joi, 29 martie 2012

Uncrawled 301s - A Quick Fix for When Relaunches Go Too Well

Uncrawled 301s - A Quick Fix for When Relaunches Go Too Well


Uncrawled 301s - A Quick Fix for When Relaunches Go Too Well

Posted: 28 Mar 2012 03:28 PM PDT

Posted by Everett Sizemore

A lot of things can go wrong when you change most of the URLs on a website with thousands or millions of pages. But this is the story of how something went a little too "right", and how it was fixed by doing something a little bit "wrong".

The Relaunch Timeline

On February, 28 2012 FreeShipping.org relaunched with a new design and updated site architecture.The site's management and developers were well-versed in on-site SEO issues and handled the relaunch in what many SEOs might consider "textbook" fashion. This included simultaneous 301 redirects from all previous URLs to their specific counterparts using the new URL structure. All internal links were updated immediately, as were the sitemap files, rel canonical tags and all other markup.

They had expected some lag-time and a temporary loss in rankings, but traffic had started a dramatic decline immediately after the relaunch, and a week later it was still falling.

On March, 7 FreeShipping.org contacted seOverflow to make sure they had done the redirects properly. Everything seemed to check out. A scan of the site revealed only a few 404 errors from internal links, those being relegated to a few outlying blog entries. All of the old URLs were serving a 301 response code to the new URLs, which returned a 200 response code. The XML sitemap was using the new URLs, as was all internal navigation, rel canonical tags and other on-site links. By all indications, the developers had implemented a major site redevelopment flawlessly...

Too flawlessly. A site:domain.com search revealed that many of the old URLs were still indexed alongside the new ones, and had not been re-cached since the relaunch of the site a week earlier. Log files revealed that Google had not been back to visit most of the old URLs. They had no link path available to reach most of them, so any page with a preivous version that had not been recraweled yet (i.e. any page without prominent external links) was seen as a duplicate.

Knowing how fast and accurate their developers are, I proposed they turn the old linking structure back on for awhile so the internal links on categry pages would send crawlers through the redirects first. This ensures they see the 301 status code and can update the index accordingly, rather than assuming that the old page is still active along-side the new page for weeks or months. This is slightly different than what I used to prescribe, which involved resubmitting an old sitemap (more on that later). It is important to note that only the navigation links changed back - all other markup still reflected the new URLs. Changing the rel canonical, Open Graph or Schema, for instance, would not be recommended. All they needed was an easy crawl path to the now-redirected URLs.

On March, 8  about half way through the day they flipped the switch to turn on the old internal link URLs and traffic from search more than doubled on the same day. They maintained a steady climb until traffic from search stabilized above pre-relaunch levels.

On March 12 the new internal links were again changed over to the new URLs and traffic from search has remained at or above pre-relaunch levels.

Google Analytics Timeline for Redirects

Rethinking Overthinking Sitewide Redirect Best Practices

I'd seen this situation before and had always advised resubmiting the old XML sitemap to ensure the legacy URLs got recrawled faster than the weeks or months it could take search engines to revisit a page without a link from somewhere. But recent statements from Bing caused me to think twice about that recommendation. And this great post by John Doherty had me wondering the same about submitting a "dirty" sitemap to Google.

What Bing Says...
"Only end state URL. That's the only thing I want in a sitemap.xml. We have a very tight threshold on how clean your sitemap needs to be...  if you start showing me 301s in here, rel=canonicals, 404 errors, all of that, I'm going to start distrusting your sitemap and I'm just not going to bother with it anymore... It's very important that people take that seriously." - Duane Forrester, Senior Product Manager, Bing Webmaster Tools

“Your Sitemaps need to be clean. We have a 1% allowance for dirt in a Sitemap. Examples of dirt are if we click on a URL and we see a redirect... If we see more than a 1% level of dirt, we begin losing trust in the Sitemap”. - Duane Forrester, Senior Product Manager, Bing Webmaster Tools

In preparation for this post I asked for some clarification. I'm not sure how "clear" this makes it, as the seriousness of the statements above seem to be at odds with the following advice:

Duane Forrester on Redirects in XML Sitemaps

What I Took Away From All of This...

