My thinking is that index changes usually result in potentially stronger representation numbers as befit the hedge/mutual funds as they reposition to reflect ownership positions as per their rules of organization and ensuing bylaws. At the same time, positions in less meaningful slots will demonstrate a weakening. We're witnessing a step-up moment which has come up here from time to time. I remember just a few months ago when some were trying to understand a frighteningly dramatic change of attitude which caught many off balance. As luck would have it, I'd been watching the Alerian indices and things made sense all of a sudden.
The Alerian indices haven't been around for as many years as some probably think, myself included. Yet I know well the impact such devices can exert when they evolve into the "go-to" wheels of change to be reckoned.
For the unitiated:
Many institutional buyers are required to hold positions in various investment vehicles such as GE, GM or IBM for the sake of high-profile inclusion as co-owners. This is mandated by the institution's rules of organization. The goal is that of taking steps to ensure reliably secure positions involving the fund's investment process. At the same time, as an individual holding's market standing changes, such changes must be acknowledged by participation on the part of the holder/ sponsoring institution.
What with NGL moving up sharply, one would expect that the index change is reflecting a more highly desired place in the hierarchy. For me, personally, holding 24 units of NGL is proving to be a boon to my estate.
Oooohhhhh, I can smell the coffee already!
I get tired of those rent-a-cup joints I'm forced to frequent. Or is that freak-rent?
Lolol
OK, I quite now. Really, I'll be quit.
