Sentences with phrase «when p»

your 2 % grows very fast to 98 % when you p ** s off your potential clients... It is not always about money or winning.

Toss in a larger battery capacity (410mAh for LG; 320mAh for Motorola), along with a special «power save mode» when the P - OLED display is running in ambient mode, and you have the makings of a tenable all - day affair.

A reward for the proof of work, V, is set to rise when the market value P is above the benchmark value and a reward V is set to be zero when P is below the benchmark.

Rule 156 states that when P's property and affairs are being dealt with, the costs are usually payable from P's estate.

And since this is a climate blog, where doubling time is (or should be) on everyone's mind, it's worth knowing the rule that when the CAGR, expressed as a percentage p %, when p is at most 4 % the doubling time is 70 / p years (add a few months when p is between 5 and 10).

According to the ideal gas law PV = nRT, additional warmth (increased T) reduces density when P is held constant, namely by increasing V while leaving n (the number of moles and hence the mass) unchanged.

When a P Switch is shaken in edit mode, it transforms into a key.

When P levels are low, most that escapes through the kidney's glomeruli filters is reabsorbed farther down by the cells that form the urine channels (renal tubules).

This had occurred when P & G bought Iams years earlier and changed it from a pet store brand into a popular grocery store pet food.

When P / E ratios get higher than usual, there is a consequence in the form of lowered future returns.

When P / E multiples are expanding, we get above - average returns, and people start pulling money out of bonds, out of gold, whatever, and dumping it into stocks.

When P / E is 10 times greater than the 138 - year average, and 3 times its previous all - time peak, when interest rates are already zero, we are in totally uncharted waters.

Those praising this method point to a few notable successes, mostly times when P / E ratios were very low since interest rates were very high.

We can take the formulas from Safe Withdrawal Rates with Switching and see what happens when P / E10 = 10 and P / E10 = 12.

When P / E10 = 10, HSWR50T2 has a 30 - year Safe Withdrawal Rate of 6.2 %.

The odds are 50 % -50 % at year 20 when P / E10 = 19 (or less).

When P / E10 = 12, switching has a 30 - year Safe Withdrawal Rate of 6.0 %.

When P / E10 = 16, switching has a 30 - year Calculated Rate of 6.02 % and a High Risk Rate of 7.3 %.

Most double - digit calendar - year stock market diclines — the monster drops everyone fears — occurred when P / Es were below 20, not when they were very high.

Most were acutally when the P / E was below average.

When P / E10 peaked at the beginning of Year 5 at 30.5, the total balance was $ 1060528 and I withdrew $ 115000 from stocks (which added $ 70000 to TIPS) to restore the balance.

The intermediate stock allocation was 70 % (making the stock allocations 100 -70-0 % when P / E10 fell below, between and above the thresholds).

When P / E10 exceeded the upper threshold, which I set at 21, the stock allocation was 0 %.

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for one of my columns at the Value Walk site: «Everything that you are describing is the sort of thing that you would expect to see when the P / E10 level is where it is today in the event that Shiller is right and stock investing really is a highly emotional endeavor.»

So, it shouldn't be surprising that most of the market's big drops came when the P / E was below 20.

When P / E10 was between the two thresholds, I used an intermediate allocation of 30 % or 50 % or 70 % as indicated.

At a 6.2 % withdrawal rate (as with HSWR50T2 when P / E10 = 10 or lower), you can get a 30 - year income stream of $ 40K per year from an initial balance of $ 645K.

The most likely 10 - year annualized return in 1982 (when the P / E10 level was 8) was 15 percent real.

In 2000 (when the P / E10 level was 44), the number was a negative 1 percent real.

I allocated 100 % of the portfolio to stocks when P / E10 fell below a threshold of 13.

Often the riskiest time to buy stocks in these industries is when P / E's are at their lowest.

I allocated nothing into stocks when P / E10 was above threshold.

Delayed purchase, dividend and income approaches all worked well when P / E10 was above 20.

It's easy to understand why 100 percent stocks would work best when the P / E10 level is below 9.

However, it's hard (at least for me) to understand why 40 percent stocks works best when the P / E10 level is between 9 and 21.

From Years 5 through 10, when P / E10 fell below 15.0, I invested $ 20000 into stocks each year.

In Years 18 and 20 - 23, when P / E10 exceeded 20, I was able to transfer $ 100000 into TIPS.

When P / E10 is 20 or above, the earnings yield 100E10 / P is 5 % or less.

However, if you retire with $ 1 million at a time when the P / E10 level is high, you might be pushing it to use that portfolio to cover annual living expenses of anything above $ 20,000.

That is, dividends have kept up with inflation but have not grown (on average) when P / Ex = 25 for all values of x using 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 years.

Retire with a $ 1 million portfolio at a time when the P / E10 level is low and you can take out $ 90,000 each year with virtual certainty that your retirement will not fail.

If you invest $ 1000 when P / E10 = 12, it will grow to $ 2190 (plus inflation) at Year 10 and $ 4320 (plus inflation) at Year 20.

It drives me crazy that most experts in this field were advising investors to go with high stock allocations in 2000, when the P / E10 value was so high that a regression analysis of the historical return data showed that the most likely 10 - year annualized return on stocks was a negative 1 percent real and when Treasury Inflation - Protected Bonds were offering a risk - free return of 4 percent real for time - periods of up to 30 years.

Still, I have a hard time accepting the idea that stocks can offer a strong long - term value proposition when the P / E10 level stands where it stands today.

Even those who fear stocks because of price volatility should reconsider when P / E10 falls below its typical historical level of 14 or 15.

The most dramatic advantage of LHOptA occurred in the early 1920s when P / E10 was unusually low.

In general, it is wise to buy these when the P / S ratios are low, and sell them when they are high.

I'm sure many people did do very well over the long run by pulling out of stocks during bubbles (maybe not at the exact peak, but well in), and jumping in at troughs, when P / Es were very low.

So, if you can just show, for example, that the odds of a stock market crash are far higher in years when the P - E ratio is much higher than average (or for housing crashes the buy - rent, or price - household income ratio), or that the expected risk - adjusted long run return is much lower than average, or other «anomalies» (anomalous to the EMH) like this, then you can show that the EMH is substantially far from the truth.

Therefore, when the black price line is touching the orange line, note that this is a time when the P / E ratio of the company is precisely 15.