onyx1

American Staffing Index, a measure of demand for temporary employment, is now tracking at pre-crisis levels: http://www.americanstaffing.net/statistics/graph_52_weeks.cfm Architecture Billings Index, a leading indicator of construction spendind, is off it's recent highs, but considerably above crisis levels: http://www.google.com/imgres?q=architecture+billings+index&hl=en&sa=X&qscrl=1&nord=1&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS398US399&biw=1399&bih=725&tbm=isch&prmd=imvnsu&tbnid=opSYR1KHTDAlZM:&imgrefurl=http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2012/04/architecture-billings-index-pos-for-5th.html&docid=T6lSj9o36zwtLM&imgurl=http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UiFHGPT9t-U/T47Ntdl-JNI/AAAAAAAARP8/L6aunVYmRfs/s1600/abi.jpg&w=1040&h=860&ei=yPXkT5G_PObV0QHN_uW-CQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=430&vpy=157&dur=1442&hovh=204&hovw=247&tx=86&ty=120&sig=118437345317959465096&page=1&tbnh=164&tbnw=200&start=0&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0,i:77

Thanks. Frank Martin almost always jumps to the top of my reading list.

Yes, a very good principle to follow. So take it to its logical conclusion and pay up for one of the best investments you can make: A high quality Mattress!

Allow me to add a few to your list: 6. BAC failed to address this scenario, despite being instructed to do so by the Federal Reserve during the recent stress test: “BHCs will be expected to estimate losses associated with requests by mortgage investors, including both GSEs and private-label securities holders, to repurchase loans deemed to have breached representations and warranties, or with investor litigation that broadly seeks compensation from BHCs for losses. Firms should consider not only how the macro scenarios could impact repurchase losses, but also how a range of legal process outcomes, including worse than expected resolutions of the various contract claims or threatened or pending litigation against the BHC and against various industry participants. Firms should provide appropriate support of the adverse outcomes considered in their analysis. 7. BAC, despite being aware of its likely insolvency, agreed to conspire among management, internal counsel, external counsel & auditors not to disclose this scenario as a risk item in the recent SEC filings. I find the entire scenario loony and exaggerated, but maybe I shouldn’t be surprised since it is comes from a guy who claims "I never pay attention to anything Warren Buffett says or does."

twa, Assuming this is a realistic risk, how would you explain the complete lack of disclosure regarding this issue in the two most recent 10-Q's and the last 10-K?

More contrarian indicators: http://www.thereformedbroker.com/2012/05/24/and-who-could-blame-them/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter "$38 billion yanked out of stock funds in less than five months this year. And who could blame them?"

Here is a list of publicly traded US/Canadian companies with MV between $18bln and $22bln (sorry for the weird formatting): El Paso Corp. (NYSE:EP) 22,919 Manulife Financial Corporation (TSX:MFC) 22,907 Newmont Mining Corp. (NYSE:NEM) 22,874 State Street Corporation (NYSE:STT) 22,773 Intuitive Surgical, Inc. (NasdaqGS:ISRG) 22,438 BB&T Corporation (NYSE:BBT) 22,056 WellPoint Inc. (NYSE:WLP) 21,921 The Mosaic Company (NYSE:MOS) 21,677 CBS Corporation (NYSE:CBS) 21,564 Johnson Controls Inc. (NYSE:JCI) 21,501 Archer Daniels Midland Company (NYSE:ADM) 21,338 Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation (NasdaqGS:CTSH) 21,206 McKesson Corporation (NYSE:MCK) 21,087 salesforce.com, inc (NYSE:CRM) 20,905 Coach, Inc. (NYSE:COH) 20,872 Corning Inc. (NYSE:GLW) 20,746 Cummins Inc. (NYSE:CMI) 20,585 Stryker Corp. (NYSE:SYK) 20,521 Teck Resources Limited (TSX:TCK.B) 20,519 Williams Companies, Inc. (NYSE:WMB) 20,459 AFLAC Inc. (NYSE:AFL) 20,325 Discovery Communications, Inc. (NasdaqGS:DISC.A) 20,200 The Chubb Corporation (NYSE:CB) 19,846 Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc. (NYSE:TMO) 19,845 Spectra Energy Corp. (NYSE:SE) 19,779 FirstEnergy Corp. (NYSE:FE) 19,644 Phillips 66 (NYSE:PSX) 19,199 Rogers Communications Inc. (TSX:RCI.B) 19,161 Broadcom Corp. (NasdaqGS:BRCM) 19,081 Marathon Oil Corporation (NYSE:MRO) 18,874 American Electric Power Co., Inc. (NYSE:AEP) 18,685 Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. (NYSE:MMC) 18,613 Ecolab Inc. (NYSE:ECL) 18,557 PG&E Corp. (NYSE:PCG) 18,394 Yahoo! Inc. (NasdaqGS:YHOO) 18,388 Air Products & Chemicals Inc. (NYSE:APD) 18,082 Baker Hughes Incorporated (NYSE:BHI) 18,057 Kellogg Company (NYSE:K) 18,013

