Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Joy Global trounces estimates!

Joy to the World! Another gift, from my Christmas stock!

So JOYG beats numbers. Was there any doubt? Was there any surprise? I guess there was--but only on Wall Street---and not here!!

Because isn't this what I advertised on November 19th???

So how do you deflect that talk? How about have good earnings on December 15th, or how about selling yourself to somebody else??

As usual--truth in advertising!!!!

And free money again from the sheeple on Wall Street!!

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

The cash hoarders

Time to buy LVS

OK--that's enough selling on this name.

Sands Macau didn't go down--so why should LVS?

Oh that's right--LVS has option pressure!!

JPM: The Year Ahead (20% equity gains)

US Year Ahead 2011 -

Monday, December 13, 2010

Goldman tips AAPL--Sees another 34% upside

They see 34% upside to AAPL, and they recommend buying February calls.


Sees Ipad and Mac shipments above consensus
Sees an earnings beat January 25
Sees a CDMA iPhone by March--another game changer

GStips AAPL -

Saturday, December 11, 2010

Where's the blabbering bimbo Meredith Whitney now???

Here she was when the market was melting down.

And here she was when it was rallying. Remember her? Don't believe the hype? I've never been more bearish???

Will she ever apologize? The answer is no! She so full of hubris she still thinks she's early!!

And now, she's probably hiding out in Manhattan getting some more work done, so she'll look as good as her predictions are bad!

Bernie Madoff's son, Mark commits suicide by hanging himself

NEW YORK (AP) — One of Bernard Madoff's sons was found dead Saturday of an apparent suicide, according to a law enforcement official.

Mark Madoff, 46, was found hanged in his apartment in Manhattan's SoHo section, according to the official. A family member notified police around 7:30 a.m.

The official spoke to the AP on the condition of anonymity because he wasn't allowed to speak publicly about the case.
Done on the two year anniversary of the ponzi scheme.

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Pole Dancer's greeting card store

"In these tough economic times, you need to do anything to get ahead...."

If you buy $50 of cards you get a private pole dance.

Time to bid botox

Just don't bid it too much!!

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Elvis impersonator saves woman's life

NY Daily News
An Elvis impersonator saved a woman's life after she collapsed at a Las Vegas restaurant Sunday -- the same day that he married his fiancée and completed a marathon.

Claudio Palma, a doctor from San Francisco, was dressed in The King's trademark get-up for the annual Rock 'n Roll marathon when he saw a woman collapse at a local burger joint, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported.

The unidentified woman, a diabetic, was bleeding from the mouth and head and had no pulse.

Palma, an anesthesiologist, was still in his running shoes and sprinted over to the women to perform CPR. He revived the woman before paramedics arrived and took her to the hospital.

He said that the woman "freaked out" when she came to and saw the paunchy, sideburned King kissing her on the mouth.

"She was giving me a weird look and telling me she was okay," Palma told the paper.

Earlier in the day, Palma married his fiancée, Rhanee, in a run-thru chapel during the second mile of the race.

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Goldman Sachs, and JPM get behind Citi

GS on C -

Now that Uncle Sam has dumped it's stake, Citi is a beauty queen and the whole street gets behind her!

Morgan Stanley tips GOOG to 730

So the above is the GOOG chart now, and below is the GOOG chart when it was tipped here just last week.

Once again, easy and free money on Wall Street!!!

As advertised!!!

Saturday, December 4, 2010

Wrong time to thump your chest!!

Reminds me of the bears beating their chests a couple of weeks ago when the market pulled in 4%, even though they were short since 666, and their portfolio is burning to the ground.

Barron's on Google's acquisition try of Groupon

"Pass the Groupon, please!"
Rumors circulated on Monday that the company was in talks to pay up to $6 billion in cash to purchase Groupon, a venture-backed company based in Chicago that distributes coupons via the Internet.

Groupon has a novel twist: It extracts deep discounts of as much as 50% from major retailers such as The Gap (GPS) in return for promising to deliver a minimum number of customers. It then engages Web surfers in a game of sorts, telling them they must get as many fellow bargain hunters as possible to respond by a deadline in order for everyone to get the discount. Groupon gets half the sales dollars, and the client gets to market its wares in a whole new way, while paying very little money up front.

