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.
That was the last trade before "E" was added to symbol.
Technologies, Markets and the Competitive Environment of Drug Delivery Using Nanotechnologies Explored
Last update: 6:17 a.m. EDT Oct. 31, 2008
DUBLIN, Ireland, Oct 31, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Research and Markets ( http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/683fce/drug_delivery_usin) has announced the addition of the "Drug Delivery Using Nanotechnologies: Technologies, Markets and Competitive Environment" report to their offering.
Drug delivery commands a sizeable proportion of the overall pharmaceutical market, approximately 15% or some US 109 billion in 2008. It is also expected to grow at a faster rate than the overall pharmaceutical market over the next 4 years. The reason Extending patent life for existing drugs and offering new alternatives for delivery, in particular the peroral route.
In all of this nanotechnology is a major enabler. Previously insoluble drugs can be re-packaged or formulated both increasing efficacy and decreasing the need for solvents. Greater stability can be assured by novel nanostructured materials and processes utilising nanotechnology. Such developments are not going unnoticed, with strategic collaborations, mergers and acquisitions becoming the norm.
This report, written by Tiju Joseph and Richard Moore of the Institute of Nanotechnology, provides a comprehensive overview of these new technologies and a market analysis of opportunities to 2012. It concludes with a description of over 40 emerging companies in this exciting and fast-developing field.
Companies Mentioned:
- Abraxis Biosciences Inc. - Access Pharmaceuticals Inc. - Allergan Inc. - ALZA Corporation - Aphios Corporation - Artificial Cell Technologies - Avidimer Therapeutics - Azaya Therapeutics - Baxter Healthcare - BioAlliance Pharma - Biodelivery Sciences International - Biophan - Calando Pharmaceuticals - Capsulution Nanosciences AG - Dabur Research Foundation - Elan Corporation - Endovasc - Enzon Pharmaceuticals Inc - Exilica Ltd - Flamel Technologies - Gilead Sciences, Inc - ICeutica - Insert Therapeutics - ImuThes Ltd - Intezyne Technologies - Keystone Nano - Labopharm - Magforce Nanotechnologies - Nanocarrier - Nanocopoeia - NanoBioMagnetics - Nanobiotix - Nanomerics - Nanotherapeutics - NanoViricides Inc - Neopharm - Novosom - Psividia - SamYang - Spherics - Starpharma - Skyepharma - Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corporation - XstalBio
For more information visit http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/683fce/drug_delivery_usin.
SOURCE: Research and Markets Ltd.
Research and Markets
Laura Wood
Senior Manager
press@researchandmarkets.com
Fax from USA: 646-607-1907
Fax from rest of the world: +353-1-481-1716
Copyright Business Wire 2008
Rez, my question was in reference to Max's post # 29116. When he posted it on 5-7-2008, the chart for CEGE was current up to then and had notations on it. Basically his quote remains the same; ie., buy when Slow Stochastics crosses above 20. Then sell when RSI is above 70 or MACD turns down. This is for LONG ENTRIES AND EXITS!! My question that you responded to was pertaining to short entries and exits. If you are a full IHub member, you can search his board's messages for more relevant posts about that subject.
GLTA!!
Totally agree, Random I Am. Its just a matter of time before we head north. IMO
I think I'll go dressed up as a human being. It may be a big change. LOL
I love Halloween; its the one night of the year that I get to take my mask off.
Its extremely hard to blame the whole company for the actions of a few and the fallacies that are inbred into the insurance system. Liddy has the ability to correct some of this even in this market environment but it takes time and help. IMO, AIG will survive this downturn as it should. The consequences of a failure by them would go a lot farther than jobs being lost.
My original post concerned the fact that Cramer is a big Pumper/Basher with his own audience and TV show. Though some choose to believe in his every word, I do not. He reminds me of the ex-taxi driver (Wade Cook) a few years back that was going to change the investment world with his rolling stocks. Where is he now that his system did not work in a changing market environment?
All this is IMO.
Upon reflection of Cramer's proclamation that AIG would go to "zero" due to credit default swaps:
(From The Big Picture) Lehman Credit-Default Swaps Settle "Without Incident"
Posted by Barry Ritholtz on Thursday, October 23, 2008 | 06:23 AM
in Derivatives | Markets
I received quite a few panicky emails about this settlement process being a potential disaster. Crisis averted:
"Hundreds of traders who placed bets on Lehman Brothers’ creditworthiness before it went bankrupt have settled their positions “without incident,” according to a company that tracks derivatives contracts.
