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.
XLE - 180 mil barrel release from SPR and XLE is flat. Interesting. Natural gas prices firm.
ATIP - Taking a small position here. Really beat up physical therapy chain. Looks like many institutional buyers coming in after big sell-off last year. Down 80% from a year ago. Down 44% YTD.
SA article
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4498812-ati-physical-therapy-atip-down-not-out
https://fintel.io/so/us/atip
Not sure what you are saying. I was wishing there was a way to lock your account at the current balance without having to sell your positions. I understand hedging and occasionally use S&P puts but it is hard to get a balanced book that remains neutral. I know there is not such an option without going to cash but wishful thinking.
That said, I am glad I did not freeze my accounts. Up nicely since posting.
CDRpC - Someone posted on SA that a lawyer looks to be filing for an injunction to stop this merger from taking place as currently structured.
I bought my CDRpC shares just after the announcement at a better yield than the B shares. About a week ago the B's dropped to have a better yield than the C's so I sold half and bought B's. Today the yield on the C's is 14%, and the B's at 12.5%. Took the profit on the B's and replaced with an equal dollar amount of C's. Increased my holding with the profit and have a much better yield. All in a ROTH so no tax consequences. If the C's had the same yield as the B's here as I type they would be $1.55 higher or 13.6%. I even included the bid/ask spread. Both transactions filled better than the bid/ask.
I have increased my position size to about 2.5%. If the lawsuit is filed I expect CDR the common shares to take a hit. Shorted a starter position of CDR at 27.65. I see no reason why the court would not give the preferred the injunction they are looking for.
Thanks! I need to do better at recognizing and measuring risk and reward and adjusting my position size accordingly. I thought this trade had little downside with a management offer on the table at $4.25 and the shares trading slightly above. I can't complain about my gain but when re-evaluating my trade I should have had more shares. I think I had a 1% speculative position. I should have had 2%.
HMLP - sold another third of the position for another 72% gain. HMLP I think only has 5 liquid natural gas storage units. Always uncomfortable something will happen to one that will pull the shares down. Probably sell the remainder tomorrow.
Added some ALINprB. Long shot trade that I will probably have to wait for. Perhaps years! Arrgh! Selling for about $5 here. $1.50 in accumulated dividends. A little over 1% of port here. Better positioned than HMLP for more upside in my opinion.
>>Maybe you’d like to compare investment returns over the last 2 years since the Cat have not been trading?? <<
Sure. Come on over to Traders Cooperative and lets compare and chat.
Thanks!
>>This board has been the one you have been posting on 97% of the time in the last 12 years.<<
Actually for you 100% as this is the only board you read that I post on.
I do not focus on this dead stock. I focus on those that continue to believe that this is a not a dead stock. Swiss, from what you have wrote I assume you are younger than most others here. The Lehman situation is a good learning situation. It is case history bankruptcy case. But you have been focusing on this stock way past after the class is over. Move on and learn about other investments instead of holding out hopes for miracles here. My hopes is that someday you will make well informed and wise investments. NO one here knows what they are talking about.
"With regard to food shortage, yes we did talk about food shortages, and it's gonna be real," Biden said
And the S&P rallies! And the 10 year rallies 6%.
Food shortages? That can lead to strong civil discontent. Many people live paycheck to paycheck as it is. I am taking a serious look at how this plays out. Scary times.
CDRprC - Replying this post where I said I bought CDR-A. That is a misprint. I bought the C's. That said, at a point this week the B's got cheap and higher yield that C's so I bought some B's and sold some A's. I then even added a little more B's. 2% of port now.
I have been commenting a good bit on a SA article under Joe Eifrid.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4495571-take-a-shower-after-reading-the-wheelercedar-merger
I think this one will see a court filing to stop this merger for reasons I discuss. No court filing and the merger approved I will sell some if not all. The B's were showing a current yield of about 18% when I bought. At that yield I don't see much downside. If this goes like I think, and CDR is forced to payoff the preferreds to make the deal go through, par is at 25.00 for a 143% gain. Very compelling risk/reward IMO.
SMLP - Saw this post today in a SA article. With moves in natural gas I would not be surprised to see SMLP more positive on the next quarter CC.
" So Europe is chronically short gas and the U.S. wants to grow production to help them. SMLP's pipelines are mostly gas outside of the Bakken. The Utica and Marcellus can easily ramp up. And the Double E gas volumes should also ramp as you can't flare gas in New Mexico and you have the trunk line to get the gas from the Waha to the Gulf Coast for LNG......