#1 Despite what I've heard during several interviews and straight from him at conferences, it seems like Bing will let you get away with more than 1% of "dirt" on your sitemap, at least if it isn't an ongoing thing. Sometimes I get the feeling Duane Forrester makes some stuff up as he goes along, which is fine. Sometimes it is better to be decisive and give an actionable answer than to hedge your bets by talking on and on without actually saying anything (*Ahem).

#2 As long as your old URLs redirect to the new ones it is OK, perhaps even preferable, to leave the old internal links up for awhile. Best Practices for redirects has always been to update all of the links you have control over. This is for several reasons. First, it helps you avoid multiple redirect hops if/when it comes time to change all of the URLs again. It is also good htaccess housekeeping since old redirect rules can often get broken without being noticed during the QA process. Last but not least, according to Matt Cutts a 301 redirect does not pass 100% of pagerank on to the destination page. However, losing out on a tiny percentage of inherited pagerank for a few days and having a good excuse to procrastinate on housekeeping is better than having your traffic drop off a cliff for weeks or months at a time.

#3 The old adage about "Knowing enough to get yourself into trouble" is as true as ever.

#4 Leaving the old links up for a few days seems to work equally as well across major search engines. The Google Analytics screenshot above shows traffic from all search engines, but looking at just Yahoo, Bing or Google individually tells pretty much the same story.

#5 You can do it either way. Since every site is different it is good to have more than one option. One could stick with the XML sitemap resubmission to each of their webmaster tools accounts as a best practice, and that "should" work just fine. Given the results of this case study I'm going to recommend that most clients leave up the old internal links (especially nav and category links) for about one week after re-launching a website with new URLs on the same domain (a new domain is slighly different, and you can use the change of address tools).

#6 Domain Authority doesn't necessarily mean squat for weak internal page crawling. Free Shipping Day was the third largest online shopping day of the year in 2010 and 2011. FreeShipping.org is the only official sponsor, and benefits from massive amounts of press coverage. The site has about 12,700 links from about 1,110 domains, including the New York Times, CNN, MSN, TIME, Huffington Post, Mashable, USA Today, Forbes... Not bad for a coupon affiliate. Yet it was a week after the relaunch, and both Google and Bing were uninterested in revisiting any of the FreeShipping.org pages in their indexes that didn't have their own strong external links.


Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!

Outreach Letters for Link Building [Real Examples]

Posted: 28 Mar 2012 03:32 AM PDT

Posted by Peter Attia

opening letterOutreach letters are a primary element in any quality link building campaign: If you're not getting responses, you're not getting links. It takes a lot of trial and error to find what works, which can be difficult for new link builders. To make things easier for everyone, I wanted to give several outreach letters I use for contacting different sites.

Although I have done a lot of testing with different letters, I’m by no means suggesting mine are the best of the best. These are what work for me and I do use the conversion rate of my emails as a factor.

Guest Posts

For guest posting, you want to have a more personal approach in your email. However, you don’t want to be overly personal and invade their bubble. I like to do some light digging and find something I can personally connect with them on (if you can't find something in 5 minutes, move on). I find this works better than trying to explain why the article would be a great fit for their site. Also, I found that adding a small incentive boosts the response rate.

Hey Taylor,

I recently came across BanjosOnTheGreen.com and saw that you play a Deering Banjo. I broke the neck on my banjo a few days ago so I’ve been looking for a new one. I’ve never played a Deering before though: what’s your take on them?

Also, I’ve been writing up music articles and would love the chance to write on your blog. I’d be happy to send over a new set of banjo strings as a thanks!

Cheers,
-Peter

Michael King wrote a great article with a scenario on how you can be personal to leverage a link. This is a perfect example of the quality links you can obtain through manual outreach.

Real Correspondence Example:

guest post correspondence

Broken link building

I target personal sites for broken links. These can be blogs or enthusiast sites and usually have a page of resources or a blogroll. I’m a fan of keeping emails short, so I try not to get personal on these.

