From last week, Dss said
"Worst sectors today, down more than 2%:
XLF
XME
XLB
VNQ
XHB
XLI"
If you, like me, wish to short, don't short strength. Never short AAPL, it will rip your face off.
This really choppy correction began 5/2.
Last week, I gave you these: in XLF, the performance is:
JPM -10.8%
GS -10%
WFC -08.6%
BRK.B -6.4%
C -12%
BAC -11%
AXP +1%
USB -4.5%
MET -9.2%
MS -12%
And I promised the rest. Here’s the work
In XME, we have
ICO +1%
MCP - 17.9%
RTI +1.9%
CRS –1.6%
RGLD 0.6%
ANV –18%
MEE –3.7%
NEM –8.0%
ANR –16.2%
JRCC –17.34%
In XLB we have
DD – 10.5%
FCX –8.4%
DOW –14.9%
MON +0.7%
NEM –8% (did that one already)
PX –4.3%
APD –4.4%
AA –8.8%
PPG –8.9%
IP –7.7%
In VNQ we have
SPG –0.6%
EQR +1.4%
PSA –1%
HCP –8.3%
VNO –2%
BXP 0%
HST –5%
AVB +4%
PLD –6.1%
HCN –4.8%
In XHB we have
PIR –6.7%
TPX –6.4%
PHM –9.4%
BBBY –6.4%
MHK +1.4%
LEG –9%
OC –2.9%
WSM –12.2%
RYL 0
DHI –8.1%
In XLI we have
GE –9.7%
UTX –7.5%
UPS –6.8%
CAT –12.6%
MMM –6.2%
BA –6.7%
UNP –2.8%
HON –7.2%
EMR –15.4%
DE –16.6%
How can this data be used? First, you can see how any individual stock fares versus the SPY since 5/2. The SPY lost 5.3%. So we call this factor “relative strength,” over a period of around 26 trading days. BA’s relative strength is almost the same as the SPY, while DE is around ½ the relative strength of BA.
The second thing we can do with this data is determine a possible momentum trade. Momentum trades are all I do because I do not try to find a top or a bottom, and look for in-channel prices. When the price falls out of the channel, the momentum trade is over. I think yesterday, Mannwich set a momentum trade on C. Good trade. Relative strength compared to SPY is really poor. I too am short C, and have been for a number of days. When it falls out of its downchannel, I’m out.
The third thing we can do with this data is determine possible longs, when the turn-around does start. For example, you see AXP in the financials has a 1% increase while the SPY has a 5% decrease. When the SPY turns around, it is likely that AXP will follow it up faster than a stock that lost say 12%, assuming AXP has some correlation with the SPY. You can check this by overlaying the 2 charts. (you have to be careful with this one, because of something like MHK, the volatility might falsify your observations). (As might the short interest).
The 4th thing we can do with this data is determine who might pop as a result of a short-covering rally. Like ANV and JRCC have lost the most, maybe by shorts (you can’t get recent short interest, only the members of the exchanges get this data and it’s kept secret, so you have to guess). So on a short-covering rally, they may pop the highest.
So there’s your data. As I promised.
On a personal note, Friday I have to travel to Hong Kong, because now I am persona non-grata in China, and I have some meetings with some Chinese. The boss wants to send me to Taiwan for the next phase, but this means I can opt out of my contract (I think they forgot this clause) and I get my pension. Remember, youngsters: hope springs eternal. Like DSS says, the hard work pays off. So tomorrow I may not be on-line, but I should be back by Tuesday night next week. So I shouldn’t miss a post.
Can you hear them begging already ?
ReplyDelete"Benny, you sure you can't spare another trillion or two ? See, even with the best intentions in the world, I'm seeing increasing risks in lending my money.. er.. OUR money, Benny.. to help the economy.
Not to mention all those bags of stocks I've got in store.."
And thks Rock. Hope to read and comment this afternoon.
ReplyDeleteBTW, congratz for your shorts, and to Emmy too (for jumping in and out the short bandwagon these last few days, IIReadC) ;)
Rock,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the post. Hope all goes well for you personally, too. Seems like a Hobson's choice unfortunately.
