Tuesday, August 11, 2009

The return of "Oh my!"

Today's sell-off is just another ground-hog day for the bears.

We get a couple hecklers of some politicians, and they'll tell the world that the US will soon be embroiled in civil unrest. Oh my--sell!

We get a couple stories of tent cities under bridges in the WSJ, and then the bears tell us we will have a W, instead of a V. Oh my--sell!

And all these traveling town hall meetings are just another joke from these politicians. Oh my-sell!

And in honor of all the bears that think we can't get out of this mess, unless we have a biblical jubilee, and forgive all the debt we have built up, I went to a show last night in Vegas called "Jubilee."

And that identifies our current malaise in the market.

The similarity between the show and the White House was subtle, but you would be able to pick it up! The men and the women dancers looked like they used Obama's waxer!

And now his honeymoon is over. No more shirtless picture from Hawaii, or basketball pick-up games, as football season is on deck!

And the "Jubilee" show was as exciting as the latest performance has been from the White House, as I fell asleep during the show!

So ignore those that cry "Oh my--sell!"

They'll soon be as forgettable as the show!

Monday, August 10, 2009

Harry Reid Clean Energy Summit

In Vegas and my hotel number last night was 666!

I'll take those numbers!

But look at RTK.

It's .99 with a good earnings report, up on huge volume.

Sunday, August 9, 2009

$38 billion of NSF charges

FT:

US banks stand to collect a record $38.5bn in fees for customer overdrafts this year, with the bulk of the revenue coming from the most financially stretched consumers amid the deepest recession since the 1930s, according to research. The fees are nearly double those reported in 2000.

The finding is likely to increase public hostility towards the financial sector, which has been under political pressure to ease the burden on consumers by increasing credit availability and lending more fairly after being bailed out by taxpayers...

The most cash-strapped customers are the hardest hit by such fees, with 90 per cent of overdraft revenues coming from 10 per cent of the 130m checking accounts in the US. Regular use of overdrafts is most common among consumers with low credit scores, Moebs discovered.

A sign of the times?

Dr. Doom, Nouriel Roubini, is cutting rates on his website. Here's an email I received, showing that not only are his bearish proclamations being discounted, so are his rates!

Due to your continued loyalty to RGE Monitor over the last year, we will like to offer you the option to continue your membership at a discounted rate.

Kaiserschmarn

I was at Spago's in Beverly Hills last night for dinner, with a banker friend and his actress wife "Coco" and Wolfgang came by the table and suggested that we try the almond upside down cake for desert. I said I already wrote about the world upside down so he'd have to suggest something different.

He said, "Go with the Kaiserschmarn" which was a creme souffle pancake with McGrath farm seascape strawberries.

And as I'm eating desert, I thought about Jim Cramer's explanation of when the short sellers would circle a stock to break it, buy the puts and credit default swaps on the company, and then attack it relentlessly with massive sales and naked shorts pounding the stock down, with some side buying of the financial downside ETF the SKF, and some rumors on the side.

Cramer had his own term for it:

Kesselschlacht.

The battle of encirclement.

This morning, I wake up to the NY Times, with another article about ex Treasury Secretary Paulson and his communication when Goldman was undergoing it's own kesselschlacht.

On calls from Paulson's Treasury's phone alone to Lloyd Blankfein, excluding home and cell phone records, Paulson called the CEO of Goldman Sachs 24 times from September 16-21.


Anyone think Paulson was instrumental in helping Goldman in their battle with kesselschlacht?

But that's all we now hear from the shortsellers. The government has effectively neutered them, and the markets ramp higher because only the bulls have balls.

And now the shorts, have a new word in their lexicon to replace kesselschlacht.

Kaiserschmarn!

Because they are getting eaten by the bulls.

With a side of seascape strawberries!

Saturday, August 8, 2009

The 999 retest!


Where's the worldwide depression?

Where is it Mr. Roubini?

Where are the "sub-par" equity returns Mr Gross?

Anyone remember this? Real Depression photos? That we were supposedly going into? That Wall Street was selling, because they were shorting?