The company, Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation, processes large numbers of investment transactions. It said that only $5.2 billion had to change hands for all the traders to close out their positions, a much smaller amount than had been predicted a week ago.
The settlement process had been seen as a major test of the market for credit-default swaps, and whether it could handle the unprecedented stress of a big Wall Street firm going bankrupt. The overall system appears to have borne the shock successfully, although individual firms might have taken painful losses they have not yet disclosed.
At the same time, the contrast between this week’s orderly settlement process and last month’s financial turmoil, which also involved credit-default swaps, raised anew policy questions over the market for credit derivatives and its failure to limit systemic risk. Because the swaps are private contracts between two parties, there is still almost no information in the public domain over who holds which positions, or who might be left teetering the next time there is a major default."
Go figure . . .
>
Source:
Tracking Firm Says Bets Placed on Lehman Have Been Quietly Settled
MARY WILLIAMS WALSH
NYT October 22, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/business/23lehman.html
Futures
DJIA INDEX 8,891.00 -144.00
S&P 500 942.00 -17.30
NASDAQ 100 1,283.25 -9.25
Europe
DJ EURO STOXX 50 2,512.00 -77.00
FTSE 100 4,115.00 -100.00
CAC 40 10 EURO 3,376.00 -94.00
DAX 4,687.50 -105.00
IBEX 35 9,144.00 -576.50
S&P/MIB 21,530.00 -373.00
AMSTERDAM 260.10 -8.90
OMXS30 655.00 -16.00
SWISS MARKET 6,066.00 -141.00
Asia
NIKKEI 225 8,590.00 -70.00
HANG SENG 14,106.00 -1,064.00
SPI 200 4,111.00 -48.00
Energy
BRENT CRUDE FUTR (USD/bbl.) 67.580 -2.140
GAS OIL FUT (ICE) (USD/MT) 676.500 -11.750
GASOLINE RBOB FUT (USd/gal.) 162.430 -6.760
HEATING OIL FUTR (USd/gal.) 211.560 -6.150
NATURAL GAS FUTR (USD/MMBtu) 6.844 0.000
WTI CRUDE FUTURE (USD/bbl.) 69.690 -2.490
MGRM - HOD
DTG - NLOD
Do you know:
Why is Barron's Banned From CNBC?
(From The Big Picture) I give Barron's grief whenever I think a columnist or magazine cover is wrong.
But even when some thing rubs me the wrong way, the rest of the magazine is usually filled with worthwhile content: Mike Santoli's Streetwise, Randall Forsyth's, credit writings, Michael Kahn's Technician, The Trader Column, the various interviews, and of course, Alan Abelson. It has been a fixture of my weekend for as long as I have been in the business. I was thrilled to publish there last month.
If it wasn't important, it wouldn't be worth criticizing.
One of the things I enjoy has been the Monday morning CNBC segment called "The Barron's Bounce," usually with Michael Santoli. It dawned on me that I hadn't seen Mike on in sometime, so I started poking around. I was surprised to read via Gawker that ever since the Barron's cover story looking into Jim Cramer's track record (Shorting Cramer) in 2007, all Barron's staffers have been unofficially banned from CNBC.
This decision serves neither CNBC nor its viewers. Legitimate analysis and criticism into anyone's track record is encouraged. When I screw up -- and I do, all too regularly -- I expect to hear about it from readers. If Cramer's nightly stock picks are under-performing, well, that is fair game for any critique.
Let me break ranks for a moment and say something nice about Jim Cramer's show: The most positive aspect of it has been to teach many of the newbies who watch it some basic money management techniques. I've heard Jim discuss diversification, stop losses, the dangers of naked put writing, and other, rarely discussed issues. Yes, I have a hard time with the cult of personality that has evolved around the show, and some of the goofier aspects of the broadcast, but I am not the intended demographic of Mad Money.
The bottom line is that there is a lot more to the show than Cramer's picks. Besides, he is on 5 hours a week, and answers dozens a questions on 100s of stocks. No one can throw out that many responses to that many trading ideas and perform any better than any large mutual fund.That's just the math of discussing that many names.
I would urge CNBC to reconsider this Barron's ban. If you don't find the Barron' content worthwhile, well that's fine. But to respond to criticism in such a heavy handed way makes the network look thin skinned and petty.