Beware of markets that go down at night!
ReplyDeleteIt appears we are going to gap down into new low (for this move) territory.
ReplyDelete@Dss
ReplyDeleteThanks for your thoughts. Really.
I think your comment yesterday of 4th often searched hit, simply means they were expecting something else than what they got.
Like maybe 1) Strong beat 2) hear the words 3) On the Apple store 4) No rap 5) etc etc
Any thought about the volume ?
ReplyDeleteCan't tell for US markets, but from what I see on the 10 or so French stocks I'm following, plus what I've gathered in MSM, no big volume to confirm the self off that started in May.
@WolfStreet:
ReplyDeleteWhat a GREAT observation. Actually, since the "flash crash", the volumes have been going down. I too was curious about this.
I had a discussion with my TDA StrategyDesk guys, and they told me the HFT algos's transactions actually do register as a trade, and the volume is recorded.
So what does it mean that the exchange volumes are lower? less mom-and-pop trading? Less HFT algo trading? Lower hedge fund trading? More investment and less short-term trading (look into futures and options), meaning there is more betting on what's going to happen?
From my perspective, I think it's the last one. I believe there is much higher volume in the options, as you can bet on spreads and make money as opposed to buying or shorting an equity and when the equity pops or submerges, your spreads will make money. Not a lot, maybe, but it's pretty guaranteed.
What this means to a dum ol rock is that it's likely either a top is being recorded, and we are going to bet on a down market for awhile, or that there will be a huge upswing in prices. Frankly, I belive that it's likely a top that's being recorded. But if you're in options, you can make money either way.
I don't play these, because I have fun with the daily volatility, and make money that way. But for those of you who aren't nimble, well, this is a way to cover your bets.
Excellent post, Rock! Thanks for your efforts.
ReplyDeleteNo surprise that I'm in your TOP camp, Rock. Can't see what exactly propels both the markets and economy higher at this point, although I'm sure we haven't seen the last of Benny's tricks.
ReplyDeleteSir Jamie Dimon weighs in about the "stalled" recovery. "Too much banking regulation", he says. Incredible.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/post_2096_b_872902.html
Is American becoming the next Japan? That's been my premise from the start.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/06/philip-pilkington-down-in-the-hole-%e2%80%93-is-america-becoming-the-next-japan.html
Rock,
ReplyDeleteI just thought it was funny that your "Rock's Check List" made it up so high in the Google rankings, among camping, party, rock climbing, geology and rock stars list.
But we do get a lot of lurkers who must google us based upon our Anonymous Traders page hits. People from all over the world, interestingly enough, if you look at the flag counter.
Manny,
ReplyDeleteNot enough taxes and regulations on the banking industry. After the meltdown that deregulating derivatives caused it is shocking that anyone could say that.
Canada never had the meltdown like we did (they were affected as a by product) because they never allowed their banks to lever up, they didn't lower their capital requirements to almost zero, and they kept their regulations in place.
Manny,
ReplyDeleteI am doing analysis right now to figure out if this is the pause that refreshes or a true end to the bear market rally.
Is this 1994, 2004, 2005 or 2007?
@Denise: But it shows just how utterly removed from OUR reality (the rest of us) these bankers are now. Most of them honestly think this way and believe they are indispensable from our economy and country, no matter how patently absurd that is in OUR reality. We don't matter.
ReplyDeleteIt's all going to come to a head again in the next bigger, uglier crisis, but the next time I don't think they make it out unscathed (which I believe the smarter ones know, which is why they're taking everything not nailed down this time around).
My last comment disappeared. Anyone else having trouble?
ReplyDeleteGreat Denise! I'd love to hear your take. Personally, I'm in the '07 ('08) camp. Each subsequent "recovery" following the bubbles is getting shorter and more shallow each time, leading to an even worse bubble and crisis, which leads me to believe this one will be no different.
ReplyDeletePlus we have to distinguish between the US economy, and the stock markets, especially the S&P 500 and the NDX.
ReplyDeleteMany of our multinational corporations are doing just fine, record profts, record revenues, etc., because parts of the US and World economies are still doing well.
