least with a sport there are odds.

Oh, I know that the market has become today's most popular pastime. I know it's all anybody is talking about. (Me, too, I just think it's mindless.) I also know that the argument about liquidity, and all of that money flowing into the market through 401-K plans, is a strong one. And I know that as long as interest rates remain low and the economy remains prosperous -- or appears to remain prosperous -- different segments of this market will continue to cook. (I really do believe in that improved productivity thing that the Internet has created. As recently as three years ago, I -- as a financial journalist, in need of lots of info and data -- never could've worked at home as often as I do now. Makes me three hours more productive per day, and a heck of a lot happier, because that's three hours I'm not commuting.)

I also know that there's a growing credit risk, as so many people buy way too much, from socks to stocks, on credit. (It's the stock part that has me worried.) I can't buy the "no inflation" story when oil prices and housing prices continue to soar. And I know I have a responsibility to continue reminding investors that at some point this party will end, just like all of the rest.

But (sorry, it must be the debater in me) I also have learned that trying to determine what this market may do is the ultimate exercise in futility. Which is why I concentrate on individual companies.

Bottom line, as I often say, is that whoever is quoted in the right place at the right time calling the market right will be the next guru.

Until then, Abby Joseph C. is queen for this day. And me? I'm neither bullish nor bearish. I'm ambivalent. Couldn't really give a hoot. That may not make for good copy, or good TV, but I also can sleep at night. Better things to do with my time, like look for the B2B frauds.

Your thoughts on market commentary? Don't email me, post it on my message boards.