Ashtead Share Discussion Threads

[bracke] 01/11/2022 15:24

Good day disc0

US markets didn't like the 'good' data but so far AHT has not followed them down.

[disc0dave45] 01/11/2022 12:34

Good afternoon Mr bThese chuffing gaps!

[bracke] 01/11/2022 12:20

A gap up on open to jump above the upper trend line of the ascending wedge to just short of testing 4716. The share price requires another buying day to move above 4716 and consolidate the move up. Without a move above 4716 the probability is a drop back to fill the gap.

AHT DAILY

[bracke] 31/10/2022 18:32

High volume today 2.65 million.

[disc0dave45] 31/10/2022 16:57

Mr bNaturally!

[bracke] 31/10/2022 14:14

Thank you disc0

I hope it is of some use apart from being pretty.

[disc0dave45] 31/10/2022 12:04

Thanks for your analysis Mr b and your pretty chart :)

[bracke] 31/10/2022 10:49

As can be seen from the daily chart below the share price is trending upward.
Having crossed resistance at 4372 the target is to test the last major high at 4716.

AHT DAILY




Viewing the hourly chart shows that having broken above 4372 the share price rose to 4500 on 22nd Oct since when it has moved sideways within a rising wedge. Buying is now required to take the share price above the upper wedge line (currently at 4575) and hold it there but beware of false breaks. If selling occurs what was strong resistance at 4372 should provide good support, it would be disappointing if it didn't and a drop to the lower wedge line is then probable.

AHT HOURLY

[bracke] 30/10/2022 15:33

Agreed....I'm feeling dizzy.

[disc0dave45] 30/10/2022 14:36

Good day Mr bThink we are going around in circles :)

[bracke] 30/10/2022 14:05

Good day disc0

At the danger of going round in circles with this....

Looking at the historical inflation data I posted there were numerous occasions when inflation was under 2% so the FED would be tasked with bringing it back to 2.00. If the target was 3% the FED would intervene earlier i.e. as soon as it dropped below 3%.

Bearing in mind the 20 year average was 3.2% when the target was 2% and during that time there were plenty of readings below 2%. If the target was 3% FED intervention would mean fewer readings at the lower levels and hence a higher 20 year average.

[disc0dave45] 29/10/2022 17:17

Some decent Q3 numbers from H&E which the market clearly liked too with the share price going up nearly 12%.
Their outlook sounds encouraging for AHT:

“Barber (CEO) offered an encouraging perspective on the equipment rental industry.
"We expect favorable industry fundamentals to prevail through the close of 2022 and into 2023,” he said. “This promising outlook is supported by a backlog of projects in the non-residential construction and industrial end markets that continue to sustain strong customer demand. In addition, global supply chains continue to constrict the availability of rental equipment. These factors reinforce a fundamentally sound business environment, leading to solid fleet utilization and favorable pricing trends. As early as 2023, we expect to benefit from the onset of numerous infrastructure projects, as well as other construction projects focused on the expansion of U.S. manufacturing capabilities and renewable energy. Collectively, these programs are expected to provide greater visibility to emerging construction opportunities."

[disc0dave45] 29/10/2022 12:44

Another one filtered

[fenners66] 28/10/2022 20:27

US markets going great guns today.

[disc0dave45] 28/10/2022 19:11

Sorry but I was referring to your "4.2%" peak during the 20 years when the average was 3.2%, so the higher period of 4.2% inflation didn't result in higher unemployment etc.Conversely inflation too low can also cause higher unemployment, my point being that targeting 3% instead of 2% aligns with a period of sustained growth and low unemployment - so why the obsession with 2% and everyone follows like a bunch of sheep yet no country's economic metrics etc are anywhere near the same.

[bracke] 28/10/2022 18:54

Because the inflation rate was no where near the current levels.

[disc0dave45] 28/10/2022 16:22

"A higher LRA will result in demand for higher pay and likely higher interest rates"It hadn't for the previous 20 years!

[bracke] 28/10/2022 14:14

"Has the FED learned from history ?
or is the lesson that having a US recession does not matter?"
=============================================================

It appears not. The FED has a history of reacting too late and then over reacting.

A recession certainly matters to the government and according to the following also matters to the FED:

'The Federal Reserve Act mandates that the Federal Reserve conduct monetary policy "so as to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates." Even though the act lists three distinct goals of monetary policy, the Fed's mandate for monetary policy is commonly known as the dual mandate. The reason is that an economy in which people who want to work either have a job or are likely to find one fairly quickly and in which the price level (meaning a broad measure of the price of goods and services purchased by consumers) is stable creates the conditions needed for interest rates to settle at moderate levels.'

The problem arises when one of the two elements of the dual mandate cannot be achieved without detriment to the other.

"Why 2%?, long run average is 3.2%…..it̵7;s all above my pay grade tbh."
========================================================================

If the long run average (LRA) is 3.2% then inflation has been below and above that figure. If 3% is made the new LRA average the probability is that the LRA average will increase by approx 1% to 4.2%. A higher LRA will result in demand for higher pay and likely higher interest rates. It would also affect exports and increase balance of payments deficit.

So.......will the FED 'bottle it'?

[disc0dave45] 28/10/2022 13:27

Good day Mr bNo economist but what's the impact on employment and price stability if the target is 3%?, it seems to me with low unemployment and GDP growth (Q3 +2.6% forecast was 2.4%), that the risks of pushing inflation too low is more detrimental in terms of a full blown recession, higher unemployment and increased instability in prices than aiming 1% higher.Why 2%?, long run average is 3.2%.....it's all above my pay grade tbh.

[fenners66] 28/10/2022 13:19

Has the FED learned from history ?
or is the lesson that having a US recession does not matter?

[bracke] 28/10/2022 12:10

Good day disc0

The more I read about the US situation the more it appears to depend on how determined the FED are to achieving 2% inflation and are prepared to accept a deep recession.. The market appears to think that the FED will 'bottle it' and is continually front running the expectation of a FED pivot.

In the meantime we trade what we see.

[disc0dave45] 27/10/2022 21:50

"Which begs the question 'how far into the future?"Hopefully 12 months or so, can't see too much more bad news to come......he said with everything crossed and hound included in that.I see caterpillar beat expectations.

[bracke] 27/10/2022 14:41

The US mid term elections occur mostly on the 8th November. Which is something else to consider.

"Interesting times and hopefully one that provides future prosperity."
=======================================================================

Which begs the question 'how far into the future?'

[disc0dave45] 27/10/2022 13:02

Good afternoon Mr bThanks for that.As previously posted their 20 year (or 19 year can't remember) average was 3.2% so no surprise they will move the 2% target (their 10 year average inflation rate I believe).Interesting times and hopefully one that provides future prosperity.