$SMLP's equity is arguably the most torqued to natural gas than anyone else given the small equity as a percentage of its enterprise value combined with how under utilized its systems are...
For example, $TELL is ripping, yet the project is years away and the cost to build new trains has gone way up (think about the price of steel and other components), not to mention the amount of dilution required to raise the equity to build it....
All of $SMLP's infrastructure is built out...so $SMLP is TORQUED to higher gas volumes behind its system.... HELLLO, Mr. Market? Are you there...."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4493808-summit-midstream-conservative-fy-2022-guidance
I added some this am for a trade. Now about 3% in to this stock now. More than what I am comfortable of about 2% of port. I have a stop loss on new shares at 14.50.
JXN- Got back in flat from where I sold. Did some more research. I liked what I saw. 2% position.
HMLP- Sold a third of the position for 47% gain. More and more it appears that the US will be exporting natural gas to the world. HMLP unit will be in high demand. I have high hopes for my ALINprA and B preferred shares. Altera Infrastructure seems to be nicely positioned for natural gas exposure.
Not focusing on this dead stock. Its fate was known a decade ago.
Focusing on the holders here to help them transition to the other side. Swiss, you need to start learning to find good profitable trades. This one is a total loss for you. I know, you think it is cool to get the occasional "atta-boy" from Jersey and others when you attack me. But that does not make you money nor add true value to your life. Seek wisdom, not popularity.
I really know very little about details of the ECAPs. Most the information I have has come from this site. WE all know how reliable that is. I never had any interest in trying to trade them.
My understanding is that the ECAPs are set up like the the CT trust preferreds. The CTs are not a bond, but their only holding in the trust is a junior bond. I assume that the ECAPs are set up the same way. Not a bond, but preferred trust for LBIE.
But, call it what you want. I have no problem not knowing if it is a bond or a preferred hybrid like the CTs. Call the CTs a bond if you wish. It is a moot point as the Cts no longer exist and have been replaced by a class 10b claim that the creditor committee has deemed will see zero recovery,
Move on, Swiss. This is like an addiction for you. It would do you well to focus on other things than dead stock issues.
FLNG - Sold the remainder of shares for 22% gain. Sitting near top trend line resistance. Not playing breakouts. Rather take profits in this market and increase cash in hopes of better buys.
I am posting some of my trades on another board.
>>The Word bond is mentioned 4 times here <<
That's amazing.
I wish there was a way to call your brokerage and have them freeze your account at current levels with out trading out of positions. If that is what could be done that is what I would do right now. Too much of a chance for a black swan event.
In a small way that is what the ultra short ETFs do to help me hedge. I know about the daily calculation decay but I look at it day to day.
SWiss, If you spent less time attacking me and more time researching trading opportunities you could possibly learn something that will be a value to you for the remaining part of your life. Attacking me is like attacking the market for these shares. Obviously the market sees no hope for the CTs seeing a recovery.
As to your referenced post. Apples and oranges. I was speaking about bonds, and you are talking about the subordinated ECAPs. AS I recall I said I had no interest in trading foreign markets as there was plenty of trading opportunities here.
As to your "boo-hoo" comment. I made a sizable amount of money trading Lehman and likes during the financial crisis. But I knew when to get out. It is not a coincidence that I sold me business and retired to trade (my hobby) in 2009.
Quit trying to impress folks stuck in a worthless trade here and start learning. Attacking me relentlessly add no value to your life.
Thanks! Plus one coin! I think that is a first for this site!
Very weird, Why don't you come on over to my board and we can discuss my bad stock picks? Always ready to learn.
Yes, let me clarify...
My business partner son left Alvarez. He was offered a job through Alvarez to move to New York to work with Lehman's new up and running LAMCO unit to start a cyrpto banking operation with the $50 bil in NOL cash. He had no interest in moving to NY so he quit to go home and work for the family business. He gave me some other information but Lehman found out about the insider information I was provided and had me sign a non-disclosure agreement. Sorry that I can not share that information with you. Actually I have said too much already and have gone in to hiding as I think a NY crime syndicate with Russian connections is also involved.
Don't share this with anyone. This is just between you and me and why I sent by private message.