ReplyDeleteSo the stock market is not really a reflection of what the US economy is experiencing like it used to 20 years ago.
ReplyDeleteNot me, Denise, although for some reason even when logged in it won't post under my blue handle. Weird.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, looks like the situation deteriorating in Syria:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/08/syrians-flee--jisr-al-shugour-troops-approach_n_872995.html
@Dss
ReplyDeleteYeah, I thought it was funny too. so I was looking for another reason.
But I hope, dearly, that people who hit that, actually learn something, and it so pains me that I neglected to put in the checklist the donation to St Jude's.
I just got my US taxes back, and my Sing taxes are done but not accepted yet. As soon as they are, I'll have confirmation on the amount of my donation to St. Jude's for this year.
Last year was a good year.
St. Jude's will I think be pleased. I wish those hits would, if they use that information to make money, do the donation, as well.
One of my daughters was chronically ill. It is my most fervent hope that people who make a lot of money will donate to the organizations working to help chronically ill children.
So in doing my analysis I have to factor out the sectors (banking and financials, US Home builders, etc.) that are not doing well.
ReplyDeleteS&P 500 is about 20% financial, there are none in the Nasdaq.
I find myself too influenced by the terrible economic conditions for many Americans and Europeans and maybe become too bearish.
Rock,
ReplyDeleteYou can always go back and edit that post and add anything you like.
Plus I like the thought that people should donate some of their profits to help people less fortunate than ourselves.
Manny,
ReplyDeleteMaybe it is the sun flares. :-)
Good point, Denise, but everything is linked now in some manner so I get the sense that if we get one or more major rolling events like in different countries, it will still affect everyone else in some negative way. There are just too many things that could go wrong in the short-term for TPTB to get them all right, and they don't really have infinite control over them anyway, just the ability to kick the can for as long as possible delaying the inevitable reckoning, whatever that may be.
ReplyDeleteManny,
ReplyDeleteThe blue handle thing is weird. All I know is that you have to log in with a google email account, but I am sure you have tried everything.
Maybe someone else knows the answer?
Manny,
ReplyDeleteToo true, if the stock market decides to crack everything will go down, the market takes no prisoners.
I think that they have little control over what happens, in the big picture.
Is it "deer in the headlights" time for the O-man and Benny? I honestly think they don't have the faintest idea of what to do at this point. This is what Obama gets for selling out and doing the WRONG things instead of leading. He had a big opportunity to be a transformational president and leader and he he shrank from that opportunity.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/06/christy-romers-reminiscences/
Agreed Denise. Merely the illusion (or delusion?) of "control" or the ability to simply delay the pain, ultimately potentially making it worse on the rest of us, while they, the beneficiaries of most of the largesse during the "good" times, sacrifice squat.
ReplyDeleteBut I also know that much of the meltdown of 07 was due to forced liquidation, that is what made it so bad.
ReplyDeleteWhen banks, hedge funds, anyone who is levered gets a margin call they must meet it TODAY, usually by 2:00 pm cst.
If they cannot meet the margin call by putting up more money (many of our finest investment banks and hedge funds were levered 30 to 50 to 1) the clearing institution just sells indiscriminately.
Coupled with an economy in recession, the selling was also people trying to get out to save something.
And there was the extra fear of the collapse of the entire world financial system.
Hopefully, after some analysis I will have some answers. Maybe not.
ReplyDeleteI also find Romer's analysis to be an interesting and obvious case of self-serving ASS-covering. Who's going to come out next with more ass-covering? We saw it in the Bush admin when things went south there too, and I'm sure we'll see more of it from former Obama admin employees.
ReplyDeleteGreat point, Denise, but what makes you think that forced liquidity couldn't happen again and VERY soon, given how nothing has really changed in our financial markets for the better?
ReplyDeleteGranted, I'm still in the camp that the Fed has bought stocks before and will do so again if and when the need presents itself. Why wouldn't they at this point? They've done just about everything else to manipulate the markets.
