Tuesday, June 7, 2011
06/07/11 No one knows what it's like to be hated, to be fated to telling only lies
AA- An industrial powerhouse, with the added (personal) cachet of a Pittsburgh address. Forward P/E of 10. IMO, back to the forties/fifties by 2020.
GE- The ultimate conglomerate. Another stock headed for the forties/fifties as we enter this century's version of the Roaring Twenties.
INTC- This company has enough cash/talent to reinvent the semi industry for decades to come. It's easy to write off their strategic visions, but Intel will ultimately prove prescient: (a) Security will be key as we move into the wireless age, (b) Tablets don't do it for me- INTC has the right idea moving down the 'Ultrabook' path, (c) At some point, technology takes the next leap forward- I have no clue what that might be, but INTC probably does. After stagnating for ten years, this stock is poised to lead the SMH to its next incarnation. Easily a 3-digit company by 2020.
CSCO- I've watched this movie enough times to call it CSCO 2, or A Cloud Hangs over CSCO. The same cloud hung over AMAT in 1998, remained in place for a long ----ing time, then evaporated as the stock price rocketed 5-fold. It may be months in the swamps before we see Cape Canaveral. 5-fold? I don't know. Chambers needs to figure it out. He may even decide he needs to go. Investors are dumping the stock like it's roadkill. But I have friends/relatives who work for the company, and they're not worried.
WFC- The best bank in the US, hands down. The online platform, the service in its branches, the lending standards, and the character/competence of management (at least according to my wife)- when the sector finally recovers, this will be the bank to own.
So I ended up with decent entries into FSELX/FSPTX/FSCGX/FJPNX/FSRBX.
But my dreams, they aren't as empty
As my conscience seems to be
I have hours, only lonely
Back to solitary.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
ULTA...At least the ladies are being taken care of.
ReplyDeleteNo doubt it sounds like I'm off my rocker right now. That's the way it works.
ReplyDeleteBuying TCK @ 5, then watching it drop to 3 probably felt the same way.
Make no mistake- investors were selling TCK @ 3 in March 2009. Big time.
ReplyDeleteThat didn't happen in a screenplay. It happened in real life.
Right now, investors are selling CSCO @ 15. No joke.
In March 2009, investors were selling CSCO @ 14. Also no joke.
ReplyDeleteInvestor psychology- if it wasn't real, no one would believe it...
ReplyDeleteLook, if I told you at the 3/09 nadir of the market that 2 years later the SPX would double, TCK would rise 20x, and CSCO would trade unchanged...
ReplyDeleteToday, I'm sounding a little more reasonable, no?
To capture 5-fold to 20-fold gains, there's no way around buy-and-hold. There simply is no other way.
ReplyDelete2nd - I'm enjoying your inner dialogue tonight. I can't believe my eyes seeing CSCO at $15.5. I might have to pick some up myself and probably sell it in a week so that I can look back 5 years from now and say "man, i can't believe i bought CSCO at $15.5 and sold it a week later for a 5% gain"
ReplyDeleteAnd CSCO is trading at $45 in 2016
ReplyDeleteConsider this: CSCO has $5/share in cash (after backing out LT debt). So it's actually only trading at 6.5 times earnings and 6.5 free cash flow, after backing out cash.
ReplyDeleteThat's one of the many reasons why I think this market rockets significantly higher: valuations are absurd.
"valuations are absurd."
ReplyDeleteLOL, that's probably true.
I say valuations are absurd only for a few. CSCO, MSFT, HPQ. Not true for oil and coal and recent IPO's. Not true for CAT, etc. Be picky. Gain/Risk at this point may be minimal if not absurd.
ReplyDeleteCP > think about some of these valuations:
ReplyDeleteCSCO: 6.5 times EPS ex cash + 1.5% yield
AAPL: 10.5 times EPS ex cash
GOOG: 11.8 times EPS ex cash
AA: 12 times EPS
AXP: 12.8 times EPS
BAC: 10 times EPS and 0.45 times Book
HPQ: 7.5 times EPS
IBM: 12 times EPS + 2% yield
JNJ: 13 times EPS + 3.5% yield
MMM: 14 times EPS + 2.4% yield
MRK: 9.5 times EPS + 4.2% yield
MSFT: 7 times EPS ex cash + 2.7% yield
the list goes on and on...those are NOT expensive by any measure. I know people will say margins are at all time highs, but with the labor market being what it is, do people really expect that input cost to rise significantly any time soon?