TECS - Contrarian trade and hedging. Nasdaq has come up too high and too fast with all of the uncertainty there is in my opinion. Who know what happens over the weekend. TECS is a 3x short tech. Long at 34.51 here near the close.
Sold some other stuff. Portfolio is about 2.5% from all time highs. Too much risk out there for me to stay very long.
Tako, There are no analyst ratings for these CTs. Any website that may still indicate that are wrong.
What I said was clear. Take from it what you want.
If you spent as much time trying to prove me wrong, and more time researching good stocks instead of trying to revive a dead horse, perhaps some day you could make some money trading - like me.
Just sold a buy of 11 days for 15% gain. Always good trading ops in a volatile market. Like a good trader once said, we don't care if the market goes up or down, we just want it to go up and down.
Swiss, You lack maturity. You should work on that.
JXN - Sold for 15.3% gain. Not that I don't like it here. Just a good quick profit and it is trading near past resistance and the market fundies suck.
No. I answered your question perfectly. Obviously if Lehman has a contractual obligation to issue preferreds there would be no fraud involved.
Lehman had a contractual obligation to issue LBHI preferred shares to ECAP holders if LBIE went under. The thinking was that if LBIE went under, LBHI would be the more secure holding. And ECAP buyers/holders felt more secure having LBHI also securing and backing the ECAPs.
Well, then we all know what happened. Both LBIE and LBHI filed BK. UK courts ruled that the two could not be combined. LBHI wanted LBIE to be in US Court as they knew that LBIE was in better shape. The UK court would not have that.
So LBHI moved to issue LBHI preferred shares as contracted hoping to backdoor putting the ECAPs in US court in Class12. LBHI hoped that would leave a bigger pool/recovery for them in LBIE.
ECAPs said no thanks to that offer. They felt they would receive more under LBIE's subordinated position.
That is a quick synopsis of what happened with the ECAPs and LBHI.
I don't have the link available but you should read the prospectus for the ECAPs and you will see the link with LBHI.
BTW, my partner's son left Alvares last year and joined my former partner in my former business.
POR or Plan of reorganization is a generic term used for all bankruptcy plans. I use to use the term myself until you guys would form a circle jerk when ever I mentioned. If the plan was a reorganization plan it would state in the court order how it is to be reorganized. That should be simple to understand. Show me any sign of reorganization. There is none.
If you ever want to talk stocks that make money (and some that lose), you know where to find me.
Swiss, I don't know why you are stuck on the point as the facts are obvious. In the modified plan the terms of reorganization or reorganize are not used once. I agree, the modified plan may not have the phrase "plan of liquidation", but that is exactly what it is as terms of liquidation are mentioned over 100 times as I recall. If you don't believe it is a plan of liquidation, just look at the actions over the last 14 years of liquidation. Has there EVER been any talk by the Lehman trustees of reorganization? Is there one court document that speaks to this reorganization that you see.
Take the blinders off. The modified plan has words and court ordered actions that are taking place that this is a total liquidation. I find it hard to believe that with all that is know that you don't see this. And quite frankly, has me question your intellect.
The judge and I both said that. Key word there is "former."
Not sure where you got the quote, but probably something about Barclays.
LOLOLOLOLOLO!
Here is something I wrote in I think September of 2007. Along the same lines. Poured my brain in to studying this stuff and nobody cared. I found better things to do. lol!
Goldman’s Quasi-Monopoly Earnings Report
Goldman Sachs (GS) – you know Goldman Sachs. They came out with an earnings report today. But first a little background.
Goldman gave us Robert Rubin, former Chairman of Goldman. He is the gentleman President Clinton called on to be Secretary Treasurer of the United States in 1995. During his tenure he orchestrated the bailout of Mexico, Asia, Long Term Capital Management, and Y2K. He is no stranger to moral hazard. His actions show that he actually embraced it. I think he was also responsible for Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan to change his ways. After Greenspan uttered those famous words - “irrational exuberance” and knocked the equity markets for a loop in 1996, Greenspan became much more respectful of those that kept him in power. I thought that Greenspan meant what he said at the time with strong foundation, but his actions afterwards where of a different tune. Enough so that he bowed to the whims of both the Clinton and Bush administrations, taking irrational exuberance to bubble proportions.
Goldman also gave us John Thain. John is now CEO of the New York Stock Exchange. Mr. Thain helped to complete the reverse takeover of the NYSE by Archipelago in 2005. As you may have guessed – Archipelago’s largest owner - Goldman Sachs.
