Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Definitely bad news for A&FThe Mall Meltdown Continues
Retailers’ earnings season has gone from bad to worse. The bleeding intensified last week, with shares of Abercrombie & Fitch plummeting 26% on Wednesday, the biggest percentage decline since the company went public. PVH Corp., owner of brands including Van Heusen, Tommy Hilfilger, and Calvin Klein, dropped 10% that day, too. On Thursday, women’s wear chain J.Jill was down a jaw-dropping 53% and on Friday, Gap Inc. slid 9%.
Definitely bad news for the economy. If Trump wants to run on the economy to get reelected he might want to pass over this bit of bad news.
For Abercrombie and Fitch to plummet 26% is unprecedented.
No, that was a clear and pointed response. Look at the numbers and make sure you follow back to 2006 or 07. Then compare numbers and levels to 2014 and look at what happened in between.Which still left it behind where it was before he came into office. 3 steps back and 2 steps forward is net decline.I don’t judge the economy by the stock exchange. The reality is here on the ground and reflected by capital and employment.So you don't know numbers or how to read charts. This might not be the thread for you.
Let's try one more time.
How did the Dow Jones Industrial do under Barack Obama vs. past presidents? - cleveland.com
So when Obama took office, the Dow was at 7,949. When he left office it was 19,732. That's a net GAIN of 11,783
So more like 1 step backwards for 2 months, then 15 steps forward.
Obama energy policy constricted capital and shrank the economy.
Reality.
What’s more, those chart numbers are out of context. It wasn’t until Obama’s 6th year that the market got back up to pre-Obama numbers. Any net improvement coincided with fracking.
So what you are saying is...
Since you got proven wrong you now want to change the discussion?
Once again you prove that you don't understand numbers. It didn't recover past pre-Obama era numbers until year 6? That's funny because I just posted for you that after his first 4 years, the Dow had gained almost 5,000 points.
This response by you proves you don't know what you are talking about, and clearly a troll.
Obama energy policy fucked our economy. Troll that.
And I told you that when you’re on the bottom you have one direction to go.If the two steps forward were preceded by three steps backward you’re not improving.You need to go back and look again if you think what you said is true. Not to mention fracking had nothing to do with the housing market bubble that led to banks needing bailed out, and car companies needing bailed out as well. Worst part of it was that Obama was forced to deal with those issues through a bail out set up by the President before him.
Market correction?
"With that in mind, it may be tough for stocks to enjoy nearly as explosive a rally under Trump in the next four (or eight) years as it has during Obama's tenure.
The Dow has gone up more than 140% since Obama's inauguration in January 2009.
If you look at how the Dow has done since it hit its low point on March 6, 2009, it's up 210%."
The Obama bull market: A 140% jump in the Dow
You didn't even read it did you? If you take the point the Dow was at when Obama took office, it went up 140% over his two terms. If you take it from the lowest point, which was about two months into his presidency when he had enough time to do anything, it went up 201% during his terms.
When you drive things from near bottom to the bottom you have only one direction to go.
Two steps forward following three steps backward is a net negative.
How in the hell did he drive it to the bottom? Even if you wanted to keep up that ridiculous argument, 140% growth under him is not anything negative.
Do you know how numbers work? I'm not talking about economics, just numbers?
A 140% or 210% growth is not negative.
I've been following your little debate. You are correct you are not talking about economics at all. Not sure if it's on purpose or if it's just because you're ignorant.
Jo
Did any of you librards look at where people are shopping. Why go to the store why you can shop online. My wife works for Nordstrom and the they all have been hurting due to the boom in online shopping. You can order all your food and household items online and don’t have to go anywhere and it’s cheaper. I rather go to the supermarket for groceries but I hate Malls. It was a valiant effort by libtards trying to twist the truth as always.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's amazing how they shop around for bad news and then desperately trying to sculpt it into an anti-Trump message. What's further amazing is that Bezos, the guy who's responsible for the major destruction of conventional retail business.... is a lefty!
