Jump to content

nomore

Member
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

nomore's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. LOL! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-27/dow-super-boom-will-drive-average-to-38-820-stock-trader-s-almanac-says.html Damn! 38820! So precise. :P
  2. Latest one.. http://www.zerohedge.com/article/insider-selling-buying-surpasses-1400-1 Top insider sale was Oracle. CEO disposing: http://www.finviz.com/insidertrading.ashx?oc=901999&tc=7 Next was Tiffany. http://www.finviz.com/insidertrading.ashx?oc=928264&tc=7 Next Medco: http://www.finviz.com/insidertrading.ashx?oc=1257287&tc=7 http://www.finviz.com/insidertrading.ashx?oc=1387813&tc=7 (both option exercise and sale) And then Amazon, where the biggest chunk came from Senior VP who does the option exercise and sale. http://www.finviz.com/insidertrading.ashx?oc=1193122&tc=7 link to bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-27/weekly-insider-buying-and-selling-by-s-p-500-companies.html
  3. ZH is highlighting the list shown by Bloomberg weekly. Perhaps a focus on the names in the sale by insiders would help. The top 3 names shown in the second ZH posting ( http://www.zerohedge.com/article/insider-selling-outpaces-buying-over-290-1-past-week ) where insiders are selling aggressively are Heinz, Google and Starbucks. I would then have a quick browse thru these comapnies using finviz.com website. Heinz: http://www.finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=HNZ&b=2 Google: http://www.finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=GOOG&b=2 Starbucks: http://www.finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=SBUX&b=2 What is nice with finviz website is at the bottom, one can 'see' the recent insider movements.
  4. T-bone: Let me state the stance first. I was disappointed with her book and I am certainly not a fan of Schroeder. However, like it or not, she now has a column with Bloomberg and I would assume that she would be expected to write about Warren and Charlie. Let's take schroeder out of the picture. My issue is on what's been said. Given, Berkshire vested interest in Wells Fargo and Goldman Sachs, I feel what Charlie said was rather tacky. Something's perhaps best left unsaid. Let's take Charlie out of the picture and imagine that Lyold Blankfein said exactly what Charlie had said. How then?
  5. Just curious, what if it wasn't Alice Schroeder who made those comments against Munger? Here's some other critics of what Munger said. http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/09/amazing-arrogance-gall-chutzpa-and.html Nauseating Insensitivity If that kind of arrogant insensitivity does not make you nauseous, what will? It's hard to know where to start, but let's start with a blatant lie. This was no "little bailout", this was a multitrillion bailout, not just from the Fed and Congress but from every central bank in the world. One of the beneficiaries of course was billionaire Charles Munger. Middle class America was the loser. Displays of Ignorance The biggest display of ignorance in Munger's rant is his comparison of the current financial mess to Weimar Germany. Forgive me for asking but pray tell in what kind of fairytale fantasyland is the current deflationary credit bust remotely related to the war reparations imposed on Germany after the end of World War I that gave rise to Hitler? Need for a Culture Change The ridiculous Weimar comparison was not the Munger's most galling statement, however. This is: “Now, if you talk about bailouts for everybody else, there comes a place where if you just start bailing out all the individuals instead of telling them to adapt, the culture dies.” The one thing we desperately need is a culture change. Instead, we made too big to fail, too bigger to fail. We preserved a culture that benefits billionaires like Munger and greedy CEO's that helped cause this mess. That culture benefits no one else. Yet Munger wants us to “suck it in and cope” and expect to be happy that he did not get wiped out. You know what? It would have been a damn good thing if the culture died and assholes like Munger got wiped out. Munger just proved beyond a shadow of a doubt Wall Street's culture was not worth saving. Mike "Mish" Shedlock ------------------------ That posting got a reply from Janet Tavakoli, author of Dear Mr. Buffett, in another posting: http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/09/hsbc-commercial-account-manager.html In Third World America: How Our Politicians are Abandoning the Middle Class and Betraying the American Dream, Arianna Huffington describes how Wall Street insiders used the financial crisis to bribe, coerce, and manipulate Washington into bailing them out and handing them unprecedented, unconditional windfalls. Warren Buffett Jumped the Squid Today's interested men defend the bailouts and subsequent absence of felony indictments. They include Warren Buffett, Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, and Berkshire's Vice-Chairman, Charlie Munger. Charlie Munger's War Andrew Frye of Bloomberg News reported Charlie Munger's recent remarks to law students at the University of Michigan. Munger suggests we shouldn't be "bitching about a little bailout;" we should have wondered why the bailout wasn't even bigger. Munger conjured the specter of Germany's Weimar Republic in an attempt to justify the bailouts: "We ended up with Adolf Hitler." ZeroHedge, home to finance's mainly masked throw downs, spoke for many (including me), when it retorted that Germany's hyperinflation was born from "wanton money printing" and set the stage for Hitler. When it comes to bailouts that will hit middle class taxpayers most, Munger has a double standard: "The 86 year old told the 25 million of Americans who comprise the 16.7% of the underemployed population in the country, to "suck it in