On Jan 16, 12:01*am, "RonB" wrote:
Is there a shortage of MDF? *I have been in three of the big box stores in
Wichita and not a sheet is available. *A Lowe's employee told me they have
been out for weeks.

Anywhere else?

RonB

Yup, my main supplier in London,ON is out of 1/2" and 1" MDF, has been
for weeks.

You'd think they could just grow more termites...

Clint

"RonB" wrote in message
...
Is there a shortage of MDF? I have been in three of the big box stores in
Wichita and not a sheet is available. A Lowe's employee told me they have
been out for weeks.

Anywhere else?

RonB

Is there a shortage of MDF? I have been in three of the big box stores in
Wichita and not a sheet is available. A Lowe's employee told me they have
been out for weeks.

Anywhere else?

RonB

Clint wrote:

You'd think they could just grow more termites...

Clint

"RonB" wrote in message
...

Is there a shortage of MDF? I have been in three of the big box
stores in Wichita and not a sheet is available. A Lowe's employee
told me they have been out for weeks.

Anywhere else?

RonB


Fine lumber has it in 1/4, 1/2, 5/8, 3/4, and 1". All double refined
except the 5/8, which is single refined. They are a little low on 1/4",
but they have bundles of the rest.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

On Jan 16, 12:01 am, "RonB" wrote:
Is there a shortage of MDF? I have been in three of the big box stores in
Wichita and not a sheet is available. A Lowe's employee told me they have
been out for weeks.

Anywhere else?

RonB

When you hear about nothing in the news but closing lumber mills it
makes you wonder about how they can run out with so much apparently
surplus milling capacity

Brent
Ottawa On

"RonB" wrote in message
...
Is there a shortage of MDF? I have been in three of the big box stores in
Wichita and not a sheet is available. A Lowe's employee told me they have
been out for weeks.

Anywhere else?

RonB

*All* sheet goods in my local orange borg are low. Lots of previously
covered floor space now visible.

jc

"Robatoy" wrote in message
On Jan 16, 12:01 am, "RonB" wrote:
Is there a shortage of MDF? I have been in three of the big box stores in
Wichita and not a sheet is available. A Lowe's employee told me they have
been out for weeks.

Anywhere else?

RonB

Yup, my main supplier in London,ON is out of 1/2" and 1" MDF, has been
for weeks.

Still getting it, in dribbles, here, but the rumor is that the mdf shortage
is apparently due to a world wide shortage of methanol.

It's always something ... go to pour a foundation, suddenly concrete,
readily available last week, is in short supply; trim a house, suddenly
sheet goods, heretofore plentiful, are hard to find.

Somebody want to pay me to quit so we can just skip all this shortage ****?


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"RonB" wrote in message
...
Is there a shortage of MDF? I have been in three of the big box stores in
Wichita and not a sheet is available. A Lowe's employee told me they have
been out for weeks.

Anywhere else?

RonB


From what I have been hearing, Lowe's sales have been way off especially in
December and they may be cutting back on the value of their inventory.

It's not just Lowes....

The building industry is in the dumps and heading
down even more in the coming months.

Myrtle Beach, S.C. has more than 9,000 condo's on
the market. That's new sales, not resales.

I have read that Miami area is even worse.

Construction guys are in a real jamb here.


Leon wrote:


From what I have been hearing, Lowe's sales have been way off especially in
December and they may be cutting back on the value of their inventory.

Hummm...maybe its time to start looking for a beach condog.

Skip
www.ShopFileR.com


"Pat Barber" wrote in message
...
It's not just Lowes....

The building industry is in the dumps and heading
down even more in the coming months.

Myrtle Beach, S.C. has more than 9,000 condo's on
the market. That's new sales, not resales.

I have read that Miami area is even worse.

Construction guys are in a real jamb here.


Leon wrote:


From what I have been hearing, Lowe's sales have been way off especially
in December and they may be cutting back on the value of their inventory.

"Pat Barber" wrote in message

It's not just Lowes....

The building industry is in the dumps and heading
down even more in the coming months.