Illini- I'm not so sure about the oil plays...
ReplyDeleteOXy-10.37
NBR-10.59
PXP-11.61
HES-9.01
APA-8.95.
First few I checked. BTW, did you guys see the upgrade for APA today to $180? Crikers, that's almost a double from here.
Opps...Left out my baby...
ReplyDeleteBEXP- 12.26.
Iv'e been mobile using new laptop today (babysitting while kids are on Wii/Netflix). Still can't post to this blog via Google account. It asks for sign in and I use same info as usual whenever am asked to login, occasionally, on home computer for this site. No dice.
ReplyDeleteAnd the big boys with their divy...
ReplyDeleteCVX- 7.71
XOM- 8.82.
Oil Sands- SU- 11.24
ReplyDeleteNatty- CHK- 9.35
Refiners- VLO/WNR- 6.78/7.06
Losers- BP- 5.91
Monsters- PBR- 8.33.
But we're still going to 1260 :)
ReplyDeleteI don't like refiners and WNR in particular since I lost a lot on it during '08/'09. Do not understand the "crack ratio" and how they go from boom to bust so suddenly. Also, think that they all are harboring enviro liabilities that will have to be paid up some day, unless the wild card of bankruptcy is played, which is the usual way out for chemical wrongdoers. I believe most producers of crude in US are anxious to rid themselves of the refining business, hence the rise of Valero, etc. Sluffing off liability is what it is. Reference Monsanto. They were in refining at one time and big in very bad chemicals too. They split the chemicals off to stockholders with liability that was under capitalized. I think the surviving company filed for bankruptcy in the recent past.
ReplyDeleteOil Sands... Do not like them. Maybe 20 years from now they might pay.
ReplyDeleteNatty ... CHK is a loser on management who has bought their stock back at high $ in the past. NG in general is the fuel of the future at present price but it will take time and companies like CHK and HK that overproduce because they have to are being plain silly.
PBR - now that is a monster I appreciate at a low price currently but I have no position today.
I also like OXY as a pure oil producer, almost. They are high now. Over 100, could have bought in 70's not long ago.
ReplyDeleteIllini- I agree. Never played the refiners and never will. They scare the hell out of me.
ReplyDeleteYikes, we should just trade each others positions Illini. Hate CHK...Any CEO who get's a margin call for 20M is a loser. OXY is well run and a very liquid based player. Taking a hard look at AXAS.
ReplyDeleteAm I the only one concerned that RB 'suddenly' takes a vacation and fires break out at the exact same time? Hmmmmm???
ReplyDeleteRefiners are a necessary evil. They could have done better over the years. In NW Indiana on Lake Michigan, there are empty tank farms and crack towers, just a remnant of what once was Sinclair and Standard of Indiana (Amoco), maybe others. BP carries on there still, the sugar daddy to Amoco. I grew up in that region and have relatives there.
ReplyDeleteLiving farther southwest in St. Louis we had Shell's Wood River refinery in Illinois, a major source of ground pollution if not air. Shell managed to sell it to some sham organization and it is still operating.
Oh, add the late Citie's Service to the refineries in NW IN. Do not know what happened to them.
ReplyDeleteCAT - It may seem expensive, but I think it's got some room on the upside.
ReplyDeleteRefiners - I heard they make money on the spread between WTIC and Brent.
Ugly close!
ReplyDeletePZ...No shit.
ReplyDeletelooks like another painful start to the day
ReplyDeleteYou forgot the cheapest industry of all - insurance.
ReplyDeleteThe insurance companies are being lumped in with "the financials", but have very few financial issues (Unlike the banks). The insurance company issues are the disasters this year, but haven't seen any without appropriate reinsurance and the reinsurers have excess capital, so won't be any issues there.