and cope." Not only that, but apparently, all those who have been without a job for 99 weeks and more and no longer have recourse to insurance benefits, should "thank God for bank bailouts." Why of course he would say that: after all $26 billion worth of direct BRK investments were the recipient of over $95 billion in bailouts." [From] ZeroHedge, September 20, 2010: Munger Tells 25 Million Americans To "Suck It In", And To "Thank God For Bank Bailouts" As BRK Benefits From $95 Billion Of TARP Funding We bailed out banks that were the key architects of much of our national misery and currency destruction. Those living in poverty will have a much more difficult time bettering themselves, as much of the middle class sinks. ---------------------- From ZH: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/munger-tells-25-million-americans-suck-it-and-thank-god-bank-bailouts-brk-benefits-95-billio
  6. That would be the logical thing to do. However, this was what was observed last year. June 2009. http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2009/06/andy-xie-calls-it-speculative-inventory.html By Andy Xie (Caijing.com.cn) China's credit boom has increased bank lending by more than 6 trillion yuan since December. Many analysts think an economic boom will follow in the second half 2009. They will be disappointed. Much of this lending has not been used to support tangible projects but, instead, has been channeled into asset markets. Many boom forecasters think asset market speculation will lead to spending growth through the wealth effect. But creating a bubble to support an economy brings, at best, a few short-term benefits along with a lot of long-term pain. Moreover, some of this speculation is actually hurting China's economy by driving asset prices higher. The current surge in commodity prices, for example, is being fueled by China's demand for speculative inventory. Damage to the domestic economy is already significant. If lending doesn't cool soon, this speculative force will transfer even more Chinese cash overseas and trigger long-term stagflation. Forward June 2010. The following news article from Reuters: http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-49186220100610 Imports of crude oil, refined fuel, copper, iron ore and rubber all slumped compared with April, giving little evidence of Chinese export strength feeding through into commodity demand. "Chinese copper firms reduced their copper buys in May after international copper prices fell, despite running rates at copper smelters remaining at high levels. This means they were using their inventories," Exports of coke, used by steelmakers, almost doubled to more than 20 times the volume shipped a year ago, despite a 40 percent export tax, implying a lack of domestic demand. Imports of iron ore also fell by 6.2 percent from April. Now the Baltic Dry Index which tracks the shipping of commodities have been plunging. IINM we have seen 18 days of losses! From a high of 4209 in May, the BDI has plunged to a close of 2601. (http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=bdiy&exch=IND&x=15&y=11 ) http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2010/06/baltic-dry-index-continues-to-plunge.html Of course, some had argued the possibility of the over supply of ships also helped the cause of the current plunge of the BDI but many are saying that China had slowed down their commodity purchases as the main reasoning for the BDI plunge. So why is China slowing down their commodity purchase? Is it because they had over loaded their inventory since last year? They need to recycle their inventory now. And what about the Euro crisis? What's the implications? Euro is China's main exporting destination. Is the crisis in Euro causing concern for the Chinese?
  7. Isn't that enough for you? ;D According to the Chinese commerce minister, average profit margins for exporting firms are a tiny 1.8% - http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90778/90861/6936424.html All I know is that I wouldn't want to have any exposure to a Chinese exporter at this time. Perhaps we need to put the recent Foxconn suicides into consideration also. Factories like Foxconn had already increased wages by a massive 30%. Toyota and Honda too had increased wages to combat the labour strikes. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-21/toyota-honda-boost-china-pay-yuan-may-slow-exports-update2-.html Would this signal the end of the cheap labour in China? Some are calling it the new China economic reality: http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ed20100622a1.html Andy Xie had some interesting comments on this issue: http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2010/06/impact-of-foxccon-suiciedes-on-china.html Now if add a yuan appreciation to the wage increament in China's labour market, surely China export's would be more expensive. Who would this benefit? And Andy Xie actually thinks that the Yuan appreciation is a bubble process. He wrote a piece back in April 2010. http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2010/06/andy-xie-getting-yuan-right.html
  8. Irony was that the firm Matt Simmons founded, Simmons & Co, had an OUTPERFOM rating on BP with a target price of $52.00. Matt Simons on the other hand, was quoted " In response to calls for a $20 billion escrow to be set aside by BP, Simmons concludes the company’s as good as insolvent. “They have $5 billion in cash, a $5 billion line of credit, and a $10B emergency line of credit,” says Simmons, “and they boast about how their operating cash flow is $17 billion per quarter. But that’s all consumed in capital expenditures. This outlay [the $20 billion] is going to consumer everything they have.” Simmons has a 4,000-share short sale on BP that he picked up when the stock hit $37. That’s in addition to a prior 4,000-share short sale he made at $48 a couple weeks prior. “It’s going to zero,” he says of BP stock." http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2010/06/will-bp-go-bust-or-will-bp-recover-back.html