ReplyDeleteManny,
ReplyDeleteThe worst offenders are out of business (Lehman) or have been merged. And the ability to lever up (borrow) 30 times has been changed by the new capital requirements, etc.
Anything can happen, of course, but it seems to me that this next crisis, if it comes, will be one of default, not forced liquidity. Defaults and restructuring of debts, and currency debasement is what I see coming.
For instance, when a hedge fund goes belly up, they sell everything in an orderly fashion to liquidate their portfolios.
When Amaranth Advisors Hedge Fund blew up that is exactly what happened:
ReplyDeleteAmaranth Advisors
The fund had over $9 billion under management and reports indicate "losses may exceed 65 percent[3]." On September 20, 2006, Reuters reported that Amaranth would transfer its energy portfolio to a third party, eventually revealed to be Citadel Investment Group and JPMorgan Chase [4]. The losses were not as threatening to the financial system as were the losses of Long-Term Capital Management, but it led to increased pressure on the SEC to regulate hedge funds. On September 29, 2006, the founder of Amaranth sent a letter to fund investors notifying them of the fund's suspension, and on October 1, 2006, Amaranth hired the Fortress Investment Group to help liquidate its assets.
Where it is a danger to our financial system is when 100 Amaranths blow up at the same time.
ReplyDeleteGood point. Rolling soveriegn defaults and crises seems to be the biggest risk now, since all of the banking debts have been foisted onto the global Sheeple, who need to be austeritized to pay for banker sins.
ReplyDeleteWhich, incidentally (or not), will serve to put a drag on real global economic growth for many, many years. Bankers doing great, while the rest of the economy languishes in a zombie-like state.
ReplyDeleteThat wiki article is a good read.
ReplyDeleteWhen Genius Failed: The Rise and Fall of Long-Term Capital Management
The book tells the story of Long-Term Capital Management (LTCM), an American hedge fund which commanded more than $100 billion in assets at its height. Among LTCM's principals were several former university professors, including two Nobel Prize-winning economists.
Between 1994 and 1998 the fund showed a return on investment of more than 40% per annum. However, its enormously leveraged gamble with various forms of arbitrage involving more than $1 trillion dollars went bad, and in one month, LTCM lost $1.9 billion. On the precipice of not only an American financial disaster, the fund's imminent collapse had significant international monetary implications, jeopardizing the financial system itself. Prompted by deep concerns about LTCM's thousands of derivative contracts, in order to avoid a panic by banks and investors worldwide, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York stepped in to organize a bailout with the various major banks at risk.
This also is a great read about when Long Term Capital blew up and by reading it you get a really good feel for the precursor to the meltdown of 2007.
@Denise: And those guys went on to start another fund, did they not?
ReplyDeleteAlso, isn't the banking system's total derivatives exposure something in the hundreds of trillions? Doesn't that pose a major risk of contributing to a major market meltdown at some point?
I think the main point to take from these things is there are many ways to destroy our financial system but at the heart of it is leverage, greed, incompetence and hubris.
ReplyDeleteMost of what was done in the banking sector to cause the meltdown (excluding all mortgage fraud) was legal.
I think that most of them went on to join other financial firms.
ReplyDeleteManny,
ReplyDeleteFrom what I have read, they don't really know the total exposure, but estimate it at 600 trillion. Not sure how accurate that is or how dangerous it really is but it can't be a good thing going forward.
The real problem is unwinding all of the transactions.
Stock market is down only a bit today so far but it feels much worse because we are consolidating again at new lows.
ReplyDeleteThe central governments are going to do everything they can to stop a financial panic and meltdown, that is a given, as it could cause great instability all over the world.
ReplyDeleteThe last thing they need is people all over the world starving in the streets, penniless and over throwing governments.
Morning all!
ReplyDelete@Denise: But we might get that result (or something close enough to it) anyway despite their "best" efforts.
ReplyDeleteMaybe in some under developed countries but I just don't see that happening in the developed nations. You are talking about a total economic and social meltdown, back to subsistence level.