I mean how do they miss this?
Jo
The Mall Meltdown Continues
Retailers’ earnings season has gone from bad to worse. The bleeding intensified last week, with shares of Abercrombie & Fitch plummeting 26% on Wednesday, the biggest percentage decline since the company went public. PVH Corp., owner of brands including Van Heusen, Tommy Hilfilger, and Calvin Klein, dropped 10% that day, too. On Thursday, women’s wear chain J.Jill was down a jaw-dropping 53% and on Friday, Gap Inc. slid 9%.
Definitely bad news for the economy. If Trump wants to run on the economy to get reelected he might want to pass over this bit of bad news.
For Abercrombie and Fitch to plummet 26% is unprecedented.
Like a lot of retailers, Abercrombie and Fitch are closing stores around the nation.
I hope things change.
Yes like the rest of the retailers who are finding themselves closing stores they failed to keep up with the changing customer base.
The retail industry has been rapidly transformed by the online Giants. The message was clear early on..... either keep up with the change or be left out.
Jo
And I told you that when you’re on the bottom you have one direction to go.If the two steps forward were preceded by three steps backward you’re not improving.
You didn't even read it did you? If you take the point the Dow was at when Obama took office, it went up 140% over his two terms. If you take it from the lowest point, which was about two months into his presidency when he had enough time to do anything, it went up 201% during his terms.
When you drive things from near bottom to the bottom you have only one direction to go.
Two steps forward following three steps backward is a net negative.
How in the hell did he drive it to the bottom? Even if you wanted to keep up that ridiculous argument, 140% growth under him is not anything negative.
Do you know how numbers work? I'm not talking about economics, just numbers?
A 140% or 210% growth is not negative.
I've been following your little debate. You are correct you are not talking about economics at all. Not sure if it's on purpose or if it's just because you're ignorant.
Jo
Then you need to have a conversation with Donald Trump... because the Dow is one of his key talking points to the success of the economy under him.
Sadly the strength of the Dow is artificial inflated right now due to the mass amounts of buy backs that happened under the most recent tax plan that was passed. Trump and his cabinet swore up and down that the companies would give bonuses, raises, and better benefits for the American workers instead of using it to buy back stock... well they were either lying to get support for the tax plan, or they were gullible.
And I told you that when you’re on the bottom you have one direction to go.You didn't even read it did you? If you take the point the Dow was at when Obama took office, it went up 140% over his two terms. If you take it from the lowest point, which was about two months into his presidency when he had enough time to do anything, it went up 201% during his terms.
When you drive things from near bottom to the bottom you have only one direction to go.
Two steps forward following three steps backward is a net negative.
How in the hell did he drive it to the bottom? Even if you wanted to keep up that ridiculous argument, 140% growth under him is not anything negative.
Do you know how numbers work? I'm not talking about economics, just numbers?
A 140% or 210% growth is not negative.
I've been following your little debate. You are correct you are not talking about economics at all. Not sure if it's on purpose or if it's just because you're ignorant.
Jo
Then you need to have a conversation with Donald Trump... because the Dow is one of his key talking points to the success of the economy under him.
Sadly the strength of the Dow is artificial inflated right now due to the mass amounts of buy backs that happened under the most recent tax plan that was passed. Trump and his cabinet swore up and down that the companies would give bonuses, raises, and better benefits for the American workers instead of using it to buy back stock... well they were either lying to get support for the tax plan, or they were gullible.
He is bringing back companies to the US. Look at the unemployment. All time low and just going to get lower. Spew you bullshit somewhere else.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You’re short-cutting the timeline.No, that was a clear and pointed response. Look at the numbers and make sure you follow back to 2006 or 07. Then compare numbers and levels to 2014 and look at what happened in between.Which still left it behind where it was before he came into office. 3 steps back and 2 steps forward is net decline.I don’t judge the economy by the stock exchange. The reality is here on the ground and reflected by capital and employment.