Viewers deserve the best guests and viewpoints a network can wrestle up. I cannot see how this serves anyone's interests -- the viewers, Barron's or CNBCs.
This is just one man's opinion . . .
UPDATE : October 20, 2008 10:09 am
I wrote this piece last night, after emailing a few Barron's staffers last week. I saw the NYT piece on the train in this morn, after my piece had posted.
Here is the link to the Times:
Jim Cramer Retreats Along With the Dow
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/20/business/media/20carr.html
Note that the headline references Cramer's mannerisms, not the ratings --which are up substantially.
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/10/why-is-barrons.html
IMO Cramer is the master basher/pumper.
Futures
DJIA INDEX 9,218.00 -99.00
S&P 500 979.90 -10.50
NASDAQ 100 1,337.75 -22.25
Europe
DJ EURO STOXX 50 2,639.00 29.00
FTSE 100 4,292.50 27.50
CAC 40 10 EURO 3,517.00 71.50
DAX 4,896.50 31.50
IBEX 35 9,909.00 30.50
S&P/MIB 22,240.00 126.00
AMSTERDAM 272.05 2.80
OMXS30 678.25 13.25
SWISS MARKET 6,329.00 92.00
Asia
NIKKEI 225 9,100.00 -140.00
HANG SENG 15,170.00 -100.00
SPI 200 4,285.00 -52.00
Energy
BRENT CRUDE FUTR (USD/bbl.) 71.430 -0.600
GAS OIL FUT (ICE) (USD/MT) 708.000 15.750
GASOLINE RBOB FUT (USd/gal.) 171.050 -0.960
HEATING OIL FUTR (USd/gal.) 222.560 1.570
NATURAL GAS FUTR (USD/MMBtu) 6.765 0.024
WTI CRUDE FUTURE (USD/bbl.) 73.870 -0.380
Got in on a dip back to 2.55 @ 2:20 EST on stoch XO above 20. RSI's not above 70 yet but MACD is showing some weakness on 5 min. chart but not on 30 min. but I may see a little more upside early AM. Just 2k shares. THX.
Triggered?
Thank you, Sir. I'm doing some paper trading with Trade Ideas now. If it works, I'll pass it on to you.
Max, a while back you gave us a charting method for opening/closing long positions using MACD, RSI & Slow Stochastics. Do you have a similar method for short plays? Is the reverse of that 'long' method valid? TIA
Jim Cramer's Erratic Year
Tuesday, Oct 14, 2008
Jim Cramer has changed his mind! Just last week, you may recall, the shouty CNBC stock picker appeared close to tears as he begged Americans to pull all the cash they'd need for the next five years out of the crippled stock market. Well, whatever, that was last week. Now he says that we've already reached "the beginning of the end of the crisis." That sure was fast! This, of course, is in line with his (physical and intellectual) penchant for wild gesticulation. Let's take a brief look back at Mr. Cramer's unpredictable recent past, shall we?
* August, 2007: God damn Bernanke! Alan Greenspan! They have no idea how bad things are. No idea! (Wild rage).
* September, 2007: "The only thing I have is my authenticity."
* January, 2008: Cramer predicts Mike Bloomberg might buy the New York Times. Not yet!
* January, 2008: Cramer bet that financial stocks would outperform other sectors in 07. Lost bet.
* February, 2008: Barron's points out that Cramer's stock picks suck, factually speaking. Barron's reporters are banned from CNBC.
* March, 2008: Cramer nearly cries on TV because he was surprised Eliot Spitzer likes sex so much.
* March, 2008: Cramer tries to save Bear Stearns. Turns out he's not that influential.
* September, 2008: Jim Cramer was totally right in his initial crazy rant against Bernanke! Unfortunately he screamed so many things subsequently that everyone had forgotten about it by the time the markets crashed.
* October, 2008: But um, Cramer also recommended Wachovia stock as a "safe haven" for investors. That was very, very wrong.
* October, 2008: He got so upset he said fuck it, just put all your money under the mattress!
* October, 2008: Okay, back to normal!
http://gawker.com/5063278/jim-cramers-erratic-year+
AIG to cancel severance package
NEW YORK (AP) | American International Group said it has canceled a multimillion-dollar severance package for its departing chief financial officer and will cooperate in a New York state review of other executive pay deals.
New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and AIG issued a joint statement Thursday announcing that the company had stopped making payments to outgoing Chief Financial Officer Steven Bensinger, whose departure has been planned since May.