Remember USA Today and their poll of 1,011 adults who said that we were in a depression already?

Remember that story?

Now we know that Goldman is bullish, and they have been buying since the Government gave them their buying marching orders, but don't we remember Jan Hatzius saying this back in March?

“The potential for an economic implosion and subsequent world recession is huge and could surpass the biggest financial crash in history of that of the Great Depression.”

Wasn't there another agenda at work?

Now today, Obama is saying that the recession is now over--because Bernanke and him saved the world from the depression!

Now what's happening with the media stocks? CBS is now 11 and NYT is at 8-- both numbers were touted here at 4 at least, when the media was shoveling this sh*t down our mouths!

The next Fashion of the Times will be to be bullish!!!

After all, didn't we hear how the Times was going to close the Globe, and then sell it after they got concessions from the workers?
Now the Times doesn't even want to sell it!

But the real point of this post is this:

How is it possible that this market is now just going to sputter out and die up here?

Isn't my 1040 S&P target now looking a little light? Well give me a break. I gave that before we moved 50%.

But that target is light, especially since we're heading to 1440 on the S&P by June!

Yes, by June. Because we're ending this year over 1100!

And now the biggest mistake that investors make is assuming that the 666 lows, were real prices. They were fantasy, and once-in-a-lifetime prices and the only retest of 666, is what we already had, when it was turned upside down.

Yes, that's right, 999.

999 was the retest.

Why wouldn't it be? Hasn't the world of the shorts already been turned upside down?

Why would it be any different here?

So now look for more bulls coming out of the woodwork! And if you see the job that the bears did on this market, by driving it down, what do you think will be the job that the bulls do on the bears when we jam things up?

So now you can look to 999 as the new floor. And if that's the floor, where then are we going?

How about higher!!

I'm heading out to Vegas, for a little relaxation at the tables--and also because of the Harry Reid clean energy conference--but speaking of Vegas---what happened to those stocks?

And why is MGM still under 9? 22 is where that number is going. And how about LVS? What happened to those complete idiots that sold it at 9.05 a week ago? And WYNN? Didn't that number ramp?

Anyone want to know where those guys shorting the casinos are now hanging out? They're still shorting the drillers while the analysts pimp them down!

Because they think in a world upside down you don't need to drill to get oil!

More on Madoff from "Too Good To Be True"

This story on Madoff is just too good not to post!! And Barron's or the author can't complain--It's also the tease for the new book on Bernie-- Especially since it involves JPM--and especially since they have now come up with this new beauty, that may even surpass Singapore's sovereign wealth fund, (that dumped BAC at 7!!!) with their terminology of "negative wealth added!"

Now JPM , after knowing about the Madoff fraud, at the same time, when they were still collecting money from investors to invest with Madoff, they sneakily sold their stake--because the rule of a panic or a ponzi is always the same--He who panics first, wins!

So what is JPM's story on Madoff? Their sorry excuse for screwing their clients was just this: "We did not have the right to disclose our concerns!"

So that "right" exceeded JPM's fidiciuary responsibility, because with the big boys, they don't have one.

JPM's fidicuiary is to fees!
--------------------------

MADOFF'S LONDON OFFICE PLAYED A LARGE role in helping hide his fraud. London may have started out legitimate, but over the decades it morphed into a financial outpost for the family, a place where they felt comfortable stashing what they considered their personal money -- which by 2008 amounted to some 113 million British pounds.

Madoff Securities International Limited, as the London operation was called, opened its doors in 1983. The business entity was owned by Madoff, his wife, their sons, and a longtime friend of Bernie's, Paul Konigsberg. Later, Konigsberg's accounting firm would show up hundreds of times on the list of victims, since Madoff often referred his investors to the firm -- as good accountants for handling securities.

The London office had electronic terminals that made it possible to log in directly to and trade on the Nasdaq exchange from overseas. As usual, the Madoffs were early adopters of technology, and they were among the first to use these market-making terminals outside the U.S. This meant the U.K. office could trade when traders in the United States could not: domestic U.S. trades were allowed only when the U.S. markets were actually open.