Hey David,

I was looking through your suggested links on SportRacerHeaven.com and noticed a few broken links. Let me know how to reach the webmaster and I can send a list their way!

Also, if you’re open to suggestions, I think KingKongBikeParts.com would be a great fit. They have a large variety of customized parts that I’ve had trouble finding elsewhere.

All the Best,
-Peter

The webmaster will nearly always be the person you are contacting. I just use the second sentence as a buffer to get a response before providing a list. Once I get a response (And hopefully a link) I provide them with a list I’ve acquired. You can see a great correspondence example of this on Nick Leroy's broken link building post.

Also, If broken link building is still a new concept to you, Anthony Nelson wrote a tutorial on broken link building that's definitely worth checking out!

Links to a Local Business Site

Local businesses are great to target if you have something to provide in return. For example, if you have a tool that would be beneficial for them to use on their site.

Judy,

My name is Peter. I work for StrictlyBusinessRealty.com and we’ve recently created a tool for real estate businesses to help their visitors find movers in their area. Since we’re located out of Charlotte, we’re offering this tool to Charlotte businesses for free for a limited time.

You can customize the tool at StrictlyBusinessRealty.com/moving-tool/

If you have any questions or need any help setting it up, let me know!

Thanks,
-Peter

Real Correspondence Example:

Correspondence Example

Outreach Through Blog Commenting

This is what you can resort to if you can’t find any contact information on a blog. You want to be fairly vague, so that you’re not publicly displaying who your client is. I’ve seen bloggers get quite upset about outreaching to them through a comment and you obviously don’t want them publicly talking about your client negatively.

Hey Todd,

I was wondering if you accepted any guest posting on MyBliggidyBlog.com. I couldn’t manage to find your email on the site. If you could get a hold of me at notmyrealemail@gmail.com, I would greatly appreciate it!

Thanks,
-Peter

Note: Sometimes people will respond through another comment first, so you want to make sure you’re subscribed to get emails on comments made on that post.

Real Correspondence Example:

blog comment correspondence

 

I then got a response via email and was able to negotiate from there.

Paid Advertising

This is more for bloggers than businesses. Businesses that have paid advertising are pretty straightforward about it. You just need to find the “advertise” button on their site and wait for them to send you an obnoxiously long media kit.

Hey Jay,

My name is Peter. I’m doing promotions for a dog related site and would like the chance to put up a small advertisement on RufusTheAllMighty.com. I think it would be a great fit considering the relevancy. If this is something you’d be interested in, just let me know! Thanks in advance!

All the Best
-Peter

Real Correspondence Example:

Paid Advertisement Correspondence

 

How to Increase Your Response Rate

I do this for hard to get links, like EDU's. I basically open with a "soft email" to get a response. After that response, I'll hit them with my actual proposal. This works well for propositions that require a long explanation, where people tend to just skim through instead of actually reading your email.

Hello,

I’m trying to get in contact with the person in charge of the CollegeUniversity.com/housing/ page. If you could point me in the right direction, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks in advance!

All the Best,
-Peter

After I get a response, I give my full pitch. Since they've already committed to a conversation with me, they will read my email word for word instead of skimming through.

Real Correspondence Example:

increase response rate email

Conclusion

Keeping your emails short and sweet is a great way to go. I constantly try new forms of outreach and always end up reverting back to small quick emails. They grab attention at a glance and someone can see the point of your email right away. They're also easier to construct on the fly, which allows you to send out several emails faster.


Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!

Seth's Blog : Nine ideas in search of a blog post

Nine ideas in search of a blog post

Loud and angry doesn't make you right. It just means that you are loud and angry.

I'm hosting a public event in New York City on May 16th. Save the date, registration opens April 16. More details then.

Sore muscles mysteriously respond to being soaked in a warm bath of water mixed with epsom salt.

"Everything will be alright" is not the same as "everything will stay the same."

If you grow up in a town with sidewalks, a suburb without them seems somehow wrong. Design instinct is cultural, not genetic.

I wish more people would read this post about spam and bcc email.

An interesting milestone in US politics: more and more people don't even like the Congress members they agree with.