Mr. Cuomo said Mr. Bensinger's so-called golden parachute had been worth about $10 million. Neither he nor the company would say how much of that had already been paid or how much was outstanding.
The announcement came a day after Mr. Cuomo began pressuring AIG to slash pay and perks for high-level executives and said he would investigate whether any of the company's compensation deals were improper.
Mr. Cuomo said he met Thursday with AIG's new chairman, Edward Liddy. During the meeting, AIG agreed to cooperate with the investigation and join with the state in attempting to recover any illegal expenditures.
"He understands the need for reform," Mr. Cuomo said of Mr. Liddy. "He understands the new culture that must be brought to AIG."
Pay and perks at AIG have been under scrutiny since the Federal Reserve began propping up the huge insurer with almost $123 billion in loans in effort to avoid a liquidity crisis that could have put it out of business.
In return, the government received warrants to acquire a 79.9 percent ownership stake in AIG.
Mr. Cuomo declined to say exactly how many pay deals were being reviewed, but revealed that the inquiry will include compensation paid to Martin Sullivan, the former chief executive, and Joseph Cassano, the former head of AIG's financial products unit.
Under state law, the attorney general has the power to seek a refund of performance bonuses awarded unjustly by an undercapitalized company, Mr. Cuomo said.
AIG also affirmed Thursday in the meeting that it was calling off 160 conferences and events it had planned in the coming months for employees and clients, some in pricey vacation destinations, thus saving about $8 million.
I'm not a big Cramer fan. Guess we'll see Tuesday. GLTA
WOWSER, was there a date on this report. I'd trust them long before Cramer. TIA
And the list goes on and on. LOL I'm old enough to remember when he first started on CNBC and would get into verbal spats with MARK HAINES all the time.
I've paper traded his picks a few times anticipating signing on for his service and after reviewing charts of his picks, have seriously come to the conclusion that he pumps and dumps them. Its usually hard to do this with stocks that trade with large volumes but in these times, anything's possible.
I still believe we'll see $10-12 in a few months. IMO
Because he shorts them before he smashes them or advises his paid clients to short them. Just like he buys before he posts or announces his longs on CNBC. Most of his calls move exactly opposite of what he calls. IMO Papertrade him a while and watch his picks.
Agreed! It sure wouldn't hurt them much anyway; except for their 'family' lear jet storage fees, etc. LOL
But what could they do if told they had to take a 50% cut or be laid off? Quit and take their clients elsewhere? That'll probably happen anyway with AIG's new reputation. Lots of folks are losing faith in them now. IMO
These clowns should take a 50% cut in salary and commissions until at least when these loans are paid off. IMO
AIG Executives Rack Up a Reported $86,000 Tab During Hunting Trip
(Associated Press)
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — First there was the $440,000 American Insurance Group Inc. spent entertaining executives days after receiving an $85 billion lifeline from the Federal Reserve, now it's $86,000 for a hunting trip in England as the faltering company reaped another $37.8 billion in taxpayer funded loans.
News of the hunting trip emerged Wednesday as New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo ordered AIG to do away with golden parachutes for executives, golf outings and parties while taking government money to stay afloat.
"Even after the taxpayer-funded bailout of AIG, the company paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for luxurious retreats for its executives, including an overseas hunting party and a golf outing," Cuomo wrote in a letter to the New York-based insurer.
He said the spending could be "fraudulent conveyances" under a state law regarding debtors and creditors and noted that beyond those excesses millions were paid to executives who were running AIG as it faced dissolution with government help.
Cuomo said he has the power under state business law to review and possibly rescind any inappropriate AIG spending as long as the Federal Reserve is propping up the huge insurer with almost $123 billion in loans announced since Sept. 16.
Company officials said the hunting trip in the English countryside was an annual event for customers that had been planned months before the bailout. The company pledged — as it did following the September trip — to do everything possible to end such extravagances. They declined to say which AIG executives attended.
"This was an annual event for customers of the AIG property casualty insurance companies in the U.K. and Europe, and planned months before the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's loan to AIG," company spokesman Peter Tulupman said Wednesday morning.
In a prepared statement later in the day, the company said, "We will continue to take all measures necessary to ensure that these activities cease immediately. AIG's priority is to continue focusing on actions necessary to repay the Federal Reserve loan and emerge as a vital, ongoing business."