By 1989, however, the Nasdaq extended its hours and traded several hundred over-the-counter stocks during the predawn hours in the United States, thus allowing firms there to trade during London hours -- part of the gradual globalization that would one day overtake securities trading. This may have made the London office less essential to the daily operations of Madoff's broker-dealer and proprietary-trading businesses.

Over time, however, the London branch would become the family bank teller. It was offshore as well, so Madoff could wire money from his U.S. operations to London, in transactions of hundreds of millions of dollars that covered fake trades, or simply wash the funds out of his American accounts and then spend them on luxury items like the Leopard speedboat he purchased in France. (This is also known as money laundering.)

Although the sons, Mark and Andrew, were located in New York, they held ownership and titles as directors in the London operation. And Bernie's wife, Ruth, and his brother, Peter, also held shares, as did his old friend Sonny Cohn, at least originally. Paul Konigsberg was another director. Charles Stillman, an attorney for Konigsberg, said Konigsberg received nonvoting shares for work he did to help open the London operation, in the 1980s. Konigsberg, he added, didn't have any "meaningful business role" in the London operation, which suggests he didn't have any say in how the business was run.

Konigsberg, however, was a major fund-raiser for Madoff's New York hedge fund at least since 1998, according to Madoff investor Steven Leber. Leber filed a $4 million lawsuit in Florida against Konigsberg and his accounting firm, Konigsberg Wolf & Co., charging negligence and professional malpractice with respect to a Madoff account opened by Leber in 1998. In that suit, Leber alleged that Konigsberg offered to act as a conduit to Madoff for Leber's $4 million or so in family money -- but only if Leber started using Konigsberg's accounting firm as well. Konigsberg Wolf has offices in New York and is listed on the Madoff victims' trustee list. Konigsberg himself, as well as his firm and some of his family members, also appears on the victims' list more than three hundred times -- sometimes on his own behalf, other times on behalf of accounts set up for others, such as the Norman F. Levy Foundation.

It's possible the London operation was a way to repay Konigsberg for his fund-raising services without the commission money being traced. After all, through Madoff Securities International, Madoff was able to handsomely compensate other family members. In 1998, for example, directors of the London operation received emoluments, or payments, totaling £688,570 while the operation reported profits of £1.03 million, according to the Wall Street Journal. In 2007, Madoff directors altogether received £1.09 million, with the highest-paid director alone receiving £301,437.

Meanwhile, Madoff had two primary bank accounts set up for him in New York. One account was with the Bank of New York Mellon, account number 866-1126-621 (referred to as BONY 621). It was supposed to be the broker-dealer's primary cash account. He also had an account at JPMorgan Chase, numbered 140081703 (referred to as JPM 703), which was the account investors used to wire money or send checks to the fake advisory business. This was also the account used to pay investors when they withdrew funds. Many were able to get hold of their money within days; Madoff always had it ready, no matter how large the amount. It was one of his biggest selling points.

After his arrest, Madoff would claim in court that the legitimate brokerage firm and the criminal hedge fund, the advisory business, were completely separate. However, in 2001, money began to slosh back and forth between the two accounts, and this continued up until the day Madoff turned himself in. Money was regularly transferred from both the Bank of New York and the JPMorgan Chase accounts to the London office. Madoff personally wired roughly $500 million over to London and then back again between 2001 and 2008, according to copies of the documents filed by the Madoff trustee, Irving Picard. Over those seven years, Madoff also withdrew cash from the broker-dealer's account with Bank of New York, sometimes as much as $2 million in a single day.

Madoff Securities International in London also "traded for Bernard Madoff's personal accounts and members of his family," said Picard. And the trustee's revelations didn't stop there. In a filing with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Picard laid out how the London accounts had been used as Madoff's personal piggy bank. Madoff began regularly wiring money to the London office to pay for personal luxuries.

