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.
There is a difference between trending into a recession and being in one. We're not yet in recession but there's a good chance we see one in 2023 as the Fed raises rates another 150-200 basis points.
First, Twitter has already publicly disclosed its methodology. Second, the executed purchase agreement does not include any provisions related to bots. Third, Twitter's SEC filings are materially correct and can be relied upon.
Elon has no case against Twitter. I recommend you read the SEC filings because all of the above is there and in plain English.
Huh? HGEN has negative net cash per the most recent 10-Q (Q1 2022). Cash per the 10-Q was $68.9 million which is $23.4 million LESS than the $92.3 million of A/P + Accrued Expenses + Long-term Debt.
Did you look at the liabilities and debt section of the balance sheet? How much cash does HGEN have after subtracting current liabilities (A/P, Accrued expenses) and debt?
Sorry to hear that. Next time, please make sure and listen to those that are warning you against such a position. Speculative biotech's are always a wildcard, but it's only money. There will always be another tree that will grow that can be used to make some more.
Congratulations.... This post is in the running for HGEN's Top post of the year award.
Impressive how one can completely disregard any losses from owning a equity that is trading nearly 80% below their average basis. Do you include your HGEN investment or any underwater investment when determining your annual investment returns?
Not sure where you got Elgin, because Crimo lived in Highwood which is next to Highland Park. He dropped out of Highland Park high school and had been living with his dad and uncle.
Thanks DonDon. You're trying very hard to win the Top Post of Year award. You definitely get an "A" for effort.
I love when "investors" think they understand the options market. First, one needs to understand for every HGEN option sold there is a buyer of that option who has incentives that are the exact opposite of the seller. The fact you think the sellers of the $2.50 puts who sold them for $1.00 and thus, have a potential basis in shares at $1.50 need the price to move to $2.50 by July 15th is comical. On the other hand, the put buyers, have every incentive to get the price as low as possible given they need HGEN under $1.50 to make any money. One can argue a put buyer might be hedging a long position, however, nobody hedges downside risk on a stock trading at $1.60.
You're also talking about very puny total dollars at risk in these option trades.
I'll bet you. Loser donates to the charity of the winner's choice, however, $20 is for kids. I'm game for anywhere between $100 to $10,000, and I'll take the side that AMZN doesn't get to $170 by November 2022. Let me know if you're in.
In other words, during the nearly half-century from 1970 to 2018, there was not a single example of Summers' stated condition — unemployment under 4% and inflation over 4% — ever existing.
There are some earlier examples, at least in a limited way.
For about a year in 1951, unemployment was under 4% while inflation was above 4%. But inflation then dropped to 1.1% or less for the six months immediately before a recession in 1953, so this is not unequivocal evidence for Summers’ larger point about high inflation being a precursor to a recession.
We found only one clear example of Summers’ rule holding — a two-year period in 1968 and 1969 when unemployment was under 4% and inflation was above 4%. That came in the immediate run-up to a recession.
Still, this means there’s just one example of Summers’ rule holding over nearly 75 years of economic data. That’s not exactly ironclad empirical evidence.
This is known in data analysis as the "small-n" problem, short for "small number of examples." Social scientists and economists generally warn against drawing sweeping conclusions based on small numbers of examples.
So what’s going on with Summers’ rule?
We didn’t hear back from Summers, but we did hear back from a research collaborator of his, Alex Domash of the Harvard Kennedy School. When Domash walked us through the supporting data, it became clearer to us that the research upon which Summers was basing his formula had more nuances than his talking point to journalists indicated.
Domash pointed us to a blog post that is the source of Summers’ talking point. In it, he and Summers looked at data similar to what PolitiFact used, although they used quarterly figures rather than monthly figures.
A chart in the blog post breaks down the data in some detail. It covers every quarter from 1955 to 2019, or 256 separate quarters.
Using the thresholds cited by Summers in his media interviews — inflation above 4% and unemployment below 4% — they found that the likelihood of a recession was 100%. However, these conditions only existed in seven quarters out of 256, or less than 3% of the time.
Domash told PolitiFact that the "small-n" issue "is a valid critique," and one that he has since sought to improve upon by enlarging the base of research. He said he recently used the same analysis to study 30 member nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a group of richer nations, and found that low unemployment and high inflation made the probability of an impending recession "around 90%."