One of the cheapest ways to have fun and save money is to check the air pressure in your car tires. Okay, maybe not fun, but still.

The pet supply store near my house now has a bakery section. It's either the end of civilization or the beginning.



More Recent Articles

[You're getting this note because you subscribed to Seth Godin's blog.]

Don't want to get this email anymore? Click the link below to unsubscribe.




Your requested content delivery powered by FeedBlitz, LLC, 9 Thoreau Way, Sudbury, MA 01776, USA. +1.978.776.9498

 

Live at 10:45 a.m. EDT: President Delivers Remarks on Oil Subsidies

The White House Your Daily Snapshot for
Thursday, March 29, 2012
 

Live at 10:45 a.m. EDT: President Delivers Remarks on Oil Subsidies

This morning at 10:45 a.m. EDT, President Obama will deliver remarks urging Congress to vote to end the billions in taxpayer dollars handed out to oil companies every year.

Watch on WhiteHouse.gov/Live at 10:45 a.m. EDT.

Building the Workforce of the Future at Community Colleges

Last month, Dr. Jill Biden and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis hit the road for a bus tour through Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia where they visited community colleges that have formed innovative partnerships with local business leaders to train students with the skills they need to join the area workforce.

Check out the video of their trip:

In Case You Missed It

Here are some of the top stories from the White House blog:

A Wounded Warrior Embraces the New Normal: Part Two
The second of a three-part series that tells the story of a catastrophically wounded service member, from his injury to his recovery to his search for employment.

It’s Time to End the Taxpayer Subsidies for Big Oil
The United States has been subsidizing the oil industry for a century. In fact, some of the oldest tax breaks for the oil companies date back to 1913 – a time when there were only 48 states in the Union and Ford was still producing the Model T.

Big Data is a Big Deal
By improving our ability to extract knowledge and insights from large and complex collections of digital data, the initiative promises to help accelerate the pace of discovery in science and engineering, strengthen our national security, and transform teaching and learning.

Today's Schedule

All times are Eastern Daylight Time (EDT).

10:00 AM: The President receives the Presidential Daily Briefing

10:45 AM: The President delivers remarks urging Congress to vote to end the billions in taxpayer dollars handed out to oil companies every year WhiteHouse.gov/live

12:15 PM: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney WhiteHouse.gov/live

12:30 PM: The Vice President attends a campaign event

2:45 PM: The Vice President attends a campaign event

6:00 PM: The Vice President attends a campaign event

8:00 PM: The Vice President attends a campaign event

WhiteHouse.gov/live Indicates that the event will be live-streamed on WhiteHouse.gov/Live

Get Updates

Sign up for the Daily Snapshot

Stay Connected

 

This email was sent to e0nstar1.blog@gmail.com
Manage Subscriptions for e0nstar1.blog@gmail.com
Sign Up for Updates from the White House

Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy

Please do not reply to this email. Contact the White House

The White House • 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW • Washington, DC 20500 • 202-456-1111

 

Seth's Blog : The essential question to ask before extending your brand

The essential question to ask before extending your brand

Are we doing this because it's better?

Or because we can?

As organizations grow, they gain an audience, revenue, cash flow and trust. They add staff and then, soon, they decide it's time to offer something new. Smuckers decides perhaps it should use its shelf space to offer a peanut butter. A corporate coach wonders if he ought to add HR consulting services. A website decides to clone a product made by a smaller company that they can bring to a larger audience...

If you extend your reach because you can, because you have market power, you will probably be doing your existing customers a small service (centralized support or billing or just one less person to deal with) but your brand doesn't increase in stature. You had a chance to bring some of your original magic to the table (after all, it's that magic that got you started) but all you did was bully the competitors out of the way.

On the other hand, if you extend your brand because the new offering is better, magical in the way you can make it magical, then you've dramatically increased not just your market share but your perception as well.

Nike and Apple sometimes fit into the second category--the iPhone and some of Nike's clothing options are clearly different/better. Starbucks did it when they launched their ice cream.