Well, who is the current Secretary Treasurer of the United States? It is Henry Paulson, former CEO and Chairman of Goldman Sachs. Mr. Paulson took the reins in early 2006. Yet another Goldman guy.
Everyday the Federal Reserve operates an open market operation to add and subtract liquidity from our financial system. This is where the big NYSE member banks go to get additional funds. I can’t think of another person that may be more important to a financial firm like Goldman Sachs on a daily basis. I am sure the Federal Reserve looked far and wide for someone to run this very important unit as it oversees domestic open market and foreign exchange trading operations as well as the provisions of account services to foreign central banks.
They picked Goldman Sachs former Chief Economist, William Dudley. An ‘economist’ for a trading operation? I know, it doesn’t sound right to me but maybe he takes direction well. William took this post in late 2006.
World Bank, you ask? Who runs the World Bank? The President of the World Bank is Robert Zoellick. Mr. Zoellick spent most of his career working for various governmental agencies. No Goldman connection here? Almost. He resigned in June 2006 to join Goldman. After a one year stint of indoctrination of how things work at Goldman, and who truly butters his bread, he was appointed World Bank President in June of 07’.
So, former Goldman people are in place as the United States Secretary Treasurer, the head of the NYSE, the head of the trading operations at the Federal Reserve (an economist at that), and President of the World Bank. Big deal? It gets better.
Just after the 1987 stock market crash the President of the US signed an executive order forming a committee of government and private individuals to monitor the financial markets. This group was named the ‘Working Group’. We traders have nicknamed this group the Plunge Protection Team – the PPT. Their mandate was to make sure all steps were taken to make sure nothing like that crash would happen again.
In 1998 the financial world was shaken by the financial shenanigans of a hedge fund named Long Term Capital Management. ( ‘Long Term’ lol!) After which time the US President’s Working Group approached the major NYSE member banks and said, “hey guys, listen, we ain’t suppose to let things like this happen. You guys need to get your act together.”
These banks formed the Counterparty Risk Management Policy Group (CRMPG) The members are the top NYSE member banks, General Motors, a couple of hedge funds, and some well connected law firms and accounting firms. The group met and produced a document but was asked again in 2004 by the Working Group to come with more defined policy procedure. This effort resulted in the publication titled ‘Toward Greater Financial Stability: A Private Sector Perspective’.
Who was the leader of this group? Gerald Corrigan, Chairman of Goldman Sachs. Who was the transmittal letter addressed to at the opening of the report? Henry Paulson, then CEO and Chairman of Goldman Sachs, now US Secretary Treasurer. Who developed the policy? Well here is an excerpt from the transmittal letter; “I want to express to you my sincere gratitude for the time and effort devoted to this project by Craig Broderick who served as a Member of the Policy Group and the others from Goldman Sachs who participated in the project and are named in the Report.”
Link to the report; www.crmpolicygroup.org/docs/CRMPG-II.pdf
Here is what the CRMPG stated as their primary purpose; “The primary purpose of CRMPG II — building on the 1999 report of CRMPG I — is to examine what additional steps should be taken by the private sector to promote the efficiency, effectiveness and stability of the global financial system. As practitioners, the members of CRMPG II recognize that periodic financial disruptions and shocks are inevitable. However, the Policy Group also believes that it is possible to take steps that would be capable of reducing the frequency of such shocks and, especially, to reduce the risk that such shocks would take on the contagion features that can produce systemic damage to the financial system and the real economy.”
Again it appears the CRMPG mandate is to control the markets. How else are they to reduce the frequency of periodic financial disruptions.
CRMPG: “since we know that financial disturbances and even financial shocks will occur in the future, and we know that no approaches to risk management or official supervision are fail-safe, we also know that we must preserve and strengthen the institutional arrangements whereby, at the point of crisis, industry groups and industry leaders, as well as supervisors, are prepared to work together in order to serve the larger and shared goal of financial stability.”
We need to work together for financial stability? What does that mean for the public or retail investor? Obviously every trade has a counterparty. If these firms get in trouble with sub-prime loans, is it their idea to transfer that risk to the public to insure their financial stability and therefore the stability of the US economy as what they represent, as we can not have failing banks and a strong economy. But it would be acceptable to have a block of retail investors (small counterparties) suffering financial disruptions as long as it did not affect the general public or the greater good of the large NYSE money center banks?