  9. Did you guys see Matthew Simons comments on Bloomberg? It's highlighted on ZH: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/matt-simmons-revises-leak-estimate-120000-barrels-day-believes-oil-covers-40-gulf-beneath-su
  10. Check out this clip on BP: http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2010/06/bp-spill-revelead.html :D
  11. Andy has another interesting article out. In it, he talks about China's buying of commodities such as iron core, crude oil and copper. Many had described China's buying as inventory stockpiling. Andy Xie has gone one step further by saying that the recent surge in commodities are nothing but speculative inventory! I quote the last few lines.. Putting money into speculative investments isn't totally irrational. It's better than expanding capacity which, without export customers, would surely lead to losses. Businesses currently lack incentive to invest. But many boom forecasters wrongly assume that recent asset appreciation, fueled by speculation, signaled an end to economic problems. That's an illusion. The lending surge may have created more problems than it resolved. http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2009/06/andy-xie-calls-it-speculative-inventory.html
  12. Andy Xie's commentary in May warned that the current bear market rally would end in a month or so. The bull case is built on three assumptions: (1) the market decline is already deep enough; (2) the global economy is either recovering or about to; and (3) more government stimulus money is coming, should there be more trouble. The bear case rests on: (1) this is a debt crisis, the debt levels are still too high, and the global economy can’t resume growth until debt levels recede to normal; (2) the world economy is still shrinking, though at a slower pace; and (3) government stimulus can’t start another growth cycle as the global economy must restructure itself first. I am in the bear camp. The bull case is really based on comparing the current recession with other recessions in the past half-century. However, this is a once-a-century recession. The only comparable one was the 1930s Great Depression. For a new growth cycle to begin, two conditions must be met: (1) debt levels, relative to income, in consuming economies (U.S., U.K., Australia, Ireland, Spain, etc.) must return to levels prevailing two decades ago, and (2) the manufacturing export economies (China, Germany, and Japan, etc.) must become significantly less production-oriented. The debt crisis is far from over. Just look at the U.S. financial sector debt – the source of all problems in this crisis. It has not come down, despite all the talk about deleveraging. It stood at $17.2 trillion at the end of 2008, higher than $15.8 trillion in September 2007, when the crisis began. Even though it can’t borrow from the market like before, it is borrowing from the Fed and the government. How could we say that the crisis is over when the U.S. financial sector’s leverage hasn’t declined? http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2009/04/why-this-is-still-bear-market.html
  13. Here's another article: http://www.newsmaxstore.com/newsletters/fir/reports/FIR_16_Templeton.htm ----------- Housing Prices Now the U.S. has this extraordinary thing - I think in some places we see 50% to 100% gains on the housing market. Other places across the country might be up 25% to 30% in just a matter of three to four years. Incredible gains. When you invest in stocks, you get the same value all over. The same stock sells at the same value, no matter what nation you're in. But that's impossible in real estate. Real estate value depends on locality. If you're going to be a real estate investor, focus on location, location, location. So when you're trying to invest in real estate, you have to do a lot of serious research on whether this location is likely to be popular in the long run. That's why I wound up believing beachfront property is a good investment. I don't think there's ever going to be any more beachfront than there is now. Now people are getting bigger and the amount of money is getting bigger. So beachfront is pretty sure to go up in value. Owning a home on the ocean is better than owning one that's not on the water. But there are large tracts of oceanfront property still available in South and Central America in countries where there is a rule of law. You used to be able to buy land at very low prices. But still there are some good deals. A 50% drop off in prices is quite possible. I've never, never ever had a mortgage on any house. I learned that long before you were born. When I was a child in Tennessee, I watched so many people lose their farms because they had tiny mortgages, but they got to the end of their years, when it was impossible to earn a profit on the farm. They couldn't meet their payments and their mortgage was sold at auction in the courthouse. I don't rule out borrowing money. But I think it's risky.
  14. It's exactly 5 years today in a SmartMoney interview that Sir John said the following. Q: Do you think there is a real estate bubble in the U.S.? John Templeton: Yes. Real estate is very different from the stock market because it's so local and separate in terms of type. But in many locations and many types of real estate, prices are dangerously high right now. And in real estate it's easier to say what's dangerously high. You just look at what it costs to rebuild. Right here in the Bahamas, I have recently seen people pay four or five times for a house what it would cost to rebuild. source: http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2008/07/tribute-to-sir-john-templeton.html
×
×
  • Create New...