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.
I couldn't agree more.
As a matter of fact, I made a tidy profit trading after hours. Many people don't know this, but there is a very liquid market in ... um ... uh ... MACEDONIA! Yeah, that's the ticket, trade after hours in the Macedonia Market!
And if that doesn't work, then well, ummm, TROY has a nice market, you can get rid of your losers on HELEN OF TROY DOT COM, it is a great market.
Just so you know I am making money, bushels of it!
I have to admit I am skeptical when people who only play from the long side claim large profits two and a half years into the worst bear market in history.
It is like a guy claiming to have won the rodeo championship with one hand tied behind his back.
"Under Taft Hartley, a work action like a slowdown is grounds for sanctions against the union, including jailing union leaders. Thus, the injunction was just what PMA wanted as union is now forced into mediation."
Personally, I don't even think there is a 1 in a million chance that could happen.
I think many of the provisions of the act are probably unenforceable.
In this case I think the company is getting the short end of the stick, as it appears that the longshoremen are going to work "safely" which from what I have read is a code word for working extemely slowly.
I wonder if there has ever been a situation where the workers refused to comply with the court order. Ordering people to work runs into some pretty severe constitutional problems.
HPQ not enthusiastic about 2003:
http://money.cnn.com/2002/10/09/technology/hp.reut/index.htm
Bond funds will move primarily in relation to expectations for interest rates ... based on the evidence I have seen, the correlation to the stock market is not that great.
If you are going to own a bond fund, a short-term fund presents the least risk (with respect to loss of principal), with a corresponding low return, as compared to an intermediate or long-term fund.
People that swing left before making a right hand turn really tick me off. Automobiles have only been in existence for what, 100 years? You would think by now people would realize that it is possible to turn the car to the right without first turning it to the left.
The practice seems to be most common in the south, where they swing left because "that's how my daddy did it."
I bit on it, which means it is probably doomed.
With all the cash AAPL has you would think they could throw a little at their shareholders.
"would hurt companies not currently making a profit as investment money would gravitate to profitable companies"
Actually money would gravitate to companies who turned a profit AND were willing to share the profit with shareholders (leaving out pretty much all of the four letter stocks, none of which are worth more than twenty-five cents a share anyway).
But isn't that as it should be?
"Make Dividends Tax Deductible To Revive The Market"
That makes to much sense for Congress to ever act on it.
The current system punishes corporations for behaving responsibily, and rewards those that behave irresponsibly.
This one has some good historic charts, too:
http://www.stockcharts.com/charts/historical/
OT: Just for clarification --- if politics are going to become a topic of debate here, is it okay for me to refer to another poster as a "nazi bastard," or would that be considered out of bounds?
TIA!
"Tanker explosion news relevant to the market,imo."
Fortunately it was a French tanker,
so nobody really cares.
I think the focus on the "double dip" recession is mistaken, and will prove costly to many.
This is not a mere "single dip" or "double dip" or "triple dip" recession, it is a prolonged economic decline that will last for years. So those who take it as an ordinary business cycle and buy at the bottom of the cycle will get burned.
I would agree that with record low interest rates, investors will be drawn to stocks that never have, and never will, pay a dividend.
How could anyone pass up such a business opportunity?
"We promise you that, if you invest in our company, then in good times or bad we will never share a single penny of profits with you. Even if we become the most highly valued company in the universe, we pledge that under no circumstances will we direct even a single penny towards our shareholders. Even if we have so much cash that we are swimming in it, we are drowning in it, we have it coming out our noses, we swear that no matter the market conditions, none of that cash will go to you."
How can ANYONE pass up such an attractive investment?
Russell is an eternal optimist, one of these days that is going to bite him in the ass.
"My heart bleeds for these overpaid parasites who will now have to earn an honest living."
What astonished me is that prior to the layoff they had a total of 20,000 investment bankers.
What possible use could they have for so many of them?
Lol, very true. We can hardly expect Grasso to say: "... and I hope the door doesn't hit that fat arsed horse-faced old hag on the way out!"
If you have a problem with the guy, just spit it out.
The passive-aggressive approach to taunting that you have taken on this board have very little entertainment value.