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan acknowledges the CRMPG and their collective “eye” on the market in a speech he gave in 2002; “In today's markets there is an increased reliance on private counterparty surveillance as the primary means of financial control. Governments supplement private surveillance when they judge that market imperfections could lead to sub-optimal economic performance.” Link to speech; http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2002/200209252/default.htm
That leads me to Program Trading. Program trading ran about 16 to 19% of all shares traded on the NYSE from 1987 to 1998 when the Long Term Capital diabolical hit. Since that it has climbed to 65-75% of all shares traded on the NYSE.
The NYSE stock exchange issues a weekly report on Program Trading. For the week ending August 31st, program trading accounted for 73% of all shares traded on the NYSE. Now you will look at this report and see that it says 36.5%. What gives? Well, the NYSE formerly reported program trading as both sides of the trade. They did this for a couple of decades, or the inception of program trading. (Program trading is defined as a trade of 15 or more issues with a value over one million dollars.) Then in June of 2006, shortly after the Goldman guy took over, they changed the reporting to just one side of the trade. In addition, they deleted all past reports from their news archives. One day they were there, the next they were all gone. The old way of reporting worked for many years giving a more accurate summation of total program trading. I continue to use that number as it is more truthful. Link to recent report; http://www.nyse.com/pdfs/PT082707.pdf
Now you may suspect who the top program trader is. Well, sometimes it is Goldman but lately it has been Lehman Brothers. However, if you look at program trades made as the broker being the principal and not acting as an agent for others, Goldman does indeed take the top spot. For the referenced report they accounted for 25% of all program trades made as principal. Looking farther we see that the top six firms accounted for 69% of all program trades, or 50% of ALL shares traded on the NYSE. 50% of all shares traded in the hands of program traders of just six firms that are all members of the CRMPG, with the goal working together for the greater good? How would you like to be on the other side of those trades?
Again Greenspan in his speech of 2002 says it best.” To require disclosure of the structure of the innovative product either before or after its introduction would immediately eliminate the quasi-monopoly return and discourage future endeavors to innovate in that area.”
Quasi-monopoly returns! That, my friends, leads me to Goldman’s third quarter earnings release today. Earnings were up an eye-popping 88% from last year. It was as though Goldman was on the right side of every trade.
But how could this be? We saw the headlines;
‘Goldman's Exclusive Hedge Fund Drops By 10%’
‘Goldman hedge fund falls 22.5 pct in Aug’
Well, you see, Goldman doesn’t manage OTHER peoples money quite like it manages it’s own.
From the report - Asset Management (money they manage for others), Goldman: “Asset Management net revenues were $1.20 billion, 31% higher than the third quarter of 2006, reflecting a 40% increase in management and other fees, partially offset by lower incentive fees.”
Lower incentive fees? Fees were down 52% from last year. Incentive fees reflect doing a good job. Looks like their performance was lacking from last year.
Goldman: “During the quarter, assets under management increased $38 billion to $796 billion, reflecting money market net inflows of $31 billion, non-money market net inflows of $19 billion spread across all asset classes, and net market depreciation of $12 billion, reflecting depreciation in equity and alternative investment assets, partially offset by appreciation in fixed income assets.”
Increase of $38 billion. That’s a lot of money but still just 5% increase. But with $38 billion in net inflows after depreciation it appears that they had negative organic return on the assets that manage.
All on all, the money they manage for OTHERS had a bad quarter.
Now look at their proprietary trading unit – THEIR money. Trading and Principal Investments were $8.23 billion, 70% higher than the third quarter of 2006. Equity trading revenues were up a mind boggling 154%. This is in quarter were we saw a rough drop of about 3% in the S&P500.
Goldman: “Significant losses on non-prime loans and securities were more than offset by gains on short mortgage positions.”
They shorted mortgage positions with THEIR money! Shorting mortgages – a bet that citizens will default on their loans and possibly lose their homes. Goldman made money when things were good by pushing these sub-prime loans, now they win again when they go sour.
OTHER peoples money (OTM); NEW YORK, Sept 13 (Reuters) – “Goldman Sachs Group's Global Alpha hedge fund fell 22.5 percent in August on losses from currency and stock trades, Bloomberg News reported, citing an update sent to investors.”