The idea that Google, which dominates online advertising, would shell out such a fantastic sum for a two-year-old start-up peddling what amounts to a new form of direct marketing, made some people apoplectic.

Former Fortune magazine columnist David Kirkpatrick asked whether Google (ticker: (GOOG) might be suffering a crisis of confidence. "Groupon isn't even a technology company, for goodness' sake," wrote Kirkpatrick in The Daily Beast. "It's a discounter that happens to use the Internet."

Plenty of reasonable explanations were proffered by the Street. Google is the company best suited to leverage Groupon's 3,000-person local salesforce, Oppenheimer & Co. analyst Jason Helfstein opined. Google can drive traffic to Groupon's deals, while also cutting the administrative overhead for those salespeople, making it more profitable.

And then, too, Groupon has built the brand for this kind of thing, and that's hard to duplicate. The deal would be about six times projected revenue, which is not seen as too rich in the world of technology.

By Thursday, no explanation was needed, for it seemed that suddenly everyone and his brother was doing a deal in the newly minted "local commerce" market.

First, eBay (EBAY) announced that it is acquiring social shopping site, for an amount rumored to be $75 million. Later, (AMZN) said that it made a $175 million investment in Groupon competitor LivingSocial.

And why not? Last Monday, now dubbed "Cyber Monday," was the first billion-dollar day in e-commerce history, according to comScore (SCOR). Much of that was driven by price chopping, and much of it was coming at the expense of traditional retailers. As Youssef Squali with Jefferies & Co. wrote in a research report, "U.S. online sales were up 15.9%, year over year, for Black Friday [...] This is in stark contrast to the 0.3% increase in overall retail sales."

The traditional Black Friday shopping event lost some of its luster as stores including Wal-Mart (WMT) stayed open on Thanksgiving. Welcome to the QVC world of 24/7 shopping.

In a consumer-driven world, something like Groupon that can move goods in a novel way, while restoring some hope to traditional retailers, makes people sit up and take notice, and maybe even write a big check.

Although Groupon is labeled as a social, local revolution, there's nothing remotely social about mobbing coupon offers. And in recent weeks, Groupon has been doing more deals with large national brands, such as Nordstrom, rather than with local mom-and-pop merchants and eateries.

The best explanation for Groupon being the belle of the ball is that we're in Google Land, and that Google can do such a deal simply because it has the money. In this year's first nine months, its cash and equivalents and marketable securities rose 36%, or $9 billion, bringing its total stash to $33.4 billion. And Google throws off about $2 billion in free cash flow every three months.

Groupon is on pace to reach its first billion dollars in revenue in a little over two years—at least, that's the chatter in Silicon Valley. A report this week by Jason Maynard of Wells Fargo estimates more like $600 million in 2011. And Google can afford to pay up for growth. What Google can't, or won't, do, is miss the party in connecting online ads with real-world commerce, the way it missed the boat with social networking.

As I said, fans of Google find it hard to swallow all that. But Needham & Co. analyst Mark May offers some positive thinking. In his view, Google has done well with big acquisitions. It paid $1.65 billion in 2006 for YouTube, which has finally become a billion-buck revenue generator.

Google could pump Groupon's deals in ads carried by the rising number of cellphones running Google's Android software. As Groupon refines the way it profiles each consumer—by gender, buying habits, location and so forth—it can become more astute in funneling the right deals to the right people.

Of course, there's a real danger of diminishing returns. What works for Groupon at a billion in revenue may not necessarily work at $10 billion. There's no knowing how this thing will scale. But that's just the price of an education in Google Land.

At 17 times 2011's estimated earnings per share, with an expected growth rate of roughly 17 times as well, Google stock has a PEG ratio (price/earnings ratio to growth rate) of 1.0, which is reasonable. That means that it's not overpriced on a valuation basis, even if what it's doing strikes some investors as unreasonable.

IF IT TURNS OUT GOOGLE'S made an awful mistake, or if it takes a long time to get a return on Groupon, well, in that respect, Google would be in good company. Moody's Investor Services last week examined software mergers and acquisitions over the past decade. Moody's finds that, while deals can have long-term strategic benefits, in the near term most companies don't earn a very good return on assets when they buy other companies.