The company said last week it would stop "all nonessential conferences, meetings and activities that do not clearly maximize value and service given the current conditions."
Last month, and just days after the U.S. government stepped in to save AIG with the $85 billion taxpayer-funded loan, the company picked up a $440,000 tab for a weeklong retreat at the posh St. Regis Resort in California for top-performing insurance agents.
Lawmakers investigating AIG's meltdown said they were enraged that executives of AIG's main U.S. life insurance subsidiary spent a lavish amount on the retreat, complete with spa treatments, banquets and golf outings. Last week, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino called the event "despicable."
At that time, AIG issued a statement saying that the "business event" was planned months before the Sept. 16 bailout and that it was held for top-producing independent life insurance agents, not AIG employees. Of the 100 attendees, only 10 worked for the AIG unit hosting the event, it said.
The insurer said Chief Executive Edward Liddy sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson "clarifying the circumstances" of the event. In the letter, Liddy assured Paulson that AIG is "reevaluating the costs of all aspects of our operations in light of the new circumstances in which we are all operating."
The insurer then said it canceled a future California retreat that was to be held later this month.
Regarding the recent hunting trip, "We regret that this event was not canceled," Tulupman said Wednesday.
Shares of AIG fell 37 cents, or 13.2 percent, to $2.43 in trading Wednesday.
Futures:
Dow - Up 335.00
S&P - Up 45.80
Nasdaq - Up 58.75
Indexes:
Nikkei 225 - Closed for Holiday
Hang Seng - Up 1515.29
CS1300 - Up 78.53
FTSE 100 - Up 166.49
DAX - Up 253.78
Oil Futures:
Brent Crude - 77.92 - Up 3.83
WTI Crude - 81.42 - Up 3.72
Probably some went to helping those hedge fund managers justify their existence in society as we know it today. LOL
Trillions Disappear in Stock Market, but Where Did Money Go?
From Associated Press:
NEW YORK — Trillions in stock market value — gone. Trillions in retirement savings — gone. A huge chunk of the money you paid for your house, the money you're saving for college, the money your boss needs to make payroll — gone, gone, gone.
Whether you're a stock broker or Joe Six-pack, if you have a 401(k), a mutual fund or a college savings plan, tumbling stock markets and sagging home prices mean you've lost a whole lot of the money that was right there on your account statements just a few months ago.
But if you no longer have that money, who does? The fat cats on Wall Street? Some oil baron in Saudi Arabia? The government of China?
Or is it just — gone?
If you're looking to track down your missing money — figure out who has it now, maybe ask to have it back — you might be disappointed to learn that is was never really money in the first place.
Robert Shiller, an economist at Yale, puts it bluntly: The notion that you lose a pile of money whenever the stock market tanks is a "fallacy." He says the price of a stock has never been the same thing as money — it's simply the "best guess" of what the stock is worth.
"It's in people's minds," Shiller explains. "We're just recording a measure of what people think the stock market is worth. What the people who are willing to trade today — who are very, very few people — are actually trading at. So we're just extrapolating that and thinking, well, maybe that's what everyone thinks it's worth."
Shiller uses the example of an appraiser who values a house at $350,000, a week after saying it was worth $400,000.
"In a sense, $50,000 just disappeared when he said that," he said. "But it's all in the mind."
Though something, of course, is disappearing as markets and real estate values tumble. Even if a share of stock you own isn't a wad of bills in your wallet, even if the value of your home isn't something you can redeem at will, surely you can lose potential money — that is, the money that would be yours to spend if you sold your house or emptied out your mutual funds right now.
And if you're a few months away from retirement, or hoping to sell your house and buy a smaller one to help pay for your kid's college tuition, this "potential money" is something you're counting on to get by. For people who need cash and need it now, this is as real as money gets, whether or not it meets the technical definition of the word.
Still, you run into trouble when you think of that potential money as being the same thing as the cash in your purse or your checking account.
"That's a big mistake," says Dale Jorgenson, an economics professor at Harvard.
There's a key distinction here: While the money in your pocket is unlikely to just vanish into thin air, the money you could have had, if only you'd sold your house or drained your stock-heavy mutual funds a year ago, most certainly can.
"You can't enjoy the benefits of your 401(k) if it's disappeared," Jorgenson explains. "If you had it all in financial stocks and they've all gone down by 80 percent — sorry! That is a permanent loss because those folks aren't coming back. We're gonna have a huge shrinkage in the financial sector."