Obama energy policy constricted capital and shrank the economy.
Reality.
What’s more, those chart numbers are out of context. It wasn’t until Obama’s 6th year that the market got back up to pre-Obama numbers. Any net improvement coincided with fracking.
So what you are saying is...
Since you got proven wrong you now want to change the discussion?
Once again you prove that you don't understand numbers. It didn't recover past pre-Obama era numbers until year 6? That's funny because I just posted for you that after his first 4 years, the Dow had gained almost 5,000 points.
This response by you proves you don't know what you are talking about, and clearly a troll.
Obama energy policy fucked our economy. Troll that.
I can read numbers and charts, quite unlike yourself. In February 2009, ONE MONTH into Obama's presidency, the Dow was at the all time low of 8,503.77. Yes... the ALL-TIME low of his presidency was ONE MONTH into his first term. He had NOTHING to do with that. the lowest point of the Dow in 2014 was 17,143.14.
Dow Jones - DJIA - 100 Year Historical Chart
You’re short-cutting the timeline.No, that was a clear and pointed response. Look at the numbers and make sure you follow back to 2006 or 07. Then compare numbers and levels to 2014 and look at what happened in between.Which still left it behind where it was before he came into office. 3 steps back and 2 steps forward is net decline.So what you are saying is...
Since you got proven wrong you now want to change the discussion?
Once again you prove that you don't understand numbers. It didn't recover past pre-Obama era numbers until year 6? That's funny because I just posted for you that after his first 4 years, the Dow had gained almost 5,000 points.
This response by you proves you don't know what you are talking about, and clearly a troll.
Obama energy policy fucked our economy. Troll that.
I can read numbers and charts, quite unlike yourself. In February 2009, ONE MONTH into Obama's presidency, the Dow was at the all time low of 8,503.77. Yes... the ALL-TIME low of his presidency was ONE MONTH into his first term. He had NOTHING to do with that. the lowest point of the Dow in 2014 was 17,143.14.
Dow Jones - DJIA - 100 Year Historical Chart
Obama had everything to do with impeding recovery.
I'm just doing the same thing you and the others do when I post factsSo now you deny the facts of the stock market.sure he did--sureYou ignore Obama started with the economy SHRINKING at a rate over 6 %.Despite left wing wishful thinking, the DOW is still around 24,800 and unemployment is still in a historic low. The DOW was around 12,000 this time in Hussein's first term and democrats raved about it.
A stock market heading down to 6,000. So Obama basically doubled it after uit hit bottom.
It was 19,870 when Obama left office . Let me know when your buddy doubles that.
Wow.
The DOW rose 258% during "Hussein`s" presidency. Orange Jesus has a lot of catching up to do. If he gets 2 terms the DOW would have to reach 61,000 to match "Hussein`s" accomplishments.Despite left wing wishful thinking, the DOW is still around 24,800 and unemployment is still in a historic low. The DOW was around 12,000 this time in Hussein's first term and democrats raved about it.
thats cause he pumped midtown globohomo banks and wall street full of cash cash cashThe DOW rose 258% during "Hussein`s" presidency. Orange Jesus has a lot of catching up to do. If he gets 2 terms the DOW would have to reach 61,000 to match "Hussein`s" accomplishments.Despite left wing wishful thinking, the DOW is still around 24,800 and unemployment is still in a historic low. The DOW was around 12,000 this time in Hussein's first term and democrats raved about it.
Unemployment is not at a historic low.Despite left wing wishful thinking, the DOW is still around 24,800 and unemployment is still in a historic low. The DOW was around 12,000 this time in Hussein's first term and democrats raved about it.