ReplyDeleteRock - good luck with work, don't know if you'll see this or not, but what is your preference? Do you want to come home? Or stay in Asia? I'll bet you're pretty damn home sick! :-(
ReplyDeleteDenise & Manny - you have to wonder if part of the reason the banks are fighting all change and regulation of their industry is because they don't want the feds to know just how rotten things really are on their balance sheets?
ReplyDeleteAre we going to have a sneaky lunch time move to a new high of the day?
ReplyDeleteYou're probably right, Denise, but I don't think the pain has to get quite that bad for you to see some real upheavals in many of these nations, including ours. Look at Spain. Greece. It just takes a while for it to sink in that things will get worse before they get better.
ReplyDeleteCertainly, the Sheeple appear to know what's at stake here. Or at least half of them do at least. . .
ReplyDeleteThe latest CNN poll shows President Obama's approval rating below 50 percent, and a hardening and deeply personal sense among the electorate that the economic crisis may get worse:
Another Great Depression Likely in Next 12 Months?
Yes 48%
No 51%
In 2009, that number was 41 percent, and the year Obama was elected amid the banking collapse, it was 38 percent.
@Thor: I think the Feds already know though and are simply in on it. Why do you think they suspended all legit accounting principles for the banks? They know. Trust me. Mark to fantasy rules the day for the banks, as do many other big companies who've heard the dog whistle from the Feds that it's now OK to lie about your financials in the name of stoking a "recovery" because nothing bad will happen to you if you do lie.
ReplyDeleteThor,
ReplyDeleteFrom what I read, the Fed was all over those balance sheets (and forcing them to put the off balance sheet items back on the balance sheet) before the bail outs.
They are fighting change and regulation because of one simple thing, profits. Regulations will force them to take much less risk, and be banks again, not trading machines or creators of MBS and other esoteric instruments.
And their stock options are based upon stock price, and stock prices go up when companies are hugely profitable. Not to mention bonuses.
The repealing of Glass-Steagall is one of the things that led to the meltdown.
@Rock,9:08AM: Thks for the feedback and insights! I know you're the volume afficionado around here;)
ReplyDeleteYour frequent emphasizing on why volume matters has helped me realize that I did not take it into account correctly. I have since made it one of the few key indicators upon which I build my analysis, which helped me improve my results a little.
However, I am still experimenting on how best to use this data for trading individual stocks.
Interesting poll results, Thor. Makes me think this thing might actually have further room to run, kind of like the '05'-'06 period where many thought the roof was going to cave in but didn't.
ReplyDelete@Mannwich
ReplyDeleteI have liked Romer's up-front honesty. personally, I think she could be a good running mate for Hillary. Woudldn't that be a gas? Female President, Female VP?
Anyway, could you help me understand "Romer's analysis to be an interesting and obvious case of self-serving ASS-covering"?
I don't get it. yet.
Thanks!
In most of Europe they have a large safety net, so that there is less suffering than here.
ReplyDelete@Rock: I think Romer's analysis is indeed correct and I admire her for her honesty but why come out with that now? Why not fight harder within the administration? Maybe she did and that is why she ultimately resigned, because she knew this was headed to a bad place? If so, then perhaps I'm being a bit unfair. Fair point on your part.
ReplyDeleteRock,
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with you about Romer, I found her analysis to be surprisingly honest and exactly what was needed at the time. It is no surprise that strong women in governement keep getting pushed aside by Larry Summers (Brooksley Born) and champions like Elizabeth Warren are dying on the vine.
Manny,
ReplyDeleteWhy do you assume that she did not fight as hard as she could while she was there? She is only only person, after all.
My take on her coming out now is to embarrass and put pressure on Obama and the rest of them into providing more stimulus, jobs programs, and worry less about the deficit.
Obama on so many fronts has been weak and ineffective
7.75 point range so far today.
ReplyDeleteRange expansion follows range contraction.
One thing I think is true is that if the jobs picture worsens dramatically, it will be very difficult for Obama to win re-election. Bush I was a one termer and it was the economy, stupid, that did him in.
ReplyDeleteFair point, Denise. I guess I've just grown cynical of our "leaders" in government. I guess I shouldn't do that, as all of them can't be bad. Just the ones whose ideas win out, like Summers, Geithner, Rubin, et al. LOL.