Lots of good going on - Resolution Insurance in the UK announced a 500m pound buyback and Prudenital a $1.5 billion, both this week.
As far as refiners go, bought Tesoro in 2002 bear market in the $2's and happily sold at $8 in early 2004 only to watch it run to over $60. Tough business to understand all the impacting factors, but if you can figure it out, there can be a lot of money made in these.
2nd - thanks for the stock updates. Good luck with your 5 key stocks.
ReplyDeleteJust out of interests sake, my 5 top stocks are (these are fairly stable, but change over the course of a couple of years):
NWLI - Texas life insurance / annuity company at P/B of .45, P/E of 7.5, profitably through downturn, Sell a lot of products overseas.
Arbor Memorial - Canadian Funeral home company; consistent growing profitability, 2% yield, P/E of 12
Power Corp - Canadian Financial Services conglomorate with increasing yield and profitability; often written up up as the Canadian company that beats Buffet.
CNQ - Canadian Energy company with very strong management, and the best growth profile in the market. Have held since 2003.
MASC - Make acoustic and coated panels for auto and home industry. Bought it in 2009 when it got knocked down to the pink sheets for $1.60, but they continue to do a lot of things very well and just bought back a whack of stock. Could see it going to $12 in next year.
Another article proving the benefits of value investing:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.marketwatch.com/story/wall-streets-biggest-secret-2011-06-07?pagenumber=1
My favorite is the Tweedy Browne one from the early 90's (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/wall-streets-biggest-secret-2011-06-07?pagenumber=1).
PAL players is off bucking metals group and has 2 block trades this morning. Maybe the buyers of last week are back.
ReplyDeleteUnsure as of what to do take the pop, tempting with metals group so weak or wait and see if more block buyers show up.
Tweedy Browne, I use to look at their portfolio's they almost buy a stock for life. Ah the joy of buy and hold.
Mark, what's this?
ReplyDeletehttp://screencast.com/t/bptSJSTQoPI7
It is acting well, btw 50, 89, 200dma
WPRT worst earning's 14 mil vs 11 mil, still a work in process. Still have a small position will be looking to add at some point.
JB, SPX testing yesterday's low?
ReplyDeletet3d - locals got short (on the ES) right out of the shoot, but then paper came in, looking now to push back above the open, but if that fails we could have a large washout
ReplyDeleteT3D- Other than the colors are wrong for the MA's it's BEXP :)
ReplyDeleteCan't figure out why PXP is so snappy.
ReplyDeleteMark - PXP up due to OPEC no go on production increase?
ReplyDeleteMark, right purple haze colors.
ReplyDeleteJB, actually they took out lows of 6/6, but seem a little more stable at the moment. I sure do not envy you trading SP futures, I did that 1998-2000 for two years and decide it was not for me. Good Luck with the vipers.
Here is a link to Tweedy Browne, if you are a buy and hold player this should interest you much.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.tweedy.com/funds/gvf/holdings.php
BTW, last Q Tweedy was a buyer of "CSCO" for all you fans. GL later.
OPEC - Did or didn't agree to increase supply? I've seen two opposing stories but assume based on price action they had no agreement.
ReplyDeleteNot that it matters, BEXP looks like it may have found support.
TOF- Your SPF is at the bottom of it's channel.
ReplyDeleteJB- PXP...Yeah, but not THAT much.
ReplyDeleteCP- NO agreement.
ReplyDeleteJB- I understand the TRE play, but god, what a fucking disaster!
ReplyDeleteLet me guess. BC is running around with his hair on fire screaming, "last one off the dance floor, last one off the dance floor...'
ReplyDeleteDang, some of are fav. miners are getting really cheap...
ReplyDeleteNo agreement - Damn, and I went through the trouble of digging three 50gal fuel barrels out of my tractor shed yesterday in anticipation of filling them up with cheap fuel....
ReplyDeleteI wonder if maybe SA isn't experiencing trouble keeping up with demand???
'our'...
ReplyDeleteNot sure what I am more sick of - TRE or ES.
ReplyDeleteRBY - Must still be in a news blackout or something.
ReplyDelete+200 DJIA is a coming
ReplyDeletemaybe today?