Myrtle Beach, S.C. has more than 9,000 condo's on
the market. That's new sales, not resales.

I have read that Miami area is even worse.

Construction guys are in a real jamb here.

According to that scenario, there should be plenty of mdf/building materials
available, eh?

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Skip Williams" wrote

Hummm...maybe its time to start looking for a beach condog.

I wouldn't count on it ... the prices in many areas don't seem to be
dropping to match the media's gleeful 'doom and gloom'.

Kept hearing how bad the housing market in Hot Springs was back in December
.... until, that is, I started looking for "comps" to get an idea of a
properties value, and was seeing what I would consider high prices, even
down here in Houston where the market hasn't been all that bad.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Pat Barber wrote:
It's not just Lowes....

The building industry is in the dumps and heading
down even more in the coming months.

Myrtle Beach, S.C. has more than 9,000 condo's on
the market. That's new sales, not resales.

I have read that Miami area is even worse.

Construction guys are in a real jamb here.

But I'd expect that to result in a downturn in building which would
make materials a glut on the market.

Leon wrote:


From what I have been hearing, Lowe's sales have been way off
especially in December and they may be cutting back on the value of
their inventory.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Thar seems to be the case up here also. It's like a giant
game of chicken between the sellers and the buyers.

The down turn here ain't from the media, it's for real.

I understand other areas seem to be doing just fine.

The market got way overheated here for alsmost 5 years
and all that's coming home to roost.

It will swing the other way at some point.
It always has.


Swingman wrote:


Kept hearing how bad the housing market in Hot Springs was back in December
... until, that is, I started looking for "comps" to get an idea of a
properties value, and was seeing what I would consider high prices, even
down here in Houston where the market hasn't been all that bad.

You would think, but I know that not
to be true.

The quality of the plywood I have seen
lately continues to spiral downward,
which I didn't think was possible.

We have seen building materials costs
continue to fall in certain products.

OSB has really fell through the bottom.



Swingman wrote:



According to that scenario, there should be plenty
of mdf/building materials available, eh?

"Lew Hodgett" wrote \

As far as the media is concerned, what do you see as a "vested
interest" in the current news?

uh huh. my friend ... ain't gonna bite on that.

Instead:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...-earnings.html

Read the last two paragraphs "carefully" ... typical of the "doom and
gloom", despite the reality of the situation.

.... and "reality" can be what you report it to be, providing you harp on the
negative long enough.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"charles gresens" wrote in message
...

Lew Hodgett wrote:
"Swingman" wrote:

In this case the media has a vested interest in doom and gloom ...
until
after 11/08. Take a look at the DJ five year average:

The performance of the market has left me totally under whelmed since
01/01/00.

There are some exceptions.

Certainly are -- and, of course, "since Jan 2000" includes the '01/'02
period--if consolidated at that time then reentered markets beginning in
early 2002, some comparisons would be(*)

Since Since
2000 2003
DJIA +15% +60%
SP500 0 70
Russ 2000 55 100
NASDAQ -35 100
Oil/Gas 215 240

_I'm_ certainly not complaining...

(*) These are approximate taken from www.marke****ch.com graphing tool
between 1/1/00 and 1/1/03 thru 12/31/07.

--

"dpb" wrote:

_I'm_ certainly not complaining...

Look at GE for the last 7+ years.

Was about $65 when Welch retired.

Got as low as low $20s, has struggled to get back in the $30s, never
has made $40.

IMHO, not a stellar track record for a first rate company.

As I said, some winners, some not.

Lew
..

"Swingman" wrote:

uh huh. my friend ... ain't gonna bite on that.

Instead:


http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...-earnings.html

Read the last two paragraphs "carefully" ... typical of the "doom
and
gloom", despite the reality of the situation.

Pretty straight forward if you ask me.

AKA: "That's nice, but you can do better".

Not my kind of motivation, but have seen enough of it in corporate
life to recognise it.

Lew

Lew Hodgett wrote:
"dpb" wrote:

_I'm_ certainly not complaining...

Look at GE for the last 7+ years.
....

I've never held GE...but judging "the market" on the basis of one stock
is more than a little absurd...