You should add an option for "No, but I had a position in the past."

This is very good advice. Over planning your career is a bad idea. You will have a much better chance of getting to where you should be if you do the best work you can at your current job. Pay attention to detail, commit yourself, and provide immediate follow-up to anyone you work with. ALWAYS take your work seriously, NEVER take yourself seriously. Do this, and other opportunities will open up.

Tilson defends the Buffett Rule, and announces that he is well-connected, rich, and successful! LOL!

Are you interested in investing or building wealth? If you are in it for the intellectual challenge of investing, you can enjoy the process with a small or large portfolio, and you can do it fulltime or part time. As long as you keep your expenses under control, you can continue on for years doing what you are doing now. But if you are interesting in building wealth over your lifetime (and you have many years to go!), then I believe you are best off finding a way to leverage your considerable talents through employment or the ownership of a business. In order to build wealth with $1.5mm you need to keep expenses under $30,000/year and that may be incompatible with your lifestyle especially if you plan on having a family. Game theory talents go a long way in the fields of money management, real estate, financial trading, and any number of other businesses. Combine these talents with good ethics and the ability to get along with others, with the considerable leverage and scale afforded from a larger organization, and you will build wealth at a much faster rate than growing your personal portfolio. When you build enough personal wealth that this is no longer the case (as I did when I was in my late 40's) you can walk away if you choose and live a life of complete freedom.

Is was referenced in this article. These were inquiries, not bidders. "Potential buyers include museums, municipalities, research institutions, or even private individuals, Ettinger said. So far, Guernsey's has received about 20 serious inquiries, he added." http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/15/pf/titanic-auction/index.htm

Yes, good point, thank you. I agree that a takeover is not possible since the controlling shareholder has 46% of outstanding. What is more realistic is that bid-connected entities buy at the margin to reduce their ultimate cost if they win, or make a quick profit if they are not the high bidder. No 13-D means no entity has accumulated over 2.5mm shares (5%). Next week will be telling if there is any truth to this thesis or not. A spike in volume and a 13-D may confirm it.

Nice going Oracle, glad this is working out for you. We certainly could be wrong here but what would it take for that to be the case? I guess if none of the entities, or the individuals who work with or are knowledgeable about the bids levels of any entity, decide to take advantage of the gap between market and their bid, then we could have a scenario where the market is too optimistic and bids come in lower. Or worse, the over optimistic market scares legitimate bidders away entirely. There are probably several entities who simply cannot buy the stock (e.g. the City of Belfast Ireland, or maybe a museum), but others clear could (Casinos, Disney, asian billionaire, etc.). We only need one to justify our thesis. The market is still implying less than 2007 appraised value so it hard to imagine bidders being scared away at current levels. If we are right, then next week should be very telling. There is going to be some back and forth with how the high bidder structures the purchase so that tells me that in order to announce on April 15, they will need to inform the non-winners early on. With knowledge of a losing bid level, what do these entities have to lose by purchasing right up to their bid level prior to the announcement? I'll be watching closely and my plan for now is to wait until the announcement on April 15. I'm still trying to poke a hole in this strategy though.

I worked in NYC for 25 years and I can tell you that, with very few exceptions, a long-term investment horizon in the city is about three months.

Is anyone else involved in PRXI? I bought a year and a half ago as an inflation hedge. As luck would have it, it has now more than doubled based on the catalyst of an April 2012 auction of the Titanic artifacts and significant intangible assets. Bids need to be submitted by Monday April 2, and the winning bidder will be announced mid-April. The stock has reached a level that I consider fair value and normally I would sell. But I don't think it is right to sell here. Why? Because any entity with the resources to buy the assets (and there are reports of over twenty of them who have expressed serious interest) may also be able to purchase the stock. If any entity buys the stock at or below their own bid for the assets it would constitute a riskless purchase, with potential upside if another entity buys the assets at a higher price. I am assuming that at least one bidder is actively purchasing stock in the open market based on this logic, and if so there is no reason to sell. Can anyone poke a hole in this reasoning such that the best course of action is to simply start selling here?