ReplyDeleteTRE - Currently making another trip to trendline support, failure to hold $7.60 was the big clue (aside from weakening PM and broad equity prices. These guys that say PM's are a safe haven are liers, I see no evidence of that anywhere in the charts over the last 100yrs.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, seems like these miners are just trading up and down in their respective channels waiting for PM's to resume trend. If gold falls out of it's trend soon, the 144SMA would be the downside target.
The good news is gold and silver still have a negative correlation with the dollar.
Seems like FXF has become one of the preferred safe havens.
Seems like sellers have taken a coffee break....
ReplyDeleteJB- Watch that 46.4K share bid for TRE. Notice how it never changes and the other bids get picked off? I wouldn't be surprised to see it go poof!
ReplyDeleteGL ladies, I'm out...
Just bought some June 30 $129 SPY Calls at $1.67
ReplyDeleteBoy I can't wait to hear the candidate press interviews leading up to the next presidential election.
ReplyDeleteToo bad our press always caters to WS and WDC...
One fund manager who says it's past time to take profits:
ReplyDeletehttp://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/06/06/bob-rodriguez-the-man-who-sees-disaster/
Added to my SPY calls at $1.7...now have about 46 of them.
ReplyDeleteat $1.76 avg. i sense a BIG up day
ReplyDeleteConsistent with my "buy-and-hold" strategy (in the space of amazingly undervalued junior gold/silver miners, and NOT in the space of overvalued S&P), I am trying to stay away from the market and so will drop in only occasionally...
ReplyDeleteTOF, I think it is best to always "qualify" statements about current stock valuations by saying that *Blue Chip* valuations are decent now. S&P as a whole has a Shiller P/E of 24, which is VERY high. And Hussman showed many times that future 7-year returns are VERY WELL correlated to the inverse of Shiller P/E, not the *forward* P/E. So there is no way around the fact that the 7-year annual return on S&P is going to be less than 4% with A LOT of volatility in between...
David - Just curious and I don't mean anything more than this...how have Hussman + Shiller done returns wise over say a 10 to 20 year time frame?
ReplyDelete2nd half of TOG is JUUUUUUST around the corner...
ReplyDeleteAlso David - When I posted the valuations of the blue chips, I was pointing to the fact that the DJIA is indeed very undervalued. Most of those companies are in the DJIA
ReplyDelete"David - Just curious and I don't mean anything more than this...how have Hussman + Shiller done returns wise over say a 10 to 20 year time frame?"
ReplyDeleteHussman showed that going back to 1940's, this prediction methodology is AMAZINGLY accurate, while all other "popular" methods such as the Fed model, forward P/Es, etc., are just noise. You can see a graph of this methodology here:
http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc110523.htm
I have already posted links to this very important article by Hussman, titled "Valuing the S&P 500 Using Forward Operating Earnings"
ReplyDeletehttp://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc100802.htm
It starts as follows:
*****
It is impossible to properly estimate long-term cash flows based on a single year of earnings, regardless of whether one uses actual net earnings or projected operating earnings.
It is impossible to properly value the stock market based on a single year of earnings, regardless of whether one uses actual net earnings or projected operating earnings.
Writing each of these sentences only once is woefully inadequate. If I had my way, investors would have to write them over and over five days a week. Wall Street analysts would have to write them a hundred times a day, immediately upon arriving to work.
In recent weeks, I've seen "valuation" arguments that literally treat future estimated operating earnings as if they are a pure, immediately distributable dividend that will grow indefinitely without the need for capital investment, while sustaining current record profit margins forever. I've heard analysts say, with a straight face, that stocks are cheaper here than they were at the 2009 lows, because the ratio of the S&P 500 to the current forward operating earnings estimate is lower today than it was 16 months ago. I've seen analysts presume to "capitalize" earnings into some sort of market valuation by doing nothing more than dividing estimated operating earnings by corporate bond yields that are presently nearly indistinguishable from Treasury yields.