Online shopping is how many people shop retail now. Malls are dying. That has nothing at all to due with Trump.The Mall Meltdown Continues
Retailers’ earnings season has gone from bad to worse. The bleeding intensified last week, with shares of Abercrombie & Fitch plummeting 26% on Wednesday, the biggest percentage decline since the company went public. PVH Corp., owner of brands including Van Heusen, Tommy Hilfilger, and Calvin Klein, dropped 10% that day, too. On Thursday, women’s wear chain J.Jill was down a jaw-dropping 53% and on Friday, Gap Inc. slid 9%.
Definitely bad news for the economy. If Trump wants to run on the economy to get reelected he might want to pass over this bit of bad news.
For Abercrombie and Fitch to plummet 26% is unprecedented.
Abwercrombie and Fitch is just a fad.....like Members Only.The Mall Meltdown Continues
Retailers’ earnings season has gone from bad to worse. The bleeding intensified last week, with shares of Abercrombie & Fitch plummeting 26% on Wednesday, the biggest percentage decline since the company went public. PVH Corp., owner of brands including Van Heusen, Tommy Hilfilger, and Calvin Klein, dropped 10% that day, too. On Thursday, women’s wear chain J.Jill was down a jaw-dropping 53% and on Friday, Gap Inc. slid 9%.
Definitely bad news for the economy. If Trump wants to run on the economy to get reelected he might want to pass over this bit of bad news.
For Abercrombie and Fitch to plummet 26% is unprecedented.
Malls were/are peak public opulence as a reaction to the start up of Wal Mart type stores that hurt and affected Mom/Pop stores and destroyed small town businesses. As we imported more from the 1960's on and the percentages rose, we jettisoned much of our manufacturing.Online shopping is how many people shop retail now. Malls are dying. That has nothing at all to due with Trump.The Mall Meltdown Continues
Retailers’ earnings season has gone from bad to worse. The bleeding intensified last week, with shares of Abercrombie & Fitch plummeting 26% on Wednesday, the biggest percentage decline since the company went public. PVH Corp., owner of brands including Van Heusen, Tommy Hilfilger, and Calvin Klein, dropped 10% that day, too. On Thursday, women’s wear chain J.Jill was down a jaw-dropping 53% and on Friday, Gap Inc. slid 9%.
Definitely bad news for the economy. If Trump wants to run on the economy to get reelected he might want to pass over this bit of bad news.
For Abercrombie and Fitch to plummet 26% is unprecedented.
The DOW rose 258% during "Hussein`s" presidency. Orange Jesus has a lot of catching up to do. If he gets 2 terms the DOW would have to reach 61,000 to match "Hussein`s" accomplishments.Despite left wing wishful thinking, the DOW is still around 24,800 and unemployment is still in a historic low. The DOW was around 12,000 this time in Hussein's first term and democrats raved about it.
The low point was 6500 in 2009.No, that was a clear and pointed response. Look at the numbers and make sure you follow back to 2006 or 07. Then compare numbers and levels to 2014 and look at what happened in between.Which still left it behind where it was before he came into office. 3 steps back and 2 steps forward is net decline.I don’t judge the economy by the stock exchange. The reality is here on the ground and reflected by capital and employment.
Obama energy policy constricted capital and shrank the economy.
Reality.
What’s more, those chart numbers are out of context. It wasn’t until Obama’s 6th year that the market got back up to pre-Obama numbers. Any net improvement coincided with fracking.
So what you are saying is...
Since you got proven wrong you now want to change the discussion?
Once again you prove that you don't understand numbers. It didn't recover past pre-Obama era numbers until year 6? That's funny because I just posted for you that after his first 4 years, the Dow had gained almost 5,000 points.
This response by you proves you don't know what you are talking about, and clearly a troll.
Obama energy policy fucked our economy. Troll that.
I can read numbers and charts, quite unlike yourself. In February 2009, ONE MONTH into Obama's presidency, the Dow was at the all time low of 8,503.77. Yes... the ALL-TIME low of his presidency was ONE MONTH into his first term. He had NOTHING to do with that. the lowest point of the Dow in 2014 was 17,143.14.
Dow Jones - DJIA - 100 Year Historical Chart