--

It's always something ... go to pour a foundation, suddenly concrete,
readily available last week, is in short supply; trim a house, suddenly
sheet goods, heretofore plentiful, are hard to find.

Somebody want to pay me to quit so we can just skip all this shortage
****?


I would pay you but there is a shortage of money now :-P

"dpb" wrote:

I've never held GE...but judging "the market" on the basis of one
stock
is more than a little absurd...


You want an argument, change the subject.

Simply an observation of a pretty decent company.

Personally, had much better results from '93 thru 2000 than from 2001
to date, but that's life in the market.

Lew

On Jan 17, 12:55*am, dpb wrote:
Lew Hodgett wrote:
"dpb" wrote:

_I'm_ certainly not complaining...

Look at GE for the last 7+ years.

...

I've never held GE...but judging "the market" on the basis of one stock
is more than a little absurd...

--

You mean like Apple Computer when I got in at $ 60.00? AKA The
market's doing great!

"Swingman" wrote in message
...
"Pendulums swing, like pendulums do ..."

In this case the media has a vested interest in doom and gloom ... until
after 11/08. Take a look at the DJ five year average:

http://money.cnn.com/quote/chart/cha...mit1=Ref resh

Terrible ain't it?

IOW, don't believe a damn thing you see or read, they're all lying to
further their agenda's, and they ALL have an agenda.


I was watching Matt interview that wild and crazy stock guy, Jim Cramer, on
the Today show this morning. Finally he brought up a question and was
correctly answered. Matt asks, isn't the media partly to blame for the bad
feelings and results of people being afraid to spend money because of the
recession. He had to ask this twice but Jim finally answered correctly,
YES.
The problems we have today largely stem from misrepresentation, false
information, and deception.

It ain't "News" unless it is exciting. It ain't exciting unless we add some
BS to get your attention.

The environmentalists like to throw false figures out there to get the
uneducated, and apathetic wound up and excited. Recently they whined about
British Airways burning 20K gallons of fuel to make Trans Atlantic flights
with no passengers. That may be true but what they were really complaining
about was the amount of pollution. They claimed IIRC 400 Tons of carbon
pollution. I did the math using their figures and find that burning 20K
gallons of fuel that weights less than 160,000 pounds creates 800,000 pounds
of waste carbon according to their claims. So burning 1 lb of jet fuel
creates 5 lbs of carbon? Nope!

To keep from being burned by the media and while managing your financial
dealings, verify for your self because most everything you hear is a sales
gimmick of some sort.

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
...


The performance of the market has left me totally under whelmed since
01/01/00.


I would say you were not paying close attention.

It has done quite well beginning in March of 03 for about 12 months. Again
in July of 06 till July of 07 it did quite well,

Over all the Dow Industrials alone is up from about 7,900 to 14,0000
spanning the period of March 2003 to July of 2007. That is a 78% increase
in just over 4 years, averaging an 18% gain every year during that period.
From March 2003 to "Now" it is up about 60%, bringing the average down to,
but still a very healthy yearly average gain of 12.5%.

What would impress you, a better money manager perhaps? ;~)

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
...

"dpb" wrote:

_I'm_ certainly not complaining...

Look at GE for the last 7+ years.

Was about $65 when Welch retired.

Got as low as low $20s, has struggled to get back in the $30s, never
has made $40.

IMHO, not a stellar track record for a first rate company.

As I said, some winners, some not.

Lew
.


You cannot judge the "market" by "a" poorly performing stock. If you want
to see a good example, look at Google.

In article , "Leon" wrote:

The environmentalists like to throw false figures out there to get the
uneducated, and apathetic wound up and excited. Recently they whined about
British Airways burning 20K gallons of fuel to make Trans Atlantic flights
with no passengers. That may be true but what they were really complaining
about was the amount of pollution. They claimed IIRC 400 Tons of carbon
pollution.

Pollution in general, or carbon pollution specifically? It makes a difference.