He purchased the $7 million Leopard yacht in the south of France by sending cash through his U.K. office. The yacht, named The Bull, just like his cruiser in Palm Beach, was built for Madoff in 2006. The boat was also registered in Ruth Madoff's name, as were many of the couple's high-priced trophies. The 27-meter (89-foot) Leopard, built by French luxury boat-builder Rodriguez Group, was moored at Port Gallice, France, between Cannes and Nice. The annual fee to keep a yacht of this size there is nearly $50,000. Madoff told employees in London to transfer money to the shipyard, reasoning that the builders already had euro-denominated bank accounts, which would make the transaction easier -- or at least, that was the explanation he gave. The employees sent the money after receiving an invoice from the boatyard, and Madoff later transferred cash to the London firm's accounts to cover the expense. At least $250 million was allegedly wired back and forth between Madoff's New York and London offices for such purchases.

In November 2008, Madoff phoned Chris Dale, the finance director of Madoff Securities International in London, and told him to sell an entire portfolio of British bonds. Madoff then instructed Dale to transfer the money -- $165 million -- to his New York business, so he could buy U.S. Treasuries on London's behalf. Madoff claimed he was worried about the return because of the pound sterling's fall against the U.S. dollar. "He was worried about the British economy and said he preferred his investments in U.S. Treasuries," Dale told The Independent on Sunday, a British newspaper. "This seemed perfectly realistic at the time, because of the banking crisis and the pound's weakness."

Madoff's London employees didn't think to question the wires, what they were for, or any other transactions. After all, he was the boss. One employee told the London Times: "He was the chairman of the company and it was his capital in the business. If he phoned up and told us to move money for him, we did it." Employees in London claimed they had no clue that Madoff was using his British outpost as a money launderette.

The Friday after Madoff was arrested, Stephen Raven, chief executive of Madoff Securities International, was still unwittingly defending the London office against Madoff's larger fraud, and issued an indignant statement: "We only became aware overnight of the news relating to our chairman, Bernard Madoff. His major shareholding in our firm is a personal investment. MSIL in London is a small proprietary trading firm -- we are not client-facing and we trade only with the firm's own money." That was true, but the ultimate purpose of the London outpost was very different from what Raven saw: It was where the Madoffs washed their investors' money and then spent it on expensive furnishings, yachts, automobiles, and other luxuries.

Julia Fenwick, another employee at Madoff's London office, was a good friend of Peter's daughter Shana. Because of their friendship, Fenwick sometimes vacationed with the extended family. She even attended Bernie's seventieth birthday party -- held just months before his arrest -- and became intimately familiar with his and Ruth's love of Fleet Street tailors, Boots-brand face cream, and the jet-set lifestyle.

When Madoff visited London, Fenwick said in an interview with The Mail on Sunday, he was often accompanied by a personal designer who was charged with polishing Bernie's appearance and selecting Ruth's clothes. Bernie collected watches through vintage dealers in London's Piccadilly shopping district and sported wedding bands that matched each watch. During his two or three visits a year to London, Madoff would patronize Savile Row and have his tailors from the upscale shop Kilgour pay visits to him at the firm's "Hedge Fund Alley" offices in tony Mayfair. While he was being fitted for high-priced suits in the boardroom, his wife would pass the time knitting.

While in London, Madoff stayed at the Lanesborough Hotel, among the most expensive in the world. Guests pay up to £8,000 per night and are provided with their own private on-call butler. Madoff would leave a trunk of clothes at the Lanesborough, which the hotel stored, cleaned, pressed, and hung in his suite for the next stay.

As her friendship with Shana grew, Fenwick spent more time with the Madoffs outside the office.

In 2007, Fenwick attended Shana Madoff's wedding to Eric Swanson, a lawyer with the SEC. Other SEC people also attended, including Swanson's boss, Lori Richards. (Because she attended this wedding, Richards, in front of Congress after the scandal broke, testified awkwardly that she was recusing herself from the SEC's Madoff investigation.) What struck Fenwick as odd was a joke Bernie Madoff privately made to her. At the wedding reception at the Bowery Hotel in New York City, Bernie leaned in and pointed to other SEC employees among the guests. "Look over there," he told her. "That's the enemy."