On the other hand, there are literally thousands of organizations (including non-profits) that head down the path of mediocrity by rushing to offer 57 varieties, merely to please today's shareholders, merely because they can.



More Recent Articles

[You're getting this note because you subscribed to Seth Godin's blog.]

Don't want to get this email anymore? Click the link below to unsubscribe.




Your requested content delivery powered by FeedBlitz, LLC, 9 Thoreau Way, Sudbury, MA 01776, USA. +1.978.776.9498

 

miercuri, 28 martie 2012

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis


"Healthwreck": Obamacare May Go Down Entirely; Medicaid Funding in Question; Justice Scalia Joked Reading Entire Bill Would be "Cruel and Unusual Punishment"; Wrecking Operation or Salvage Job?

Posted: 28 Mar 2012 03:16 PM PDT

Weak arguments presented by "team Obama" lawyers supporting Obama's healthcare legislation took a beating yesterday, and the beating continued even more so today.

Please consider Day 3: ObamaCare at the Supreme Court by the Illinois Policy Institute.
Today was the final marathon session of oral arguments over ObamaCare. It began this morning with the question of what to do with the rest of the law if the individual mandate is struck down, a very real possibility after yesterday's hearing.

On this issue, both sides agree that if the mandate falls, at least some of the other provisions must fall with it. Most of the Justices seemed skeptical that the entire law should be thrown out, but where to draw the line was a question the Court was clearly struggling with.

Some of the justices hinted that the difficulty in drawing that line could mean disaster for the whole law. Others noted that the Court has never struck down the heart of a statute but left an empty shell. At one point, Justice Kennedy expressed his concern that it might be worse to pick and choose which parts to strike down than to just overturn the whole law. Justice Scalia joked that forcing the Court to go through the law's thousands of pages and provisions one by one would be cruel and unusual punishment.

The day ended with the question of whether the President can force states to expand their Medicaid programs to millions of new enrollees. As I explained earlier this week, Medicaid expansions have already failed the most vulnerable populations in Illinois, and ObamaCare is only going to make the problem worse.

The four liberal justices appeared highly critical of the state's argument that conditioning pre-existing Medicaid funding on new expansions is too coercive. The conservative justices also expressed some skepticism that the forced expansion was unconstitutional, though they did press the administration to define the outer limits of that power.
Justices Ask if Health Law Is Viable Without Mandate

The New York Times reports Justices Ask if Health Law Is Viable Without Mandate.
On the third and final day of Supreme Court arguments over President Obama's health care overhaul law, several justices on Wednesday indicated a reluctance to pick and choose among the law's other provisions should the requirement that most Americans have health insurance be struck down.

The questions from the justices indicated that at least some of them were considering either striking down just the requirement, often called the individual mandate, or the entire law.

Paul D. Clement, representing 26 states challenging the law, urged the court to overturn the entire law. Edwin S. Kneedler, a deputy solicitor general, took a middle ground, suggesting that the court remove the mandate and only a couple of other provisions.

The court separated the day's arguments into two sessions. After the morning session, which focused on the effect of overturning the mandate, the afternoon's hearing dealt with the law's expansion of Medicaid, part of its attempt to reduce the number of Americans without health insurance.

In the second argument, the court's more conservative justices expressed concern that the law's Medicaid expansion was unduly coercive to states.

"My approach would be to say that if you take the heart out of this statute," Justice Antonin Scalia said, "the statute's gone."

Justice Scalia, who suggested that the whole law would have to go, appeared to go further than some of the other justices, but many of them expressed skepticism that the rest of the law could remain intact if the court ruled the mandate to be unconstitutional.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called the court's task, should the key provision fall, a choice between "a wrecking operation" and "a salvage job."
Wrecking Operation or Salvage Job?

There is nothing of merit to salvage in Obamacare. Even if there was, the Supreme Court should not have to read through thousands of pages to find it.

The only things to "salvage" if key provisions are struck down, are Obama's inflated ego and his ability to say he passed healthcare legislation.

Memo to Nancy Pelosi

Hello Nancy: It seems the Supreme Court does not want to read the bill to find out what's in it.