I did the math using their figures and find that burning 20K
gallons of fuel that weights less than 160,000 pounds

A *lot* less. Figure somewhere around 6 lb per gallon.

creates 800,000 pounds
of waste carbon according to their claims. So burning 1 lb of jet fuel
creates 5 lbs of carbon? Nope!

Depends on what's being measured. Carbon, no. Carbon DIOXIDE, nearly. Total
combustion products, probably.

Principal component of jet fuel is n-octane, C8H16 (molecular weight 112).
Complete combustion of same: C8H16 + 24O2 - 8CO2 + 8H2O.
Molecular weight of CO2 is 44, and there are eight of them (352 total, or
almost 3x the weight of the fuel).

Molecular weight of H2O is 18 (144 total). Thus, mass of combustion products
is 352 + 144 = 496, which is about 4.5x the mass of the fuel.

Considering that high-temperature combustion in air also produces some NO2 and
NO3, it's likely that the total mass of all combustion products probably
really is close to five times the weight of the fuel. Of course, more than a
third of that is water vapor (read: cirrus clouds), and it takes a special
kind of mind to regard clouds as pollution.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
et...
In article , "Leon"
wrote:

The environmentalists like to throw false figures out there to get the
uneducated, and apathetic wound up and excited. Recently they whined
about
British Airways burning 20K gallons of fuel to make Trans Atlantic flights
with no passengers. That may be true but what they were really
complaining
about was the amount of pollution. They claimed IIRC 400 Tons of carbon
pollution.

Pollution in general, or carbon pollution specifically? It makes a
difference.

Carbon Specifically.





I did the math using their figures and find that burning 20K
gallons of fuel that weights less than 160,000 pounds

A *lot* less. Figure somewhere around 6 lb per gallon.

I was giving them the benefit of the doubt and used the weight of water. I
knew jet fuel was lighter.



creates 800,000 pounds
of waste carbon according to their claims. So burning 1 lb of jet fuel
creates 5 lbs of carbon? Nope!

Depends on what's being measured. Carbon, no. Carbon DIOXIDE, nearly.
Total
combustion products, probably.

Carbon, "not" Carbon Dioxide

Again, they tell you what will benefit their cause the most, correct or not
correct.

In article , "Leon" wrote:

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
...


The performance of the market has left me totally under whelmed since
01/01/00.


I would say you were not paying close attention.

It has done quite well beginning in March of 03 for about 12 months. Again
in July of 06 till July of 07 it did quite well,

Who's not paying attention here? He said "since 01/01/00". Not "since March of
03".

DJIA close on 31 Dec 1999: 11,497
DJIA close yesterday: 12,466

That's 8.4% in just over eight years, for an annualized rate of return right
at a whopping ONE PERCENT. After adjusting for inflation, stocks have been a
horrendous money *loser* "since 01/01/00".

Over all the Dow Industrials alone is up from about 7,900 to 14,0000
spanning the period of March 2003 to July of 2007.

Conveniently ignoring the 61% *loss* between 14 Jan 2000 and 9 Oct 2002...

That is a 78% increase
in just over 4 years, averaging an 18% gain every year during that period.

A 78% increase in 4-1/3 years is a 14.4% annual rate, not 18%. (You're not
taking compounding into account.)

From March 2003 to "Now" it is up about 60%, bringing the average down to,
but still a very healthy yearly average gain of 12.5%.

57% in 4 yrs 10 mos = 9.8% annually, not 12.5. (Compounding again.)

What would impress you, a better money manager perhaps? ;~)

For starters:
- addressing the point raised
- not cherry-picking time periods
- correctly calculating annual rate of return

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , "Leon" wrote:

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. net...
In article , "Leon"
wrote:

The environmentalists like to throw false figures out there to get the
uneducated, and apathetic wound up and excited. Recently they whined
about
British Airways burning 20K gallons of fuel to make Trans Atlantic flights
with no passengers. That may be true but what they were really
complaining
about was the amount of pollution. They claimed IIRC 400 Tons of carbon
pollution.

Pollution in general, or carbon pollution specifically? It makes a
difference.

Carbon Specifically.

In that case... they're either liars, or idiots, or both.