BY SEPTEMBER 2008, JPMORGAN CHASE may have had indications, or actually known, that Madoff was a fraud. How might they have found out before everyone else?

JPMorgan Chase is an enormous enterprise, which on one side -- JPMorgan -- operates as an investment bank, and on the other -- Chase -- runs as a typical commercial bank, with loans and deposits. On this commercial banking side, Chase was handling Madoff's billion-dollar advisory business bank account, JPM 703. Earlier in 2008, JPMorgan Chase had taken over Bear Stearns' operations in a government-orchestrated bailout.

Madoff was a close friend and business associate of longtime over-the-counter trader Aldo Parcesepe, a senior managing director and head of Nasdaq market-making at Bear Stearns. He regularly traded with Madoff's broker-dealer firm. Between 2005 and 2008, Parcesepe served on the board of the National Stock Exchange (NSX), the electronic exchange for equities and options that the Madoffs had subsidized in the late 1970s. Peter Madoff served on the NSX board with Parcesepe, who retired from the board in 2008. Madoff owned 10% of the NSX, and Bear Stearns regularly traded through the exchange.

The NSX was familiar ground for the Madoffs. It had once been known as the Cincinnati Stock Exchange, and the Madoffs had refurbished and reinvigorated the exchange with their own money. It was the same exchange that had helped the Madoffs attract orders from Wall Street customer firms all over the country, and the hub for payments made to Madoff for order flows.

Brokers who traded at Bear Stearns used the firm's automated equity order system to buy and sell stocks. A broker would enter the stock symbol and the number of shares he or she wanted to trade. The system was supposed to do the rest: work to find the best counterparty to trade with from among the many market makers that traded with Bear Stearns. However, for Nasdaq stocks, Bear Stearns had an unwritten code: the system automatically defaulted to trade with Madoff.

Madoff reportedly paid Bear Stearns substantial fees for this default setting on their equity order system, and he may have paid other customers to do the same as well. Between 2000 and 2008, Bear Stearns' 400 or so brokers all used this system, and all their Nasdaq trades defaulted to Madoff. It was a big source of revenue for Madoff, and it vaulted Bear Stearns to a position as the largest counterparty trading with Madoff. The arrangement was in place when Bear Stearns went under in early 2008, and it continued under JPMorgan Chase.

Since at least 1992, and separate from the Bear Stearns connection, Madoff had that other strong relationship with Chase Bank: the account named JPM 703, which Madoff used for his phony advisory business. The account had swelled over the years; by 2006 he had billions of dollars in cash on deposit. These were "demand" deposits, meaning Chase had full use of the funds until Madoff withdrew them. All the funds were commingled in a single account, and Madoff could withdraw the money as he saw fit, without any limitation.

Between 2006 and 2008, Chase Bank's accounts from Madoff averaged several billion dollars. However, in 2008, as the stock markets began dropping precipitously, so did Madoff's cash balance. Between September 2008 and December 11, 2008, it had to be pulled out of numerous nose-dives. In November alone, the balance dropped close to zero several times, forcing Madoff to transfer roughly $160 million from Madoff Securities International in London. He was juggling payouts to investors demanding their money back and moving money around from different offices and bank accounts around the world.

And all the while, he continued to take in new investors. In the month of November, investors deposited $300 million of new cash in the Chase account while Madoff withdrew $320 million. Meanwhile, he was hitting up his old friend Carl Shapiro, one of his earliest clients, for a new investment -- of $250 million.

Chase, meanwhile, was doing other business with Madoff besides banking. In 2006, JPMorgan Chase developed a derivative product for its wealthy clients. It was linked to the Fairfield Sentry Fund offered by the Madoff feeder Fairfield Greenwich. The bank offered investors -- mostly in Europe -- a note that paid three times the earnings, or returns, of the Sentry Fund. The note matured in five years. To hedge its risk on the derivative product, the bank invested in the Sentry Fund itself. This way, if the Sentry Fund did well, the bank's returns would offset its obligation on the notes.