The primary question investors need to ask is whether these analysts have actually examined the historical record of these approaches - not just whether they have an anecdote about some extreme such as 2000 or 1987 - but whether they have done a robust, long-term evaluation. Unless a "valuation" methodology is accompanied by long-term, decade-by-decade evidence showing that the valuation method is actually correlated with realized, subsequent market returns (particularly over a horizon of say, 7-10 years), then you are not looking at the sound valuation work an investment professional. You are either looking at a random guess or a sales pitch.
Don't get me wrong. There are many thoughtful, well-disciplined financial planners and asset managers - usually far away from Wall Street - who are excellent stewards of their customers' investments. My difficulty is not with those professionals, but with the careless and inept reasoning that passes for analysis hour after hour on the financial news.
If you take away one thing from this week's comment, it is that stocks are a claim to a long-term stream of cash flows that will actually be distributed to investors over time, and that this stream of cash flows cannot be estimated from a single year's earnings number. The main reason for this is that profit margins vary from year-to-year over the business cycle, and tend to mean-revert over the long-term. Earnings (net and operating) tend to be depressed during periods of economic strain, but when they reflect compressed profit margins, they are strongly associated with above-average rates of subsequent growth over the following 7-10 years. In contrast, earnings that reflect elevated profit margins are strongly associated with poor rates of subsequent growth. When analysts take earnings figures at face value, and presume to "capitalize" them simply by dividing by interest rates, they demonstrate a Kindergartener's grasp of securities valuation.
David - I also think it's a little naive to include earnings from 2008 in the Shiller 10 year trailing PE because that to me is a once in a lifetime event and I'm assuming it has a pretty big impact on this number.
ReplyDeleteAlso, looking at this number in a vacuum is probably a little naive as well, as there are many other factors at play like what interest rates are and what the rate of inflation is.
jeez...this market is terribly weak. i bailed out of my SPY calls at $1.6
ReplyDeleteGDX broke it's 365dma.
ReplyDeleteFlipped the switch and bought some SPY $129 Puts at $1.92 expiring next Friday..small position.
ReplyDeleteAlso bought 20 x USO $50 Puts expiring next Friday at $.84
I was wrong about the 46K Tre bid. It's getting chewed up by pac-man right now....Chomp,chomp,chomp...
ReplyDeleteUXG off 8%.
ReplyDeleteTake a look @ DNN.
If the market is predicting anything more than just a global soft patch, then oil is going to drop precipitously. As such, I'm looking at shorting OIL longer term as a way in part to hedge my long positions.
ReplyDeleteREDF is really taking it on the chin
ReplyDeleteAdded to my USO puts for now...but they expire only 7 trading days from today....ideally i'd like to get puts expiring 2 months or so out.
ReplyDeleteSold my SPY puts at a 5% gain and moved that money into 10 x USO August $42 puts at $3.45
ReplyDeleteSold my SPY puts at a 7% gain...moved that money into 10 x USO August $42 puts at $3.45.
ReplyDeletesorry looks like my SPY puts went off between a 5-7% gain....
ReplyDeleteIf we are going into a global recession/slowdown then I would prefer to buy USO puts than SPY puts as corporate earnings are quite strong and I don't see them slowing down that much.
David, I'd be a little cautious with Hussman. He writes very well and intelligently, but if you look at the long term performance of his fund, all of his out performance occurred curing the period from 2000 - 2003 - a time when it was very easy for value managers to outperform the S&P as the tech (and overall S&P) bubble was deflating. Since 2003, his fund is up about 35% whereas the S&P is up about 85%.
ReplyDeleteTOF said, "David - I also think it's a little naive to include earnings from 2008 in the Shiller 10 year trailing PE because that to me is a once in a lifetime event and I'm assuming it has a pretty big impact on this number."
ReplyDeleteWOW, I hope you do not really believe that since the data is the data. You cannot just make up numbers to create your own reality. What kind of research is that?
Respectfully, t3d.
BB Canada -- Hussman's objective is to outperform S&P over the FULL market cycle, and he uses a strategy that is designed to do that. It doesn't make sense to evaluate such a strategy over a shorter time horizon than the complete bull/bear cycle.
ReplyDeleteI WILL buy WPRT once it appears remotely safe...ie, after 1260.