Goldman has the largest collection of hedge funds in the world. How is it that they receive 75% of their revenues from trading, but the hedge funds they manage for other people’s money under-perform the returns Goldman receives on its OWN money? When Goldman’s hedge funds are long sub-prime, why did not the shorting of mortgages strategy that they used for THEIR money save some of the OTHER people’s money? Trading is a zero sum gain. Did Goldman need someone to take the other side of the trade?
Greenspan said this in the same speech above; “Most financial innovations in over-the-counter derivatives involve new ways to disperse risk. Moreover, our constantly changing financial environment supplies a steady stream of new opportunities for innovation to address market imperfections. Innovative products temporarily earn a quasi-monopoly rent.”
I think everyone would have to agree that Goldman has been very innovative in benefiting from market imperfections. They place their former executives in high positions of public power. They manage the CRMPG that allows them insight into the inside workings of their competitors. They have been aggressive in their managed hedge funds by establishing a counter-party to their trades. They certainly are getting their share on THEIR money with “quasi-monopoly rent”.
And they are getting paid well to do it.
Goldman: “Compensation and benefits expenses were $5.92 billion, 68% higher than the third quarter of 2006” The number employees increased only 7%. Nice raise guys!
So how does Goldman get away with this? Obviously the influence peddling is there. Why is the financial community of the slightly less connected not out there screaming about the potential for collusion and manipulation by these large member banks with their CRMPG association? Trading is a zero sum game. Why are so many willing to take a bullet for Goldman on an un-level playing field? I just read a commentary from Bill Bonner expressing some of what I mention here. He wrote this after a similar stunning Goldman report in June of 06’;
“Well, how is it possible that a company like Goldman – with thousands of traders – can make 75% of its revenues from trading? You'd think their lucky trades would be balanced out by their unlucky trades. They can't all be lucky. And they can't all be geniuses. As Buffett says, there aren't that many geniuses around.”
"Or to put it another way, here's a company making billions, mostly by trading. Who's on the other side of these trades? Who's losing? Where does the money come from? How is it possible for so many traders to have a result that is so far beyond equilibrium...it seems to defy gravity." Bill Bonner
So why do I care about all of this?
Greenspan (same speech) said this; “No one can deny that fully informed market participants will generate the most efficient pricing of resources and the most efficient allocation of capital. Moreover, it could be argued that, if all information held by individual buyers or sellers became available to all participants, the pricing structure would more closely reflect the underlying balance of supply and demand. Thus full information would appear to be the unambiguous objective. But should it be?”
“But should it be?” Hell yes it should be. Fully informed market participates is central to a free market. Allowing Goldman and the CRMPG, with the blessings of the Federal Reserve to sway the markets in the direction that benefits them most, in the name of financial stability is a bullet to the chest of capitalism. Who was Chairman Greenspan helping when he suggested adjustable rate mortgages at interest rate bottoms? Some kind of innovative sub-prime scheme perhaps? The time to save our free markets is now. The complacency bullshit needs to stop!
Joe Stocks
Nasdaq NMS one minute tick chart. I always wondered who initiates these huge buy programs that in less that two minutes takes the tick from negative -470 to a positive +738, a 1200 point move.
The NASDAQ NMS tick chart is the number of stocks that are net positive or negative over the prior minute. The blue line is zero meaning as many stocks traded positive as negative. How does buying sentiment change so quickly? Yes, it is buy programs but who can sway the market that much so quickly. I have watched this chart for years. In the early 2000's with was a very rare occurrence to see a 1000 point move. Now it happens many times a day. I use to have some old tick chart images but must have deleted.
Call your broker, or another. Seems like one of them would be able to place a trade on the expert OTC market. That what I would do if I wanted the shares bad enough. But I have a problem paying for something that is worthless.
>>No way would they let $50B of NOLs slip away.<<
No way that the IRS will let Lehman slip away with $50bil in NOLs and not offset with cancellation of debt.
So, you guys hold this theory. Why isn't anyone buying it by buying the shares at a third of a penny a share?
Yes. I would be interested in checking out that board. Thanks!
Doing well. Just very busy with my pet project. Rockdale Art Farm on Facebook
Sold some stuff to raise a little more cash. Taking the elevator down on energy. Still like CHK for their return of capital to shareholders. I own very few names that do not pay a dividend, or like with BHF, strong buybacks, or like GNW and ACT, announcing plans to return capital in cash or buybacks.
CORR - Got out of this one yesterday for a breakeven. I expected a better quarterly report.
Welcome to the board!
Welcome to the board!
Joe