Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Well then, let me get w*i*l*d & c*r*a*z*y on you!!
AA IS UP 23% !!
YEEEEEEE HAAAAAA!
I'd have to add GLW (Corning) to that list. They are suffering due to perceptions that they'll be extremely hurt due to flat screen television downturns (weak economies blamed). Rewind to '99 & '00: they got nailed because they were perceived to be a tech company & tech was being slammed (so Corning got it too).
Frankly, Corning is much more than that. I opened a position yesterday & hope to add to it.
I like your list, however.
A double is fine by me!
On AA, they alluded to hedge funds closing out & thus unloading the AA they held. Redemptions were also brought up. I would have to agree with them, but we won't know for sure until months from now!
No joke. All over Bloomberg this morning was that fact that AA was selling at PE of 3.5 and LESS THAN BOOK.
Admittedly, they said that there is no reason for this low price.
I was certainly pleased that we all saw that before Bloomberg did!
Nice link, but I can't read 779 comments to the article over just ONE cup of coffee!
350 more points & we git 'er done?? Dow 7200 is strong support.
It' not often we see Dow down for what looks like a sale price: 444.99 <-- not dollars, but HEY! Love that .99...
If we wait long enough, they'll sell us some stock & GIVE us an equal amount FREE! Then, they'll throw in a toaster hoping we can burn something other than ourselves...
Eric, Mike, Richard, Nick...
You're the best.
I'm hooked.
And Diane: I am rooting for you on AA!
There is an automobile show in LA now. Hybrids (Toyota CNG Camry... Ford Fusion... Mercury Milan...) and others are at the show.
There are some incredible analysts reviewing the models, pricing, performance & such.
We should be hearing about the comparisons soon.
There will be (I'm sure) alot of talk about CNG & infrastructure support. This would be very interesting.
If you get a chance, maybe you can check it out first hand.
Bill Bonner wrote "Demise of the Dollar". Then followed it with "Empire of Debt". For him, the dollar has seen its hayday... so has debt.... so has anything but gold.
T. Boone Booney Murooni ??!! LOL! That was great!
Oooppss.. it was Scottrade.
Guess you see I'm still mad, no?
Actually, I came here pretty mad & Gus cheered me up!
I executed a trade for AA & got it for 7.505 (I guess you see I'm taking baby steps). But it took me 3 login's to verify the price because each time I hit the 'review order' button, I would get a blank screen & lock up.
My computer is free of virus. Is this common for this site?
I just GOT to print this for JW!!!!
Richard:
Recently, I thought I'd subscribe to an ETF trader which works on 'safe', albeit possibly short-time framed positions, with specific reasons 'why' & what they are about to invest in.
You KNOW I read these for a year before I can trully find out if they 'know their stuff'. So... it's just a "read" right now.
But, they say that DXD is a buy today.
I think it says $3.4 billion... you're a tad low? I couldn't see where it eliminated Toyota as part of the fund!! Locally (here in Scott Co), Toyota makes the Camry. They are very low profile, but have eliminated overtime for the first time.
But, this Austrialian cash comes in 2011 and "... Rudd said Australia would spend 3.4 billion dollars from 2011 to 2020 to transform the industry, including money for a "Green Car" fund to help automotive companies design and sell locally made, environmentally friendly cars.
Other funds would help consolidation in the auto parts sector and assist suppliers. When tied to previous support, the new package raised total industry backing from the government to 6.2 billion Australian dollars."
So, this is not 'current aid', but rather future aid to the industry as a whole?
Actually, it's disgusting as well as humiliating.
In America, the stats for adults able to drive used to be that 1 of 4 owned a car... then, 1 of 2 owned a car; recently, they announced 1 of 1 own a car.
That's saturation.
Instead of protecting their product lines, GM, Ford, & Chrysler should have embraced the fact that all existing cars need to be replaced with high efficiency/hybrid solutions, ('solutions', not necessarily 'cars') and shot for the high ground.
They didn't embrace it. Now, there's saturation & an economic downturn. Even if kept on life support, there just isn't demand in the marketplace.
More on a level that hits the agriculture world, Ford is hitched with New Holland. It is going to be very interesting to see what develops. If that division is dragged into this, then many farmers will be watching very, very closely. Tractors, implemnents, backhoes... these are costly investments. Time will tell.
But, I'm not going to let it explode my head! It is times such as these that lessons are learned the most.
I have no idea how this went so wrong.
Elroy, I state firmly that I am a strong proponent of free enterprise; that I believe strongly in the concept that the strong should survive on a level playing field.
I do not endorse bailout money or loans for the car industry and have strong feelings of protest about the industry, it's flagrant disregard for their customers, employees, and (just as important) their vendors.
The point I was making is that this beleagured group (self-imposed) is before our congress begging for money. They have shafted nearly everyone in their path and have made promises to employees which cannot be kept. Even though the answer to their pleading should be "NO!", the possibility of them trying to clean up their act (without the loan) becomes impossible if their competitors have low interest loans.