ReplyDeleteTOF -- Hussman mentions several other models in that article, all of which give approximately the same result. So people betting on his predictions not working out over the next 10 years are betting on it "being different THIS time."
ReplyDeleteBB - I see CNQ has been weak since March. Is it in value territory yet?
ReplyDelete"REDF is really taking it on the chin"
ReplyDeleteI am glad that I put just a few hundred bucks into REDF calls a couple of weeks ago, as opposed to buying the stock itself...
Man, the computers are having fun with V on the vote. I thought about it....but nah.
ReplyDeleteHey Mark, I'm glad your going to give the all clear signal with WPRT. They are filling the gap.
ReplyDeleteFor now I'm invoking what I call the 2nd Rule:
It is all good.
t3d > "WOW, I hope you do not really believe that since the data is the data."
ReplyDeleteI think any rational person buying a stock at 3/2009 was not looking at the prior year's earnings but rather what earnings on average were over say a 5 year period from 1998 to 2003 (so as to exclude the debt "bubble" period of 2004-6) and would have found that stocks were dirt cheap then. Ignoring 2008 earnings was the right move because it was a once in a lifetime event. I think there is some sense in doing this for the Shiller PE as well.
CP - Good read about Rodriguez. Guess what, he is still in oil but little else. Even there he sees high valuations now. Time to look for some value plays in oil?
ReplyDelete"Ignoring 2008 earnings was the right move because it was a once in a lifetime event. I think there is some sense in doing this for the Shiller PE as well."
ReplyDeleteTOF, in order to exclude giving too much weight to "once in a lifetime" events, Shiller P/E averages the past 10 years of data.
But if you don't like the 2008 earnings, Hussman shows several other models that don't use them at all and still give the same result as the Shiller P/E model.
I am glad that I have at least one stock that is rocking today. Against all odds, it is one of the hated Chinese small cap stocks -- CAAS, and I am loaded with November $5 and $7.50 calls on CAAS...
ReplyDeleteT3D- You'll know it's all clear when you see me running naked through the lobby ;))
ReplyDeleteMy sense is that Shiller is a purist and is committed to research based on the facts, thus the Shiller index is correct.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to use some other average period to come to a conclusion, thats different.
I suppose you agree with the banks mark to fantasy accounting without which they would be in-solvent. Typical government statistics with their heuristic approach.
man i can't get a hang on this market..i closed my USO puts and moved back into SPY calls...$128 calls expiring next Friday at $1.65
ReplyDeletewow...that was good timing! c'mon +200 pts!
ReplyDeleteillini,
ReplyDeletemy cost on CNQ is below $6 and I'm loaded up so I haven't really been looking for a place to buy recently.
Having said that, it is definitely cheap now and I'd expect to see $50 within a year and $100 within 3 or 4 years unless we see a major recession and corresponding drop in oil price.
I think it will depend on the overall market trend as to whether you get a better entry point.
I've got a half dozen stocks that I want to buy and they've all moved down to an area that I consider cheap, but what's holding me back is they get cheaper every day with the market, so I'm acting like a Pavlov dog and getting rewarded for not buying, so I wait longer and get rewarded again. I wonder if this pullback we are in doesn't last until we get into July earnings season where I expect we will again have good earnings and pull the market back up.
Heck no Mark, I'm gong to be chasing after that herd of girls who are chasing you. Get off my trail Weiner.
ReplyDeleteGL luck the rest of the days pants and skirts.
WPRT - What I wanna know is when today's gap down closes???
ReplyDeleteDNN - Yet another nuclear meltdown?
Today's market action is what it is, nothing less.
I just put in a few stink bids under the assumption this selling spree isn't done.
illini - I'm looking to get back into BEXP at some point, does $16 sound too far fetched??? Okay, I fully expect to have to raise this bid but hey, ya never know...
http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.pnf?chart=bexp,PLTADANRBO[PA][D][F1!3!!!2!20]&pref=G
illini,
ReplyDeleteI own 19 energy companies - 2 of them are coal, rest oil and gas. It is my largest industry holding.
