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.
First, annualizing a retailers 1st quarter earnings is beyond insane. Kohl's earnings estimate for the year is almost $3/share (vs. your 52 cents). Second, comparing Kohl's to MSFT is completely absurd.
I live it every single day. Talk to professionals. I work at one of the largest financial services in the world and speak to dozens of companies (large to micro-cap) and C-Suite / VP level executives, bankers, lawyers, consultants, etc. every week. If they have a busy day and need to get real work accomplished, they aren't going into the office --- unless there's some need (i.e., in-person client proposal, client meeting, etc.). Since schools and daycare centers reopened, WFH is night and day more efficient. Over the last year, the largest companies and professional services firms have pushed to get professionals back in the office to rebuild rapport / relationships / culture, etc., and we've all discussed how the end result would be lower productivity --- i.e., instead of cranking out work, you're spending time chit-chatting / reconnecting / travelling to meet team-members, etc. Anyone who thinks WFH is not significantly more productive, clearly hasn't worked in a professional setting in many years and has no idea what is actually getting accomplished today.
Like I mentioned before, the biggest M&A transaction year in history was done fully remote --- no time wasted travelling around the country/world, no pointless in-person meeting inefficiencies, etc. The migration to virtual meetings (driven by the pandemic / WFH) provided the opportunity to hold substantially more meetings and cover multiple deals in a given day versus over a week if conducted in person and all without the fun of flying all over the country.
This is non-sense. Most professionals are substantially more productive WFH than in the office. The movement over the last year towards a hybrid model is likely the cause for the decline in productivity as workers are spending more time in the office reconnecting with coworkers vs. being productive. This is a push by Companies for a more connected workforce with the cost being lower productivity.
The largest M&A deal activity year in history was accomplished 100% remotely (WFH) --- there is no way that would have been possible working in person.
Huh??? Schwab acquired TD Ameritrade in 2020 --- the only thing happening now is migrating TD Ameritrade accounts onto the Schwab platform. Also, Schwab isn't acquiring TD Bank.
This is utter non-sense. Simple dollar-cost averaging into the S&P 500 over a long-period of time has yielded significant returns for the "average person". $100 invested in the S&P 500 in 1980 equals $11,100 today. Investing is one of the best ways for anyone, including the "average person", to improve their financial well-being / freedom.
How does the "average person" in the U.S. "get rich", since investing isn't the answer?
You sold cash covered puts to have more cash available to buy on a pullback you expect next week? If the puts are cash covered, you don't have more cash since the cash used to cover the puts is way more than the premium received from the puts sold. Also, if you expected the market to pullback, you should have sold calls and waited for the pull-back to happen before selling puts --- i.e., puts will increase in value if the market pulls back, leading to negative returns on your puts relative to when you sold. Unless you're selling very shorted dated put options, that doesn't make a lot of sense --- and definitely doesn't make sense if you're trying to have more cash available to buy on any pullback.
You're clueless. This is nothing like the GFC. The fact banks have unrealized losses on HTM assets is not unexpected when rates increase 400+ bps in less than a year. If the Fed lowered rates like they did during the GFC, the HTM losses and any potential bank issues would vanish overnight. The fact a few banks fail because they did really stupid things like invest $91 billion in longer duration mortgage assets over the past 6 months without hedging interest rate risk, will have very little impact on the overall economy. SIVB could have easily avoided today by hedging interest rate risk on their asset portfolio... Also, a large portion of their depositors (80%) shouldn't have carried amounts well in excess of FDIC limits. Some people were smart and quickly transferred cash out (a close VC friend transferred $75 million from his start-up businesses at SIVB to his personal investment accounts yesterday).
What are you talking about? The yield curve has been inverted for the last year, and now you think its saying a recession is around the corner? The drop in yields late yesterday / today was driven by a flight to quality given the uncertainty around potential bank failures and corporates needing to find a home for hundreds of billions of dollars.
Vanguard, Blackrock, and State Street maintain the largest suite of Index Fund ETF's which owned these shares. They also own large stakes in all large U.S. public companies. Thinking this was algos / traders is laughable.
That's great. However, for all the research you're doing, one would expect you could find some good investments to buy and hold vs. flipping options daily which consumes time and effort for very little after tax returns.
This makes little to no sense. Institutions are in the business of providing a quality education, and the vast majority of U.S. universities and colleges do just that. Institutions have fulsome application and acceptance practices to ensure qualified students are admitted. But, now you want institutions to have skin in the game on whether each of their qualified students actually pays their bills, and you think that will lead to a more cost effective education? How do you think the cost of default would impact the cost of education?
Today's tuition is based largely on supply and demand and expected return on investment... Every potential student assess their return on investment and decides whether to go to school or not, which school to attend, etc., and overall, ROI's will vary significantly across the spectrum --- some economic returns unbelievably high while others very low economically but might provide significant value to society (social workers, etc.). This is no different than investing, except now you want Morgan Stanley or Schwab to backstop its Etrade or Ameritrade individual investors who don't get a good return on their investment decisions.
It's one thing if an institution isn't providing a good quality education (i.e., Trump University), then yes, students / families should be able to recover damages from said institution. However, if someone gets accepted to Harvard, graduates with a liberal arts degree and $150k in student debt, and says screw it I'm going to turn down an I-Banking gig at Goldman to be a beach bum... You want Harvard to cover that student's laziness? That's absurd.
If you're going to do that, why not make retail stores, restaurants, etc., liable for consumers credit card debt? They shouldn't be selling goods to consumers that may not pay it back.
BTW, if you think you can provide a high quality education at a much cheaper price --- you should create your own private university. For some reason, nobody does this and I wonder why?
That is horrible advice, unless your trading fixed income. No reason not take advantage of the short-end of the curve. Ladders work very well. But then again, you would rather trade options daily for very small dollar returns that are taxed at ordinary income rates.
Back to talking about your investment guru Tom Lee after his fine year in 2022?
Do you believe everything you hear? You clearly have never heard of an equity risk premium.. Instead you think it makes sense to compare a risk-free asset and risk asset without factoring a risk premium. BTW, current real yields are implying a PE of 14x for the S&P 500.
Also, the SPX is trading well above 20x earnings (not below) (i.e., SPX LTM earnings are less than $180).
Fact: Since the 1980’s no bear market has ended at levels above 9-14x the previous peak in S&P 500 EPS.