ReplyDeleteNo worries, Denise. Obama can just make it official and go join Goldman Sachs as a high paid "consultant". After all, he's got two daughters to raise and put through school.
ReplyDeleteThis is a really anemic bounce today! I thought for sure the markets would have a clearer direction by now.
ReplyDeleteRock - agree, honesty is such a rare quality in so many of our "leaders" today. I'm sure we also all see it in our own work environments, I don't know if that's a new thing, the level of dishonesty in business, or if I'm just waking up to reality . . .
makes you wonder if losing your soul is the price you have to pay to make it in business this day and age. . .
ReplyDeleteHRmm - so much for people waking up
ReplyDeletehttp://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/most-americans-blame-wars-for-federal-debt-fewest-cite-tax-cuts.php?ref=fpb
Most Americans Blame Wars For Federal Debt; Few Cite Tax Cuts
By a wide margin, more Americans think the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have inflated the national debt than the percentage who blame domestic spending or the tax cuts enacted in the past decade for doing the same, according to a Pew poll released Tuesday.
Those beliefs actually run counter to data recently released by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which showed that the Bush-era tax cuts have been the single biggest factor in ballooning the federal deficit. While the wars have also contributed greatly to the deficit, Pew's findings illuminate how Americans more readily perceive the visceral aspects of federal budgetary policy.
Self serving belief?
@Thor: The wars were one part of it, but tax cuts for the wealthiest were definitely a big part as well. It's definitely a self-serving belief with many still holding onto the Dickensian aptly-named "Laffer curve" premise that tax cuts create more government revenue.
ReplyDelete@Thor
ReplyDeleteIf it eventually ends the wars, I'm not going to complain.
Exactly emmy!
ReplyDeleteTaibbi weighs in on Ross Sorkin's "rubdown" of Goldman. LOL. How do you really feel, Matt? Banking Sycophant Sorkin is just brutal though. I agree with that.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/andrew-ross-sorkin-gives-goldman-a-rubdown-20110607
Manny,
ReplyDeleteWho hasn't become cynical of our leaders. Weiner bites the dust, I just hope that Bernie Sanders doesn't have a sexting problem. :-)
Those beliefs actually run counter to data recently released by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which showed that the Bush-era tax cuts have been the single biggest factor in ballooning the federal deficit. While the wars have also contributed greatly to the deficit, Pew's findings illuminate how Americans more readily perceive the visceral aspects of federal budgetary policy.
ReplyDeleteSelf serving belief?
---------------------------------------------
No, it is just proof that the media and those in government did a fabulous job at hiding that statistic. It isn't the first time I have seen it, but most people are not tuned in at all.
LOL Denise! That just might do it for me. ;-)
ReplyDeleteNothing's shocking anymore though. Isn't that sad? Makes me realize just what a boring life I lead (which is FINE with me, by the way). Do these people just crave all of the excitment that comes with this stuff? I mean, it's truly strange, don't you think? It's one thing to crave this kind of "excitement" or drama when we're young and in our 20's but c'mon. Time to grow up, folks.
Emmie - good point!
ReplyDeleteSo I'm working from home today, and just got back from breakfast, street cleaning, so I couldn't park on my own street and had to park on Sunset. On the corner of my street and Sunset was an old homeless guy panhandling for cash. I couldn't help but think to myself that we live in the wealthiest country in history, yet we still have senior citizens begging for change on corners of large cities. What is wrong with us?
ReplyDeleteoh my - I see I missed the market turn-around while out. . . .
ReplyDeleteSelling continues.
ReplyDeleteGreg - did you get a look at Apple's proposed new HQ? I can't wait to see it! I grew up 20 minutes from Apple and drive past there pretty often whenever I visit home.
ReplyDelete@Thor, yes I saw the video of Steve at the council meeting where he proposed the idea. I'm guessing they get approval. Two of the councillors were trying to squeeze him for an Apple store in Cupertino and free wi-fi. too funny.
ReplyDeleteGreg, hah, I saw that too! I loved his response to them - basically, we'd love to keep paying taxes here in Cupertino, but if not, Mountain View would be more than happy to take us. Oh, and by the way, pay for your own damn Wifi.