Sorry Team Obama, your bill was more like "Healthwreck" than "Healthcare".

By the way, I have to ask: If the Supreme court strikes Obamacare, does it strike any provisions of Romneycare that passed in Massachusetts?

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List


Bill Gross Predicts QE3 and Operation Mortgage Twist

Posted: 28 Mar 2012 12:49 PM PDT

PIMCO founder and co-CIO Bill Gross spoke with Bloomberg Television's Margaret Brennan today, telling Bloomberg TV that the Fed will likely shift focus to mortgage securities to keep borrowing rates low when Operation Twist ends in June.



Link of video does not play: Bill Gross on Pimco ETF Ticker Change, Bonds, Fed

Partial Transcript
On Gross's view that we may see a sign from Bernanke in April that QE3 will be rolled out:

"I think [Chairman Bernanke] is very satisfied…I think the Fed is outcomes-oriented. They want an outcome in terms of a higher stock market, in terms of housing starts and lower unemployment. What [Bernanke] said on Monday, in terms of the employment, he suggested that up until now, we've done very well in terms of reducing unemployment but it'll be tougher going forward if only because of structural impediments that he outlined. Going forward, he's looking at jobs, at unemployment and the housing markets. You know, future QEs will the outcome-oriented type of strategy which seeks to provide jobs and provide higher housing prices and housing starts to continue on."

On the tool that Gross thinks the Fed might deploy in April:

"I have a sense that they'll continue with the Operation Twist, but not necessarily in terms of buying longer-term bonds and selling shorter dated Treasuries. I think that's basically been played out and the pension market itself in terms of liability structure has been damaged to some extent by lower 30-year yields. I think [Bernanke] will try to do is Twist in the mortgage market. Basically, buy current coupon mortgages in agency spaces and then basically Twist by repo-ing out the Treasuries that they currently own in short-term space. So, you know, a twist on another Twist I suppose, going forward."

On the ticker change for PIMCO's new ETF (to BOND):

"It is easy to recognize. I told my wife about it last night and in the middle of the night she started saying something about James. I hope she was referring to the ETF but you get the point… It's more easily recognizable. In this business you want to go with a ticker and a sticker that people can recognize and pass on to their neighbors."

On Gross's warnings to investors about management fees:

"We've noted that for a long time. This is simply a cautionary element that suggests that when interest rates come down close to zero and when the discounting of those interest rates and equity prices and other financial assets produce a perspective of 4-5% total return for the combined asset class is in our view, then it's incumbent upon a manager to keep expenses low and to alert investors as to the importance of expenses relative to lower returns in this new financial world that we speak to."

On investor appetite for PIMCO's new ETF:

"We wanted to be able to give investors a choice. We recognized the tremendous importance of the retail distribution network for PIMCO and for the Total Return Fund, which is now $253 billion. Thank you very much, we don't to discourage that. But there are investors in the $10,000-$20,000 category, who find it difficult to buy PIMCO Total Return. We thought this would be a good way to do this in the actively managed ETF space. By the way, we're outperforming the market in the first month or so by a good 200 basis points."

On PIMCO's appetite for Treasuries:

"We have an average appetite in terms of duration space. And to the extent that five-year Treasuries, which are being issued today and seven-year Treasuries tomorrow - they reflect a relatively firm commitment on the part of PIMCO, which reflects a relatively firm commitment on the part of the Fed that they'll keep interest rates firm until late 2014. Bernanke mentioned yesterday that that wasn't a commitment in total but it's subject to a relatively slow economy and contained inflation, which is what we see now. A five-year security at slightly above 1%, to our way of thinking, as it rolls down the yield curve and becomes a four-year, produces close to a 2% return and is that a super, deeper attractive type of return? Well it's up to history. No, it's not….but it's certainly better than nothing."

"We have reduced our Treasury commitment slightly. From the standpoint of duration, we have average duration of an average maturity across the board but we have been reducing Treasuries and investing in shorter duration corporates and rather heavily in the agency mortgage market. You can get, with a Fanny or a Freddie coupon that is a 4% coupon, you can realize 3% as opposed to the 2% or 1% - I mentioned in terms of five-year space. We're really focusing on spread and the lack of volatility going forward for the next two to three years which is really the domain of 30-year and 15-year mortgages."