I did the math using their figures and find that burning 20K
gallons of fuel that weights less than 160,000 pounds

A *lot* less. Figure somewhere around 6 lb per gallon.

I was giving them the benefit of the doubt and used the weight of water. I
knew jet fuel was lighter.

creates 800,000 pounds
of waste carbon according to their claims. So burning 1 lb of jet fuel
creates 5 lbs of carbon? Nope!

Depends on what's being measured. Carbon, no. Carbon DIOXIDE, nearly.
Total combustion products, probably.

Carbon, "not" Carbon Dioxide

They're probably considering carbon dioxide to be "carbon pollution".

Again, they tell you what will benefit their cause the most, correct or not
correct.

Agreed. Only questions in my mind are whether they know their figures are
wrong, or not -- and whether they care. My point was simply to illustrate that
the mass of the pollution generated can indeed be considerably greater than
the mass of the fuel being burned, because it combines with a huge amount of
atmospheric oxygen.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
news
In article , "Leon"
wrote:

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
...


The performance of the market has left me totally under whelmed since
01/01/00.


I would say you were not paying close attention.

It has done quite well beginning in March of 03 for about 12 months.
Again
in July of 06 till July of 07 it did quite well,

Who's not paying attention here? He said "since 01/01/00". Not "since
March of
03".

Good God DOUG! Is March 03 NOT SINCE 01/01/00????????????


DJIA close on 31 Dec 1999: 11,497
DJIA close yesterday: 12,466

And now you chang the game to suit your whims. 12/31/99 IS NOT since
01/01/00



I cleaned out my blocked senders list but it gets anotther familiar name
today.

"Leon" wrote:

What would impress you, a better money manager perhaps? ;~)

If some of my nags would decide it's time to get out of the starting
gate and back in the racegrin

Lew

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
...

"Leon" wrote:

What would impress you, a better money manager perhaps? ;~)

If some of my nags would decide it's time to get out of the starting
gate and back in the racegrin

Lew


Lew, I feel your pain and frustration and AMOF just got off the telephone
with my money manager. I have done pretty well since 03/03 but not as well
as the market. Weeeeer gunna make some changes pretty quick.

Not again? When are people going to learn not to feed that ****ing
troll?

"Leon" wrote

I cleaned out my blocked senders list but it gets anotther familiar name
today.

ROTFL ... unlike the DJ, some things never change!

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Jan 17, 10:04*am, (Doug Miller) wrote:


In that case... they're either liars, or idiots, or both.


DO NOT FEED THE TROLL!!!! (He's at it again!!!!)

In article , "Leon" wrote:

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
news
In article , "Leon"
wrote:

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
...


The performance of the market has left me totally under whelmed since
01/01/00.


I would say you were not paying close attention.

It has done quite well beginning in March of 03 for about 12 months.
Again
in July of 06 till July of 07 it did quite well,

Who's not paying attention here? He said "since 01/01/00". Not "since
March of
03".

Good God DOUG! Is March 03 NOT SINCE 01/01/00????????????

Sure -- but so is the period between Jan 2000 and Feb 2003, during which the
market performed VERY poorly.


DJIA close on 31 Dec 1999: 11,497
DJIA close yesterday: 12,466

And now you chang the game to suit your whims. 12/31/99 IS NOT since
01/01/00

True -- it's ONE DAY BEFORE. Or did you miss that?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , "Swingman" wrote:
"Leon" wrote

I cleaned out my blocked senders list but it gets anotther familiar name
today.

ROTFL ... unlike the DJ, some things never change!

Yep -- like you jumping in with another uninformed comment...

Hint: go back a few posts in the thread and read again, for comprehension this
time. Lew said the market had performed poorly since 01/01/00; Leon claimed
Lew hadn't been paying attention, citing performance during a couple of
carefully selected periods during that time; I pointed out that Leon is
ignoring performance over the *entire* time, and gave incorrect figures for
rate of return in several places.

Lew was right: market performance since 01/01/00 has sucked. Sure, there have
been a few periods in there when it did well, but there have also been some
periods when it did very, very badly.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.