New Jersey, USA

11 months ago Doug Kass tweeted "repeating for emphasis - msft is a value trap". MSFT closed at $25.50. This one not working out so well either.

We put 20% of the funds into BAC, WFC and AIG. We had 5% in BAC equity, 5% in BAC warrants, 7% in WFC, and 3% in AIG warrants. We do not have a lockup, so those were very large positions for us in a specific industry...financials...not to mention we already own Fairfax and Berkshire. If we had lockups, I would have put 20% into BAC alone when it was below $6. Unlike other funds, our partners can pull capital with 60 days notice, so we cannot do what you might do in your own personal account or a fund that has lockups. We sold the AIG warrants as BAC and WFC moved up, because we like the CEO's of those two companies a hell of a lot more, and we like the fact that BAC is simplifying their business back to the basics. We haven't sold a single share of BAC or WFC, or the BAC warrants. We have started to add very small amounts of out of the money puts on BAC, and we'll continue to do that as the stock continues to move to tangible book and then book value. Cheers! Congrats Parsad and everyone else (too many to name them all) who are enjoying this recovery to fair value. I'm proud to be in such good company! During the mini-panic last August I put a little over 20% into three commons stocks. BAC at $5.16, WFC at $25.25, and BRK A at $104,500. I'm very happy with these prices as I usually get too early. My error was not buying more BAC, but hey, I can't recall any great purchase where in hindsight I didn't say the same thing. Although my net worth isn't going up as quickly as Eric and others with balls of steel, the last 5 months have blown away my expectations. Great times!

Dorsia, You can find it here: http://seekingalpha.com/article/268689-mtr-gaming-group-the-money-lever-to-pull-in-this-casino-is-the-hold-percentage But make sure you see the fourth comment (from last May) where Harry exits the position! Priceless!! "I am personally unhappy reading the 10-Q that the cash flow isn't as strong as I would have expected.. I have to move on if the cash flow isn't there. Apologies to my kind readers. I truly believed the cash flow would be stronger. I will revisit this in the coming quarters to see if things change."

Amen! JSArbitrage is right IMO. Can we at least spend some time discussing the substance of what that guy wrote and not his rank? Do you guys think that a firm that forgets its duty towards clients needs is bound to auto destroy eventually? What "duty" are you assuming? GS is not a fiduciary! To assume so in a trading context is gravely naive and potentially career ending. Regarding the author's contention, what is there to discuss? Of course GS is in business to make money for themselves, first and foremost. Despite suggestions from politicians, the media, and naive junior ex-employees, this is not immoral or illegal. They provide live two-way markets and respond to reverse inquiry. This alone is very valuable information and serves clients. Institutional clients have a free to option respond to or ignore any trade. I was a client of GS for two decades and never had a significant issue in my dealings with them (or their competitiors) because I accepted these basic facts.

Too funny! This guy is not a Managing Director. He is an Executive Director in europe, which is the equivalent to a Vice President in the USA. This is not a senior position with responsibility and I guarantee he does not run a department with any substance or risk authority. I smell a rat here. I will watch with amusement over the next few days at those who succumb to confirmation bias and claim this is proof of what they knew all along!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303717304577277621266731402.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection "Gains in the financial firms' fixed-income businesses, which can account for as much as half of revenue, are putting companies including Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan Stanley and the J.P. Morgan unit of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. on track to report their strongest numbers since the first quarter of 2011, said bankers and analysts." Even though they completely ignore Merrill Lynch, lets hope this is article rings true for 2012 Q1 as the fixed income business has been a big drag for the last two quarters: ML's FICC revenue in 2011 Q1 was $3,954, ML net income $2,143 ML's FICC revenue in 2011 Q3 was $ 314, ML net income - $ 302 ML's FICC revenue in 2011 Q4 was $1,218, ML net income - $ 443

$44 billion of PTPP over a two year period under stress scenario. That pretty much puts an annual floor of $22 billion/year for BAC.

http://federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/bcreg/bcreg20120313a1.pdf Go right to page 27 to see all 19 banks worst-case Tier 1 common ratio during stress scenario