On finding investing opportunities in developing countries:

"Where is that attractive growth? Countries like Brazil, countries in Asia, China-related of course. These countries don't come without risk. They don't come without a rather volatile situation in terms of inflation or potential currency disorder. If an equity investor is looking for growth, you want to go developing as opposed to developed. Even a bond investor, if you are looking for higher real rates such as in Brazil, you want to go to developing as opposed to developed."

On buying hedges against fat tail possibilities:

"What we're suggesting now is not an extremely negative possibility. That would be the fat left tail. But also the fat right tail, we've had a fat right tail in equity markets for the past 3-6 months…On the left-hand side, you know, the bi-model possibility in terms of a downturn are simply a reflection of the high degree of leverage, the high degree of debt and the policy coordination which may or may not be helpful in terms of producing this smooth, rather bell-shaped mode or median we're all used to."
No Real-World Point to Mortgage Twist

Note that Bill Gross' call on QE3 is not what he thinks the Fed should do, rather his take on what the Fed will do.



click on chart for sharper image

Mortgage-rate table from Bloomberg.

30-year mortgages are below 4% and 15-year fixed mortgage rates are near 3%. Other than goosing financial markets that are already back to nose-bleed level (if not outright bubble territory), there is no real-world point to an "Operation Twist" for mortgages.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List


Another Weaker Than Expected Durable Goods Order Portends Weaker Than Expected GDP

Posted: 28 Mar 2012 09:52 AM PDT

Inquiring minds are investigating Trends in Durable Goods Orders.

Key Durable Goods Numbers

  1. February orders increased 2.2 percent but economists expected a 3 percent rise.
  2. January durable goods orders fell 3.6 percent.
  3. Orders for non-defense capital goods excluding aircraft rose 1.2 percent. Analysts' expected of a 2.0 percent gain.
  4. Non-defense capital goods' orders fell 5.2 percent in January.
  5. Excluding transportation which had an unsustainable sharp increase in civilian plane orders, durable goods orders were only up 1.6%. 
  6. Boeing received 237 aircraft orders in February, up from 150 in January, accounting for the 3.9 percent jump in transportation orders.
  7. Motor vehicles and parts orders rose 1.6%.
  8. Inventories of manufactured durable goods rose for the twenty-six consecutive month and are now at the highest level since the series was first published on a NAICS basis in 1992

High inventories and falling demand for non-defense capital goods' orders does not portend well for future GDP growth.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List


Train Wreck for Obama's Healthcare Mandate; What Obama's Lawyers Couldn't Answer; Obamacare Going Down the Tubes?

Posted: 27 Mar 2012 11:47 PM PDT

Tuesday was a rough day for the Obama administration in oral arguments in the Supreme Court over mandated insurance.

The Illinois Policy Institute comments on What Obama's Lawyers Couldn't Answer.
If the government can force you to buy health insurance, what can't they force you to do or buy?

That was the question posed by a number of Supreme Court justices throughout today's oral argument on the constitutionality of ObamaCare. And that was the question President Obama's lawyers couldn't seem to answer.

That question didn't seem to bother the four liberal justices, who appeared ready to uphold the law. At one point, Justice Breyer suggested that the government could force you to buy things such as cellphones and burial insurance. The remaining justices, however, appeared highly skeptical of the government's argument. Justice Kennedy and Chief Justice Roberts, largely believed to be the "swing votes" in this case, pressed the administration's lawyer hard for any kind of limit to the President's theory.

Chief Justice Roberts harshly noted that the type of insurance ObamaCare forces people to buy was completely different from the type of health care these people actually use. Justice Kennedy countered the administration's argument by saying that the government will say that every market is "unique."