But rich tech companies such as Google needn't worry about such things. They are flush with cash and minting more all the time. Why not use some of that $33.4 billion to pay a dividend? Well, maybe, someday. But not today, not while there are Groupons to chase.

In any event--the deal with Google is reportedly now toast. We'll see what happens to GOOG on Monday.

Friday, December 3, 2010

George Carlin on the economy and airport security

Since we had such lousy job numbers...

Over 10 years ago but...

Bears warn of clouds on the horizon

Big deal.

Tell us when you see clouds like this!

Remember the hand wringing on FCX?

Here's the chart--when we were told the action in FCX meant the move in gold was over.

We had a big reversal day, and the stock backed up 10 points--it then retested that and --Oh My!--it failed.

So because of those squiggles on the chart, mining would stop around the world, and China wouldn't buy any more gold, and then, it would remain just some "barbarous relic!"

Heck--just ask Brian Belski!! Remember that?? With his pretended Wall Street manner of trying to "protect" your money by keeping you out of gold.

Now we found out that President Obama just made a secret trip to Afghanistan. Heck--I hear he was there to pick up some gold on behalf of the US Government, so Fort Knox would really have some!!

Now today we had a very sloppy Unemployment Report--and once again we had troves of workers leaving the workplace. Which just means that the job situation is worse than it seems.

Which just means that tax cuts will be passed.

Which just means that unemployment benefits will get extended again.

Which just means every short hand wringer under-performing hedge fund trader has to re-position again!

Which just means that you have to keep buying the dips, as the POMO team keeps the market elevated.

Which just means that the Pavlovian instincts of dip-buying will soon become much more prevalent and stronger by the dip buying crowd as that behavior gets rewarded even more!

So yesterday, after parlaying my $20 slot play into $2,000, I decided to go over to the Hilton and play craps and see if I could get a run on the found money.

But there wasn't a whole lot of people at the tables, so I figured I would just go to the Borgata tomorrow instead--because I like it when there's a lot of action.

So instead, I walked by and put $100 in this slot----and on the 8th pull it hit the Jackpot. Two slot jackpots in a day--and I didn't even have to spend $20 to get them. I had someone take a picture just because the Casino says you can't have a picture inside. They act like it's a state secret.
 (And for you bears that can't read the tape or for that matter--a slot!--here's where it reset--for the anonymous commenter below--three quick hits on either side of payline pays progressive)

Now--people will say that's not supposed to happen. But that's just like Wall Street. This market is so "rigged" to the upside, that the Fed, who acts like their books are a state secret--(unless of course, you're a foreign bank that borrows billions and billions or one of the favored banksta buddies, who want to borrow billions and billions more) is now allowing pictures at the Wall Street casino.

And they're telling the public that the game is rigged to the upside.

But the public ain't buying it, because they're unemployed and broke!

But that doesn't matter.

It never mattered since March 9, 2009!

So why would it matter now??

Especially since the Fed wants to turn the public into stock sluts in the rigged casino!

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Madoff trustee sues JPM for $6.4 billion

Why wouldn't JP Morgan be sued. Ponzi is the highest level of self-actualization for a banker!!

The trustee seeking money for victims of Bernard Madoff's Ponzi scheme sued J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. for more than $6 billion, claiming the bank enabled his multibillion-dollar fraud.

The lawsuit is the latest salvo by Irving Picard, who has filed a flurry of cases in recent days seeking to claw back improper profits from the fraud. Mr. Picard has a deadline of Dec. 11 to bring the lawsuits to recover assets for victims, the two-year anniversary of Mr. Madoff's arrest and the day his firm filed for bankruptcy protection.

"J.P. Morgan was willfully blind to the fraud, even after learning about numerous red flags surrounding Madoff," said David J. Sheehan, a lawyer for Mr. Picard, in a statement. "While many financial institutions enabled Madoff's fraud, [J.P. Morgan Chase] was at the very center of that fraud, and thoroughly complicit in it."

JPM, of course, says they are innocent. Really.

Maybe it's time to reread this!

In 2006 JP Morgan allowed bank investors to leverage their bets on Madoff, and then put $250 million of the firms money alongside those investors to invest with them. JP Morgan, then yanked their money a few months before Madoff collapsed, without telling any of those investors!