They will NEVER qualify for low interest loans.
Therefore, for our congressmen, it is a damned if you do and damned if you don't.
I do not have fake outrage. I re-read everything I wrote, as well as what you wrote (and even read your article again... ) to see why you reacted in such a manner.
In truth, you stated twice that GM, Chrysler, & Ford were asking Alistar for money, but I didn't see that in the link you posted. I would, however, like to read about it.
So, if you have a link that I could read that sheds light on the GM, Ford, & Chrysler asking for Euro money, I would read it. This is NOT to say that I am challenging what you're saying, it's so that I can learn more.
Now then, I hope that I have explained whatever this misunderstanding is.
Elroy, you need to read a little closer.
I'm posting a "damned if you do, & damned if you don't".
I took no position.
Every word of that post is true.
Dannng... I'm all tore up...
We have town after town in the South that folks thought the Unions had their best interests in mind when the unions dug their heals in the sand...
Business pulled roots & moved... Ghost towns are left.
"ALL" car manufactures are to be treated the same as the banks with regard to the Euro loans. ALL.
I'm not meaning to hammer the point, but if you were making stainless steel abrasives in a tight market, had all your costs contained, were able to eek out marketshare, then how would the fact that a European abrasive manufacturer grabbed your market share (via cheap bailout loans) because they had lower costs?
Anyone faced with 'stand on your own' capitalism (which I trully believe in) should not have to compete against the bitter effects of government subsidized loans.
Even if our Big 3 were healthy, we would cry fowl. Since they are sick as dogs, what cry do we do now?
Here it is (emphasis is mine), and we should consider the disadvantage that it would put our car makers in EVEN if they did NOT need a loan:
European carmakers eligible for rescue funds
By Richard Milne in London, Daniel Schäfer in Erlangen and Ben Hall in Paris
Published: October 20 2008 23:33 | Last updated: October 20 2008 23:33
German and French carmakers, which have asked the European Commission for €40bn ($53bn) in cheap loans, are eligible to tap their governments’ banking rescue plans, according to government officials.
Both the German and French finance ministries said on Monday that the financing arms of carmakers could use the state guarantees for new lending of up to €400bn and €320bn respectively.
“Car banks can definitely participate in the scheme,” said the German ministry. A French official said: “If you are a bank specialised in providing credit for the purchase of cars you need access to the wholesale markets like any other bank.”
The financing arms account for more than 15 per cent of operating profits at the European carmakers, according to analysts at Morgan Stanley, and car manufacturers have a large short-term refinancing need because of the credit they offer their customers.
The availability of government credit guarantees comes as the European car industry faces up to its toughest time in decades as demand is plummeting in countries including the US, the UK and Spain.
Also, carmakers have to invest billions of euros to meet stringent new emissions targets by regulators.
This month all carmakers in Europe called on the European Commission to give them €40bn in cheap loans in an attempted copy of the $25bn the US Congress has promised mostly to domestic manufacturers.
All of the carmakers contacted by the Financial Times – including Volkswagen, BMW, Renault and PSA Peugeot-Citroën – said they had no current need to use the government scheme. Several also said the €40bn request was separate and would need to be dealt with by national governments.
But governments have been split with the French president and Italian prime minister calling for help for the car industry while German ministers have publicly squabbled over the need for a separate bail-out.
Any help from governments would be subject to conditions in each country. But, presuming the carmakers only asked for the credit guarantees, they would be far less onerous than those demanded of banks that need new capital. Both countries would offer the guarantees at an unspecified commercial rate of interest.
In Germany, companies would be required to submit their business model for approval.
In France, companies would need to satisfy certain conditions on “ethics”, particularly in regard to pay. The government wants all companies to link severance payments for top managers to performance and restrict the issuing of share options. Companies would also have to increase their stock of credit to consumers and businesses by an annual rate of 3-4 per cent, the government announced on Monday.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
In Tuesday's Financial Times, there was a short article stating that European car makers were asking for bailout money from the Eurozone bail funds. Their excuse? Lower margins, lower sales. (NOT imminent bankruptcy).
If the Euro folks agree to that, it will equate to government subsidy and will further strengthen the Euro manufacturers... which, we know, our big 3 must compete against.
While we are dredging up the past follies of our industry.. pointing fingers as to what & who did wrong.. the Euro manufacturers are beating the drum to even BETTER compete against the big 3.
Did anyone read this story?
He should have worded it differently..
As in "hatcheting someone's job so that you could fly a jet to DC with a tin cup in your hand".
Wonder if that $20,000 was one-way or round trip?
The UYG is long financials, no? IF "Djusfn Swaps" stands for Dow Jones Ultra Short Financials ( see top holdings http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/partsub/funds/holdings.asp?ETF=true&Symbol=UYG ),then isn't there embedded insurance in the fund?