There was a time when nobody had to wonder what happened to the money they used to have. Until paper money was developed in China around the ninth century, money was something solid that had actual value — like a gold coin that was worth whatever that amount of gold was worth, according to Douglas Mudd, curator of the American Numismatic Association's Money Museum in Denver.
Back then, if the money you once had was suddenly gone, there was a simple reason — you spent it, someone stole it, you dropped it in a field somewhere, or maybe a tornado or some other disaster struck wherever you last put it down.
But these days, a lot of things that have monetary value can't be held in your hand.
If you choose, you can pour most of your money into stocks and track their value in real time on a computer screen, confident that you'll get good money for them when you decide to sell. And you won't be alone — staring at millions of computer screens are other investors who share your confidence that the value of their portfolios will hold up.
But that collective confidence, Jorgenson says, is gone. And when confidence is drained out of a financial system, a lot of investors will decide to sell at any price, and a big chunk of that money you thought your investments were worth simply goes away.
If you once thought your investment portfolio was as good as a suitcase full of twenties, you might suddenly suspect that it's not.
In the process, of course, you're losing wealth. But does that mean someone else must be gaining it? Does the world have some fixed amount of wealth that shifts between people, nations and institutions with the ebb and flow of the economy?
Jorgenson says no — the amount of wealth in the world "simply decreases in a situation like this." And he cautions against assuming that your investment losses mean a gain for someone else — like wealthy stock speculators who try to make money by betting that the market will drop.
"Those folks in general have been losing their shirts at a prodigious rate," he said. "They took a big risk and now they're suffering from the consequences."
"Of course, they had a great life, as long as it lasted."
Trillions Disappear in Stock Market, but Where Did Money Go?
From Associated Press:
NEW YORK — Trillions in stock market value — gone. Trillions in retirement savings — gone. A huge chunk of the money you paid for your house, the money you're saving for college, the money your boss needs to make payroll — gone, gone, gone.
Whether you're a stock broker or Joe Six-pack, if you have a 401(k), a mutual fund or a college savings plan, tumbling stock markets and sagging home prices mean you've lost a whole lot of the money that was right there on your account statements just a few months ago.
But if you no longer have that money, who does? The fat cats on Wall Street? Some oil baron in Saudi Arabia? The government of China?
Or is it just — gone?
If you're looking to track down your missing money — figure out who has it now, maybe ask to have it back — you might be disappointed to learn that is was never really money in the first place.
Robert Shiller, an economist at Yale, puts it bluntly: The notion that you lose a pile of money whenever the stock market tanks is a "fallacy." He says the price of a stock has never been the same thing as money — it's simply the "best guess" of what the stock is worth.
"It's in people's minds," Shiller explains. "We're just recording a measure of what people think the stock market is worth. What the people who are willing to trade today — who are very, very few people — are actually trading at. So we're just extrapolating that and thinking, well, maybe that's what everyone thinks it's worth."
Shiller uses the example of an appraiser who values a house at $350,000, a week after saying it was worth $400,000.
"In a sense, $50,000 just disappeared when he said that," he said. "But it's all in the mind."
Though something, of course, is disappearing as markets and real estate values tumble. Even if a share of stock you own isn't a wad of bills in your wallet, even if the value of your home isn't something you can redeem at will, surely you can lose potential money — that is, the money that would be yours to spend if you sold your house or emptied out your mutual funds right now.
And if you're a few months away from retirement, or hoping to sell your house and buy a smaller one to help pay for your kid's college tuition, this "potential money" is something you're counting on to get by. For people who need cash and need it now, this is as real as money gets, whether or not it meets the technical definition of the word.
Still, you run into trouble when you think of that potential money as being the same thing as the cash in your purse or your checking account.
"That's a big mistake," says Dale Jorgenson, an economics professor at Harvard.
There's a key distinction here: While the money in your pocket is unlikely to just vanish into thin air, the money you could have had, if only you'd sold your house or drained your stock-heavy mutual funds a year ago, most certainly can.
"You can't enjoy the benefits of your 401(k) if it's disappeared," Jorgenson explains. "If you had it all in financial stocks and they've all gone down by 80 percent — sorry! That is a permanent loss because those folks aren't coming back. We're gonna have a huge shrinkage in the financial sector."