They used the Goldman Sachs "model" that was used during the subprime debacle. Goldman got short sub-prime, while still selling the product to it's clients.

Here's the story:

JPMorgan Chase says that its potential losses related to Bernard L. Madoff, the man accused of engineering an immense global Ponzi scheme, are “pretty close to zero.” But what some angry European investors want to know is when the bank cut its exposure to Mr. Madoff — and why. 

How is it possible that JP Morgan can say their losses are pretty close to zero? If JP Morgan withdrew money just months before an entity imploded, JP Morgan has to give that money back. That is known as "fraudulent conveyance." So now we know how JP Morgan calculates losses that the bank will eventually have to eat. $250 million of losses on the bank's book, is "close to zero." So what does that mean for the hundreds of billions of prime jumbo mortgages that are their books where JP Morgan is acknowledging those losses?

As early as 2006, the bank had started offering investors a way to leverage their bets on the future performance of two hedge funds that invested with Mr. Madoff. To protect itself from the resulting risk, the bank put $250 million of its own money into those funds.

But the bank suddenly began pulling its millions out of those funds in early autumn, months before Mr. Madoff was arrested, according to accounts from Europe and New York that were subsequently confirmed by the bank. The bank did not notify investors of its move, and several of them are furious that it protected itself but left them holding notes that the bank itself now says are probably worthless.

A spokeswoman, Kristin Lemkau, said the bank withdrew from the Madoff-linked funds last fall after “a wide-ranging review of our hedge fund exposure.” Ms. Lemkau acknowledged, however, that the bank also “became concerned
 about the lack of transparency to some questions we posed as part of our review.”

Investors were not alerted to the move because, under sales agreements, the issues did not meet the threshold necessary to permit the bank to restructure the notes, she said. Under those circumstances, she added, “we did not have the right to disclose our concerns.
You take your money out, and you don't tell investors? That's like leaving your kids in a house burning down, while you run out the back door!

That doesn’t satisfy some investors. As they see it, they were the first people who should have been alerted to the bank’s concerns. “Instead, we continued to pay our fees to the bank and remained the only ones exposed to the risks that JPMorgan did not want to assume,” said the chief asset manager of an Italian investment firm, who declined to be identified because of potential litigation. 

JP Morgan didn't tell, because they wanted the FEES!

The tale began several years ago when a unit of JPMorgan Chase in London issued a series of complex derivatives that gave investors a way to triple their bets on the Fairfield funds, whose solid consistency mirrored the track record that had quietly — and ruinously — drawn investors to Mr. Madoff for decades...

Some investors now note that Mr. Madoff maintained several accounts with JPMorgan Chase, and wonder if the parent bank saw trouble brewing in those accounts and got its London affiliate out of Fairfield before the storm hit.

Isn't that rich? JP Morgan develops notes from it's derivative division that allows investors to triple their bets on Madoff, then later, JP Morgan gets squeamish, and yanks their money, but they don't tell any of the investors that they are no longer investing with them.

Why? What prevented this patron bank of virtue from not telling their clients that Madoff was a fraud. Why would JP Morgan leave their clients holding the bag?

JP Morgan wanted the fees!!

And was JP Morgan nervous about Madoff? They had access to other Madoff accounts.

And how did JP Morgan prevent others from selling?

They discounted the "quoted" prices of the notes by 12%, so those investors would stay in with Madoff and lose their money!

And that, my friends, is how Jamie Dimon does business.

After all, he's the face of the nation's bank!

Scene from the boardwalk

Was walking through the Tropicana, in Atlantic City and decided to drop $20 in a slot machine.

Someone must of loaded it up for me, as it hit the Jackpot. $2,000 on a .50 machine.

I got paid and walked outside, and there was a very happy guy dancing with red socks in front of Hooter's. He had already tipped some back, and was moving like Michael Jackson. Of course, look at his audience!

So I tipped him the $20 I played, and he posed in the window in front of the Hooter girls.

And he had the bigger smile!

Who was the "rocket scientist" that sold GOOG down at yesterday's close?

Here's the GOOG chart.

Now check out the same "rocket scientist" who blew out of the S&Ps two days ago at the close?