Just wondering... I could certainly be guessing wrong on the DJusfn Swaps...
That was a NICE "git 'er done" post!!!
Richard: My GTC for AA was @ $9.00 which was the 52 wk low until today. That was a fair entry point... I'm not saying that because I chose it as well, but that it was good business.
Yes, I had some execute @ $9.00 then I stayed on it to get the lower prices. Of course, I grabbed GE while I was at it.
Increased GE & AA: GE @ 15.6382 and AA @ 8.7394.
Nick: finally snagged AA @ 8.78
He was my write in....
I can't understand why no one else followed suit..
And that lead's to what? A possible disenchanted 53,000 employees on the payroll who can become vindictive or subversive at the blink of an eye.
Why would they allow so much time before termination for subversive activity to fester? This is not fair to the employee OR the company. (IMHO)
Instead of the saying "going postal", it could turn into "going citi". I certainly hope that does not happen.
These comments certainly aren't anything that would be printed, but it is common knowledge what advance notice of detrimental moves elicits.
Hmmm.
Hmmm. I have to think about that one. If I'm on my toes, I'll have an answer soon. But if I'm anywhere near the exhaustion level I feel right now, it could be months! But I will NOT forget to think about it!
I'm not sure where I read it recently, but the whole idea of protectionism might (so said the article) take a new face.
Rather than tariffs & global trade protectionism, a new form of protectionism might come in the form of interest rates. In an economic downturn, it behooves a stricken country to attrack capital for stability... and that might cause interest rate wars which, when all is said & done, would function much like protectionism tariff policies.
That could actually happen.
So, you & Mike would begin count from where? If Oct, then 3 months takes you to Feb. If you count from Nov, then March.
Calendar year pensions/Profits sharing must deposited by March 15th. If participants map contributions to the market/mutual funds, then rally. If participants map contributions to money markets, then no rally. Any combination of the two will prompt a small/medium rally.
Any rally eventually needs liquidity injections to sustain in the short term. That could be accomplished if sideline money moves into play. But, I think this will be in the middle of some pretty scarey quarterly reports, no?
How odd! Neither could I ! LOL! But, my offer still stands to you @ $9.51 / share !!!
One of my favorite books! Remember when we had a huge discourse over it years ago? That was an incredible exchange & we all enjoyed it.
A classic line from the book-> "We're smarter than you are". And it also turns out to be a classic case of the Big Head.
Actually, though I understand your point on velocity, it really doesn't matter what segment of the "public" it gets to. If we define public as populus or populus/business (non-governmental), then the velocity will create itself... and so will inflationary pressures.
It does no good to say that the money supply (evidenced by the St.Louis Fed chart I posted) has increased at a historical level &, therefore, is presently highly inflationary. That's what the definition says that we should say. However the point is that though the chart of expanded money supply is historic, is supposedly inflationary, is supposed to make us pop our eyes wide open... the money is equivalent to being buried in a backyard (bank hoarding) and very little is moving through the monetary system.
When you stop "waiting" and actually want a loan, then this will turn around & they'll dig up the money from the backyard (so to speak). At that point, the money is TRULLY disbursed in the economy.
The good it will do in the economy? It is a matter of what you would do with the loan... would it be good debt (that which, when invested, will reap the cash flow to service the debt) or would it be bad debt (debt which, when invested, does not give the borrower the money to repay the debt).
There we are again... back to the good debt & bad debt conversation! But since you like real estate, my guess is that you would invest in a real estate project that, once completed, would yield a cash flow which would service the debt.
Let's go a round-a-bout way..
On inflation: defined by an increase in the money supply
On deflation: defined by a decrease in the money supply
Today: massive increase in the money supply... like nothing the charts have ever seen.
Consequence currently: deflation. Why the opposite? Because the definition of increased money supply being inflationary assumes the money gets to the public. The massive increase in the money supply (please see "adjusted monetary base" http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/mt/page3.pdf ) is being held by institutions which needed it to shore up reserves. They can't lend it out on a long term basis because it is short term money. If, and only "if", all that money gets to the public, then (and only then) will inflation occur.
On recession: defined by 2 back-to-back quarters (or more) of negative GDP. The 2000-2001 'felt' like a recession, but wasn't by definition (not consecutive -- negative qtrs were Q300, Q101, & Q301)... so... though it felt like recession, it wasn't.
On depression: defined as "A depression is a severe economic downturn that lasts several years". The example is (once again) on GDP: 1933 -8.6%, 1931 -6.4%, 1932 -13.0%, and 1933 -1.3%. These are annuals (not quarterly) & my guess is that if every other quarter was positive GPD within the year but that the combination of negative & positive yielded an annual negative... then that year would count as a negative year in whole and they would wait to see if a second year was negative too. The bottom line is that we must live through two straight years of annual negative GDP before the politicians can acknowledge the depth of the pain.