Still, Summers’ offering of a straightforward formula in the media obscures the reality that there’s barely any historical precedent, making it less than a robust method for extrapolating into the future.
DonDon --- I thought you said HGEN was going to $2.50 today --- you know, max pain at all? Have you ever gotten one of these predictions right?
BTW, who are these entities that are intentionally lowering HGEN's price? Why would they waste time trying to lower a $2 equity when there's thousands of much higher priced equities they could try lowering?
Has anyone noticed the people calling others trolls are actually the people who are being disrespectful. They think they are better, smarter than others they don't even know. Congrats Santafe, you've earned your Trumper badge.
Now that's funny. Maybe some of us have demanding day jobs that limits our ability to spend time on a stupid message board filled with people that think they know more than someone that rarely ever posts. Why would anyone who doesn't have time to be on the board waste money on a subscription? I'd rather be charitable with that money instead.
Thanks for the laugh. It's almost as funny as taking a 4% loss on covered call options on IBM. Clearly, you need more knowledge of options so you actually make money with them.
Someone isn't happy today and it clearly isn't from my post. As I mentioned before my day job limits the companies and industries I can talk about and thus, I don't post very often. Nothing in my posts were accusatory or trolling.
I've been trading options for over 20 years and it takes a financial genius to lose money on a covered call. Clearly, you lost money on the equity piece and not on the actual call option, unless you traded out of the call for a loss. Nick only talks about the call options he sells which is impossible to lose (as I mentioned) unless of course one trades out of the option vs. waiting for the call to expire.
You always talk about your covered calls making you money, yet you never mention the negative returns you've experienced from the decline in the underlying security. You may want to balance out your discussion for readers who think you're actually making money, when the covered call is just offsetting part of your negative returns. It's impossible to lose money on a covered call as you either keep the premium, or you keep the premium and your shares are called away.
What timeline? There's no question the S&P will go down another 5%. The Fed has a long way to go before it pulls back on rate increases, downward earnings revisions have just started, and if the underlying economy eventually leads to job losses you're going to see a lot more downside.
But, shouldn't we all be asking Dexprs guy, Mr. Lee?
Because that is what happens with every boom and bust. When energy prices crash --- you have mass layoffs, capex is slashed, and focus turns to survival. We've had a couple significant oil crashes in the past decade (2015, 2020) and three crashes over the past 15 years --- leading workers to say enough is enough and they've moved on to more stable and likely more enjoyable work that pays decently well. Could they make more money in the oil fields, most likely but not worth the hassle of the boom and busts and its real work. So, we stand today with a shortage of labor and equipment and there's not much anyone can do about it, unless borders are opened to let in people who are willing to get their hands dirty.
There's labor shortages in most industry today --- from airplane pilots to bus & truck drivers to oil & gas workers to health care workers to restaurant workers to professionals (accounting, finance, legal). COVID has killed a million+ Americans, but, it also provided families the opportunity to reassess their priorities resulting in the great retirement and more families being content with only one working parent.
Except there's labor and equipment shortage, so we don't have the ability to produce more oil. This is what happens with boom and bust cycles and has nothing to do with the current administrations policies.
Former central bank economists are a dime a dozen. Greenspan said his "model" was flawed and broke during the Great Recession. Does anyone actually believe any economic models have been accurate? How are utilizing the "model is broken" concept in your investment outlooks?
Given your macro outlook, what is your model telling you how revenue and earnings are going to be impacted over the next 6 months and 12 months? What industries are going to see the largest impacts? What are the key macro inputs you use in your model?
What are examples of these "Quality" investment research products?
Trolling??? Because I ask questions you're unable to answer? I have been a member of this message board for a very long time. I also have a very busy career in M&A, that not only restricts what I can talk about but also limits by free time for posting and reading random investment boards.
Congrats on your investment and I'm not at all surprised you're promoting it. That's what promoters do.
????? I asked valid questions and was hoping for some actual answers to those questions. Not sure why you're unable to answer them.
That's great... Central banks have and will continue to make mistakes --- they are run by humans. How does that excerpt posted, which provided no new or insightful information, provide value to those on this board (i.e., how can someone use that excerpt to be better off)? How are you using that excerpt?
That's great... But, he's an obvious promoter and you should have no issues with me saying the obvious --- not sure why you're taking offense to my comments.