"Tenchu, the critical question about AMD is survivability"
I disagree, it is irrelevant whether AMD survives or not, the stock is still worth close to zero.
When one makes an investment, one expects either a current or eventual return. AMD has shown that, in good times or in bad, it provides no return whatsoever to its shareholders.
If, during the period when it saw the greatest increase in demand for its products that it will ever see, AMD was unable to share even a single penny with its shareholders, there is no rational basis to conclude it will do so in the future.
"Anyone know how I can get in that union?"
There's a bar in Jersey called the "BadaBing,"
stop by and talk to a guy named Tony Soprano.
DD's better than expected results are attributable to reduced taxes ...
The 10:00 am numbers were better than expected, should give it a little (very little) pop.
I agree that it will survive, but see little if any chance that it's stock will ever be worth much more than a quarter a share (not that I'm shorting it at this level, lol).
It is a typical tech stock that in boom times returns nothing to its shareholders, and in gloom times returns nothing to its shareholders.
"Nuthin' from nuthin' leaves nuthin'
And you gotta have sumthin'
If ya want to be with me"
"CSCO $9.91. Watching level II and the the number of shares being traded is amazing."
I'm scared to touch it, getting that "somebody knows something I don't know" feeling.
Chimps should be seen and not heard.
Also someone took down their numbers this morning.
The inability of the market to sustain a rally is getting frustrating. I've been sitting on a large pile of cash for I can't remember how long, waiting for a "good" rally to add to my short positions, and it just never comes.
We have the one-day wonders, and then it is back to regularly scheduled programming.
No need.
Just park some money in a couple of bear funds and watch the money role in.
Retail sales for September expected to be up 1.5% compared to year ago. Given that year ago was the most horrific month in the history of the United States, that is damning with faint praise:
Retail sales 'incredibly weak' By Rex Nutting
Retail sales continued to weaken in the latest week, BTM and UBSW reported Tuesday. The weekly chain store index fell 0.8% week-over-week and is now up 2% year-over-year. Retailers and analysts are lowering their monthly sales and profit projections. For all of September, BTM expects industry-wide same store sales to rise an "incredibly weak" 1.5%, compared with last September's horrible sales performance
"When EXTR is trading at $400m valuation with positive cash flow and $400 million in cash, I see nothing but "real value""
The stock is absolutely worthless.
You could hold it for the next 300 years, and you would not receive one single penny from the company.
"Then why did they cut interest rates so many times.
Why are some still wanting a rate cut?"
Because people are stubborn and refuse to accept reality, causing them to search for a quick fix from the Fed.
The problem is that too many people threw obscene amounts of money at assets with little or no real value (they are still doing it as we speak).
How could rate cuts, no matter how drastic, cure that?
"The rates should
be raised. Cutting rates isn't working. Leaving rates alone
isn't working. Time to try something else."
That is because the problems causing the slide in the markets have nothing to do with interest rates.
I will go out on a limb and predict that the markets will continue to go lower unless they go higher.
In determining an appropriate valuation for equities, alternative investments must be considered.
However, one must also consider the fact that the vast majority of publicly traded equities are not "investments" at all (buying most equities is very similar to placing a bet at the horse track).
An investment is something that provides you with a return on your investment (or at least the reasonable expectation of a return on your investment), and most stocks do not meet that criteria.
So, the choice is not whether to invest in stocks or bonds or real estate or cash (given that stocks are not even an investment), but whether to invest in bonds or real estate or cash.
The fed model is useless here.
First, interest rates are at forty year lows due to a very weak economy and the biggest decline in corporate earnings in history (also the largest corporate bankruptcies in history and the largest corporate scandals in history).
To have any validity, the fed model should use "normalized" interest rates (perhaps the trailing 5 year average or projected 5 year average going forward).
Second, regarding the comparison of p/e ratios for stocks to the yields of bonds, the "e" portion of the "p/e" ratio is largely irrevelant. Interest paid on treasury notes is money in your pocket; as we have seen during the past couple of decades, on the other hand, corporate earnings are most assuredly NOT money in your pocket (and the earnings may not exist at all).
A more worthy comparison would be the interest yield on the ten year bond to the dividend yield of the S&P 500.
Cramer saying the same thing in Real Money.