The fact that the Obama administration didn't have a good answer for these questions could spell doom for the President's signature legislation. That doesn't mean the law will ultimately be struck down. After all, the government needs to convince only one of the conservative justices. But today's hearing illustrated just how uncomfortable they are with a law that, as Justice Kennedy proclaimed, "changes the relationship of the federal government to the individual in a very fundamental way."
Train Wreck for Obama

The Hill reports Rough day for Obama health law: Kennedy among mandate skeptics
The Obama administration's health insurance mandate faced severe skepticism Tuesday from conservatives on the Supreme Court during a pivotal morning of oral arguments on the landmark legislation.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court's most consistent swing vote, repeatedly voiced doubts about the mandate's constitutionality, suggesting he could side with the court's four staunch conservatives to overturn President Obama's healthcare law.

"That changes the relationship of the federal government to the individual in a very fundamental way," Kennedy said.

Jeffrey Toobin, a lawyer and legal analyst who writes about legal topics for The New Yorker called Tuesday a "train wreck for the Obama administration."

"This law looks like it's going to be struck down. I'm telling you, all of the predictions, including mine, that the justices would not have a problem with this law were wrong," Toobin said Tuesday on CNN. "I think this law is in grave, grave trouble."

Supporters of the law had seen Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia as possible supporters of the mandate in addition to Kennedy, but the two offered aggressive questions during the two hours of arguments.The debate hinged largely on whether the mandate requires people to enter the market for health insurance or regulates the market for healthcare. Verrilli argued that everyone either uses healthcare or is at risk of unexpectedly ending up in the market for healthcare services. The mandate simply ensures that those services are paid for, he said.

Scalia wasn't buying it.

"I don't agree with you that the relevant market here is health care. You're not regulating health care. You're regulating insurance," Scalia said. "It's the insurance market that you're addressing and you're saying that some people who are not in it must be in it."

Following an exchange between Verrilli and Scalia, Justice Sonia Sotomayor spent a full two minutes outlining the three main elements of the Justice Department's position, then she asked Verrilli, "Which of these three is your argument? Are all of them your argument?"

Roberts pressed Verrilli to explain where Congress's power to issue new mandates would stop. The lack of a "limiting principle" has dogged the Justice Department's case throughout the process, prompting one lower-court judge to question whether Congress could also require citizens to buy broccoli, because a healthy diet would cut down on healthcare costs.

The Supreme Court justices revived the broccoli analogy and ran through several more, asking whether the government could mandate the purchase of cellphones, gym memberships, cars, prescription drugs or burial insurance.

Conservative judges in lower courts have upheld the mandate on the grounds that healthcare is unique, due to the risk of accidents and the nature of its cost-shifting. Although other goods also get more expensive when people don't buy them, there are few parallels to the requirement to treat uninsured patients.

The mandate is also considered essential to effectively implementing other parts of the healthcare law. Provisions requiring insurance companies to cover sick people, and prohibiting them from charging those patients higher prices, could dramatically raise the price of insurance if not counterbalanced with the mandate.

"That seems to me a self-created problem" that could be solved by not imposing those regulations, Scalia said.
Senator Lee Says 5-4 Ruling Against Individual Mandate

Senator Mike Lee, Republican, Utah Expects 5-4 Ruling Against Individual Mandate
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) predicted Tuesday that the Supreme Court will rule against President Obama's signature healthcare legislation and declare the individual mandate unconstitutional.

"Based upon the questions from the bench, I am predicting that there's likely to be a 5-4 ruling in this case. I tend to think it's a 5-4 ruling holding that the individual mandate is unconstitutional," said Lee on Fox Business Tuesday.

Lee said that he sensed Kennedy, who is considered the traditional swing vote on the court, appeared "very skeptical" about the Justice Department's argument in defense of the mandate.

Lee, who clerked for Supreme Court Justice ‪Samuel Alito ‬on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Court, also noted that today's hearing was uncharacteristically "lively."
Interview With Senator Lee



Link if video does not play: Senator Lee on Healthcare

The Illinois Policy Institute asks the correct question "If the government can force you to buy health insurance, what can't they force you to do or buy?"

Regardless of whether or not one thinks we need national healthcare, legislation ought to pass strict constitutional muster. Obamacare doesn't, and thus deserves to be flushed down the toilet. Congress can try again.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List