I think of a stable REIT like Realty Income that got hammered, but is as steady as they come with
little change in the fundamentals.
Not exact matches
Huff Stevens concurs: «Quantitative studies have, until very recently, shown
little evidence of
fundamental changes in empirical job security.»
From an economic standpoint, my impression is that this whiplash is largely psychological, and has very
little to do with any underlying
change in economic
fundamentals.
(4) the Groundhog Day effect — the inability to prepare for the inevitable slump that usually comes during or following the heavy holiday schedule
in December / January... whether it's injuries or Wenger's disdain for the January transfer window, which makes sense
in light of his disdain for spending, his philosophy for handling this situation has failed miserably... my question, once again, is how many times can one person try the same failed strategy before making some sort of
fundamental changes... just think to yourself about our recent January dealings, especially
in those years where we were still
in the race but
in desperate need of reinforcements, then try not to throw up a
little in your mouth
With each and every growing controversy, we have seen that the government's
changes to the criminal justice system have been rooted
in the panacea of cutting costs, with
little regard to preserving the integrity and the
fundamental principles of equality before the law and access to justice that sit at the heart of our legal system.
«With each and every growing controversy, we have seen that the government's
changes to the criminal justice system have been rooted
in the panacea of cutting costs, with
little regard to preserving the integrity and the
fundamental principles of equality before the law and access to justice that sit at the heart of our legal system,» he said.
But the crazy thing about empty space, weighing something --[well,] there are many crazy things — it produces a gravitational repulsion, rather than the attractions so the expansion of the universe is speeding up; but this stuff is so mysterious and inexplicable — completely inexplicable right now — that many physicists have been driven wild and mad and have
changed what we might mean by
fundamental physics by suggesting, for example, that the
fundamental concepts
in nature are not really
fundamental at all, they are accidental; they are an environmental accident; that the are many universes and we just happen to live
in the one that has the values it does because if you
changed it a
little bit then we wouldn't be living.
But there is
little indication of the direction
in which bold leadership should lead, or what kind of
fundamental change is needed.
That,
in turn, means locking down the device to prevent transactions outside of Amazon; otherwise, the business model falls apart and Amazon begins selling easily - rooted tablets which bring the company
little (if any) after - sale revenue.Sorry you're so short -
changed on such
fundamental business strategy, something King Gillette championed about a century ago.
For long - term investors, this recent activity won't make too much noise, as
little has
changed in the
fundamentals of the precious metal over a long time span.
I note that any reasonable climate
change class should highlight appropriate sources of uncertainties (e.g.,
in future projections of hurricane
changes, cloud feedbacks, etc) and I prefer when they open up discussing to students, but I find that Judith carries this further into making up uncertainties based on her gut feeling, interpreting them
in ways that make
little sense, and most importantly, failing to recognize the errors
in flawed sets of reasoning on
fundamental topics.
Its also ironic because most experts are
in strong agreement that what very
little climate
change we are already starting to see is impacting the poor very disproportionately, and will far more so (as the climate shifts) for very
fundamental reasons.
Of course this is totally dependent on how «better» is measured, but there is one
fundamental, over-riding sense
in which I think it isn't better - that we are likely facing potentially catastrophic impacts from anthropogenic climate
change and we have
little prospect of averting that within timescales that would make a significant difference.
An unintended consequence of this strategy is that there has been very
little left over for true climate modeling innovations and
fundamental research into climate dynamics and theory — such research would not only support amelioration of deficiencies and failures
in the current climate modeling systems, but would also lay the foundations for disruptive advances
in our understanding of the climate system and our ability to predict emergent phenomena such as abrupt climate
change.
So long as these assumptions held up, firms had
little incentive to undertake any
fundamental changes in the existing system.