ReplyDeleteMy little C and RIMM shorts looking stout. As is TLT.
ReplyDeleteIn the "where have we heard this one before" department. What do they expect him to say?!? The military industrial complex would have his head if he said otherwise.
ReplyDeleteNominee Tells Senate Panel Afghan War Is Not Hopeless
By ELISABETH BUMILLER and BRIAN KNOWLTON
Published: June 8, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/09/world/asia/09Diplo.html?hp
Manny - that Taibi article was great - people over at TBP are actually defending Sorkin. He's taken money from Goldman for his department!!
ReplyDeleteU.S. Universities in Africa 'land grab'. guardian.co.uk
ReplyDeleteInstitutions including Harvard and Vanderbilt reportdly use hedgefunds to buy land in deals that may force farmers out.
And from similar cases in India, these farmers have no where else to buy land(as land prices around them have also shot up). Also the issue of their communities - they've lived there for generations. And land is their hedge against inflation. Besides, most lack skills/education to take other jobs.
ICan
Thor,
ReplyDeleteJust returned from seeing "Thor". Pretty good movie. Anything to get out of the heat today.
Denise - I didn't like it! :-( My other half did though! he's going to the midnight showing of X-Men as well.
ReplyDeleteHeat? Heat you say? What is this thing called "heat"? I know of no such thing! ;-)
97 yesterday, 94 today, tomorrow 67.
ReplyDeleteI thought the movie was ok for the genre. Lots of product placement. You had to suspend belief a few times, but what the heck. It entertained me on a hot summer afternoon.
Going over the internals, we are very, very, very oversold at this point. Lots of divergences, but we are unable to rally. If we are down again overnight, I would look out below tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteI still have to do some sector analysis, but I do not understand why the reits are holding up as well as they are. 3.5% yield is nothing when faced with a 10-20% decline in price.
Plus I am completing the comparison analysis between 1994, etc. Lots of busy work.
Manny (and Rock) congrats on the shorts. Plus TLT is holding up as well.
ReplyDeleteLet's see if we can get Rock to 100 comments tonight!
ReplyDeleteare we there yet?
ReplyDeleteThree more comments!
ReplyDeleteJust started watching season 4 of Mad Men.
Good analysis by Zor Trades:
ReplyDeleteBounce or Flash Time For The SP500
China inflation expected at 5.4%
ReplyDeleteHow much should we add to that number?
ooohhhhh 100 comments!!! Yay! Made it!!!
ReplyDelete@Greg and Mannwich:
Besides RIMM, who else will AAPL be putting out of business? I really love those investment-grade shorts that I don't have to pop in and out all the time. I need a few more.
Is Danger out of business yet?
@Dss:
ReplyDeleteI too was surprised at the REITs. I did a post end of December that I was thinking it was the REITs time again, because people without houses have to live somewhere. I know my management company is raising the rents in my houses as the lease terms are up. They're being raised a lot. More than 10%.
@Thor:
ReplyDeleteI'd like to retire. I'd much rather be doing just trading, which for the last 2 years has been a good living by itself. If I had more time, I could spend it with my grandson.
But it would be nice to get my pension, and if I quit, I won't get it. And no, I won't do a lousy job to get fired. Before, I needed the pension, but now I don't. Trading is my emancipation.
I would like to come back to the US. You look around here and everywhere you look, there's just lots and lots of Asians. I'd rather be back in California where.....well.....I guess it's not all that different, is it?
@MAnnwich:
ReplyDeleteI heard the rumor that Romer "was resigned". What I heard was Timmy convinced people that she wasn't one of the gang, she was invited to meetings which were rescheduled and she wasn't told, she'd show up late, and Timmy went to Obama and told him that she wasn't a team member or supporter (I hear you only need to say that once to him).
She was out for about 5 minutes before Bloomberg snapped her up. She didn't even have time to call UC Berkeley about a reinstatement. And Bloomie doesn't snap up worthless junk.
And, she's ex-MIT. (probaly Sloan, though....)