There was a time when nobody had to wonder what happened to the money they used to have. Until paper money was developed in China around the ninth century, money was something solid that had actual value — like a gold coin that was worth whatever that amount of gold was worth, according to Douglas Mudd, curator of the American Numismatic Association's Money Museum in Denver.
Back then, if the money you once had was suddenly gone, there was a simple reason — you spent it, someone stole it, you dropped it in a field somewhere, or maybe a tornado or some other disaster struck wherever you last put it down.
But these days, a lot of things that have monetary value can't be held in your hand.
If you choose, you can pour most of your money into stocks and track their value in real time on a computer screen, confident that you'll get good money for them when you decide to sell. And you won't be alone — staring at millions of computer screens are other investors who share your confidence that the value of their portfolios will hold up.
But that collective confidence, Jorgenson says, is gone. And when confidence is drained out of a financial system, a lot of investors will decide to sell at any price, and a big chunk of that money you thought your investments were worth simply goes away.
If you once thought your investment portfolio was as good as a suitcase full of twenties, you might suddenly suspect that it's not.
In the process, of course, you're losing wealth. But does that mean someone else must be gaining it? Does the world have some fixed amount of wealth that shifts between people, nations and institutions with the ebb and flow of the economy?
Jorgenson says no — the amount of wealth in the world "simply decreases in a situation like this." And he cautions against assuming that your investment losses mean a gain for someone else — like wealthy stock speculators who try to make money by betting that the market will drop.
"Those folks in general have been losing their shirts at a prodigious rate," he said. "They took a big risk and now they're suffering from the consequences."
"Of course, they had a great life, as long as it lasted."
If I need to go and jump out of a window as they did in 1929, at least most of mine are one story windows; just have to watch out for the trees. LOL
Not according to Fox Business News - market closed Monday for Columbus Day. Not sure about Futures Market.
Futures:
Dow - Down 254.00
S&P - Down 22.80
Nasdaq - Down 25.00
Indexes:
Nikkei 225 - Down 881.06
Hang Seng - Down 1146.37
CS1300 - Down 88.34
FTSE 100 - Down 206.88
DAX - Down 431.87
Oil Futures:
Brent Crude - 78.88 - Down 3.78
WTI Crude - 82.69 - Down 3.90
A few more for your consideration. Also you may want to include a few items from AIG's website. IMO
http://charts3.barchart.com/procal.asp?sym=AIG
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/StockRating/srsmain.asp?symbol=aig
http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=DailyMPPositionReport
http://pro.edgar-online.com/profile.aspx?ticker=aig
http://www.intrepid.com/robertl/stock-vols1/stock-vols.cgi
GLTA
You're welcome. You probably knew about most of them already but thought I'd pass them on in case not. If I see any more in my bookmarks, I'll let you know.
Lucy, a few websites you may want to consider for your Ibox:
http://www.ddmachine.com/default.asp
http://www.insidercow.com/
http://www.stockta.com/cgi-bin/analysis.pl?symb=AIG&num1=11&cobrand=&mode=stock
http://www.shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=aig&submit=Short+Quote%99
GLTA
Futures: (One year ago today, Dow hit all time high)
Dow - Up 169.00
S&P - Up 21.70
Nasdaq - Up 42.00
Indexes:
Nikkei 225 - Down 45.00
Hang Seng - Up 511.07
CS1300 - Down 27.58
FTSE 100 - Up 80.49
DAX - Up 70.45
Oil Futures:
Brent Crude - 84.86 - Up 0.50
WTI Crude - 89.19 - Up 0.24
True, and in spite of what AIG is saying about this not being a "fire" sale, I believe they really could have gotten more for these assets, had this approach been activated a few months ago. They knew these problems existed long before the SP started dropping. Arrangements could have been to handle or at least researched for options to handle these problems without government intervention. As for we, investors, I believe eventually the SP will come back up to 10-12. But it won't be in the next few weeks at least, especially with the rest of the world markets behaving such as they are. (Hope I'm wrong about this).
What I found funny today was Liddy stating that the corporate retreat was for their top insurance, etc sales producers instead of top executives. IMO, the fact that these top producers made a pot load of money already should have been reward enough in light of today's economic mess. And now they have another one of these retreats planned for the near future.
Seems to me this news goes to show that the government will not let AIG fail. IMO
Hard to believe that 2 stocks that were as strong as GM which was ~$55 and F was ~$17 at the beginning of 2004 are at about 12% of their former highs. If we can't count on these types of stocks, where do we go for investments? Crazy, crazy market!