There cheapest energy stocks now in my opinion are the oil service companies. I think the majors (HAL, SLB) are both very good, but I buy smaller companies that are less followed and most of them trade in Canada or on the grey pink sheet market in the US where you can't get a quote. The best one now I'd say is Flint Energy Services (T.FES or FESVF). They do a lot of work in the oil sands and the oil sands are booming with the majors complaining about cost inflation which means Flint's revenues should be growing.
At this point with energy, you can either diversify or you need to make a call on the price of oil, nat gas, and coal / uranium if you want to play these. The Nat Gas companies are very cheap, especially the small caps. The Oils are more farily valued, but many of them (CNQ, CVE, SU) have strong growth profiles. I really like CNQ because of their strong management and because they've got assets in all areas and are very good about allocating capital to make the best return.
The other energy stocks people like a lot are the energy trusts which pay out high dividends if you want income.
UGA - Is that a breakout?
ReplyDeleteMark - Do you still have the ADES or did the doctor clear it out of your system?
ReplyDeleteADES - I hear you can't get rid of that one...
ReplyDeletebought 20 more SPY calls at $1.52 just now.
ReplyDeletegetting wiped up today on trading these damn moves...now i remember why i abandoned day trading.
TOF- No, I'm clean man. Been a few months now.
ReplyDeleteWell, the only good thing for the past month or so is my accounts are slightly higher and the overall market is much lower. Still, about 8% off YTD highs though.
ReplyDeleteWhat's your level?
ReplyDeletehttp://screencast.com/t/nm75oPP2wPBZ
T3d -- Yep, that's about right. MCP showing some small climb-out @ EOD...
ReplyDeletePicked up 2000 trading shares of MITK @ 6.52.
ReplyDeleteMCP- Yeah, but I HATE fing convertibles.
ReplyDeleteNot that it matters, but I'm positive the algo's are day trading BEXP. Well over 1/2 the trades are through BATS/EDGX.
ReplyDeleteSell side imbalance for the financials.
ReplyDeleteBEXP - Volume looks too low to have significant institutional interest, even SD has more. JMHO
ReplyDeleteOMX - Another chart with gaps down that need filling... Are we talking months, or years?
ReplyDeletePMI - Another 14% loss for longs there... This just doesn't end.
ReplyDeleteCADC - Bearish price objective: $0.0
ReplyDeletehttp://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.pnf?chart=cadc,PLTADANRBO[PA][D][F1!3!!!2!20]&pref=G
TXN...That's not going to help.
ReplyDelete1260-1250 now.
Yeesh I had a rough day daytrading today...lost about $4k.
ReplyDeletewhat kind of market do we have today?
ReplyDeletehttp://caracommunity.com/content/caras-commentary-community-chat-thurs-mar-12-2009-0
#16646, #16657 -- CP, u remember this one???
Hope the link works...
UNG - Green there, I bet S&P was down today.
ReplyDeleteKyle - Yes I do recall, not sure where we are in the cycle though, never really could figure it out until a clear trend emerged then by that time the run was over.
ReplyDeleteSo yeah, I had sworn gold off for quite a while and now that I'm becoming interested again it seems to be weakening.
Guys the long term 200 dma is coming up...seeing how the markets trade around that will be a good tell for what kind of market we're in. I've noticed that on the first dip below the 200 dma after a bull mkt begins, it's smart to buuy...not sure about 2nd dip
ReplyDeleteIf we dip below here its the 2nd dip in this bull mkt
ReplyDeleteCP -- It was that phrase 'What Kind of Market do we have TODAY?' that I remembered and searched for. Got wrong-stepped on SLW today but made some of it back on MCP at EOD. Things r a changin'
ReplyDeleteKyle, Yep, I also noticed TOF's trade of MTW @ $3...
ReplyDeleteCp. I remember playing mtw off and on several times in 09 from the long side...
ReplyDeleteBernanke may want lower commodities prices, but does he want the economic pessimism and loss of employment that comes with falling prices?
ReplyDeleteChina uses as much energy as the US now, so unless there is some large game-changing event, prices will be moving higher in the longer time horizon. Get used to it, these natural resources are considerably more finite in scale than US government debt could ever hope to be.