Nice sale LOSERS!!!

And if you don't think the GOOG sale was a loser--just wait a couple days and then check out the chart!!


Pat down!

Mexico's female police chief gunned down

Hermila Garcia, was the top law enforcement officer in Meoqui, who was taking on the drug cartels.

Women have become police chiefs, in the belief that they wouldn't be killed by the cartel.

The drug cartel begs to differ.

Women in wheelchair and underwear preparing for TSA screening

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Women shoplifters try to hide stolen boots in their fat folds

"Ailene Brown, 28, and 37-year-old Shmeco Thomas loaded up on four pair of boots, three pair of jeans, a wallet and gloves — all of which they had hidden in their body fat. According to the arresting officer, the clothing was frittered away in “areas of their body where excess skin was, [like] under their chest area and armpits.”"

I wonder if their inspiration of hiding these items in their fat folds came about while they were shopping for lingerie, and maybe, just maybe, they were inspired when they saw this picture.
And then, maybe they figured, they needed some boots to go with it!

Just sayin'.

Time to buy GOOG

So GOOG is going to spend $5.3 billion for Groupon.

And of course, the Wall Street hand wringers, who always try and manufacture a crisis, and aghast at the news.

Oh My!

The same losers who said that GOOG shouldn't buy YouTube.


What do I think of the Groupon buy? I don't have a clue. But you don't need too. Yahoo wanted to spend $2 billion for it in April, and they turned it down. Three weeks ago, Yahoo wanted to buy them for $3 or $4 billion. Investment bankers wanted to do an IPO and their valuation was about the same as what GOOG would pay.

So does it really matter if GOOG even "overpays?"

Heck remember when Facebook was worth $8 billion? And Mark Zuckerberg was roundly criticized for not bringing it public then? Because Facebook was destined to become the next MySpace?

Did anyone think Facebook would be worth $50 billion a year later?

How about Priceline? It's worth $20 billion. This company was panned as expensive $19 billion dollars ago!

How about Amazon? Remember when that was just supposedly an over-priced online bookseller? How could it be worth $6 billion? Wait--isn't it now worth $80 billion??

So who can tell you what Groupon is worth?? In an Internet economy?

GOOG has over $33 billion in cash--over $100 a share--they can afford a mistake--if they make one!!

The stock is at $564. It's down $70 from it's high.

So GOOG has dropped $22 billion in value, because Wall Street is worried that they "may overpay" a billion or two for Groupon.

Who really cares?

And you shouldn't either.

You need to buy GOOG here.

And tell Wall Street to shove their "group think" up their *ss!

Goldman gets bullish

This outlook represents a fundamental shift in the thinking that has governed our forecast for at least the last five years. 

And this morning, ex-Goldmanite, Jim Cramer finally has enough courage to poke fun at wrong way Roubini

Why didn't someone poke fun at Roubini at the market bottom?

Heck--Roubini called Cramer a buffoon on April 8, 2009:

"Cramer is a buffoon," said Roubini, a New York University economics professor often called Dr. Doom.

And on March 9, 2009 Roubini said there was a 2/3 chance that the US was heading into another Great Depression.

There was no-one on Wall Street that did that.

Oh--whooops--except this little corner of the Internet!

Who gave the good Doctor his name back in April of 2009:

Let me suggest a new moniker for Mr. Roubini on behalf of Mr. Cramer.
Dr. Buffoon!

Roubini, since the market bottom, has been spouting the same old, bullsh*t story.

And I've called the bears on the carpet since then--heck check out this story back in April of 2009, when Roubini said the green shoots were just yellow weeds:

Look at Nouriel Roubini's writings. How well was his latest work held together?

Roubini thought he was clever, intoning, while the world sees "green shoots" he sees "yellow weeds!"

How appropriate. The most common yellow weed is a dandelion, the traditional medication for constipation!

Instead of throwing tea bags over the White House fence, maybe somebody better send some dandelion tea bags to Wall Street!

Let's have a Wall Street tea party with David Rosenberg, Meredith Whitney and Nouriel Roubini as the invited guests!

Served on fine China!

All you have to do is take a closer look at him.

And then, you'll see what his story is really worth.

A big fat ZERO!!