By the summer of 2008, JPMorgan Chase had deposited $250 million with the Sentry Fund. With the financial meltdown on Wall Street and around the world in full swing, most of the markets were down 30% or more, and yet the Sentry Fund reported gains of 5%. JPMorgan Chase began to grow suspicious.

Chase representatives from the commercial banking side met with Madoff. They wanted to discuss his cash flows and to know what percentage of his portfolio was leveraged, or invested using borrowed money -- and with whom he traded options contracts. The simple math was just as many others had concluded: the options market was too small to handle the size and capacity Madoff was claiming to manage in his supposed options strategy. Moreover, it was implausible that Madoff could be generating substantial positive returns when the S&P 500 index was down 30%.

Madoff wouldn't provide Chase with any of the key information, so managers from Chase's London office, along with colleagues in New York, decided they would go through the back door.

PARCESEPE'S TRADING DESK HAD PEOPLE who regularly traded with Madoff, and they knew the number of trades executed through Madoff. On its trading side, JPMorgan learned that Madoff's trades with Bear Stearns -- by then a part of Chase, and now Madoff's largest counterparty -- could not possibly sustain a portfolio returning 10% to 12% a year on what the bank knew from the deposit side had to exceed at least $7 billion. The Chase team had access to Madoff's account records, which showed huge cash positions until the middle of 2008, when the stock market went into free fall. It was obvious: Madoff was a fraud.

In September 2008, JPMorgan Chase quietly liquidated its entire $250 million position in the Sentry Fund, even though it remained liable on the derivatives it had sold to the wealthy clients. At the time, the Fairfield Sentry investment notes were showing a 5% gain for the year. The bank had concluded Madoff was a phony, and the only way to protect itself was to liquidate anything connected with Madoff.

Not only that, but by September 2008 Chase may have known that if Madoff's hedge fund was a fraud, he was likely diverting his advisory-side funds. Still, Chase continued accepting wires and checks from Madoff's latest round of investors. Throughout the fall of 2008, according to one lawsuit filed against Chase (MLSMK Investments Co. v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. et al., SDNY 2009), the bank "continued to work in partnership with Madoff despite being privy to information that the fraud was collapsing and therefore consuming more and more of the victim proceeds."

A JPMorgan Chase spokeswoman, Kristin Lemkau, told the New York Times the bank withdrew from the Madoff-linked funds after "a wide-ranging review of our hedge-fund exposure." 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 weren't told 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 told the paper, "we did not have the right to disclose our concerns."


Friday, August 7, 2009

The market nobody loves

Oh my--the nervous nellies are out in force today.

Aren't you hearing this, from those who act like they are protecting your portfolio?

Didn't Ron Insana go into cash a few days ago?

Didn't Cramer warn us that the market was ready to pullback?

And don't we hear this:

"Look out we are going to reverse!"

"Fade the rally."

"Sell it."

"We reverse on good news, and they'll sell it, and they sell it hard."

Whatever.

Newsflash--We had a pullback on the Dow from 14,000 and NAZ 5,000 and S&P 1560, so why are we going to pull back now, when we just started to break out?

Oh my! Look out for the scary shadow!!

And all those folks short Citi who don't see this number going to 7, are going to learn a market lesson.

In fact, I'll even help the naysayers with a cheap play on Citi

The December 5 calls at .40.

They should be able to make 400% on that play.

And then, they can call home to Mommy and not cry about the big bad shadow of the bear on the market that they are still so afraid of.

Along with all their journalist friends who also remain petrified!

More truth in advertising!

NVDA hits 14 after earnings.

Wasn't that what was advertised here?

Revenue growth was good, and the name was retouted by Wall Street this morning.

I'm sitting with this name, even though it hit my ST target.

How about the Bernstein bear?

How about this beauty:

-----------
The outperformance of late-cycle commodity-related stocks, however, is disconcerting. Rising commodity prices act as a tax on the corporate and household sectors. Recent optimism regarding corporate profits is based on cost cutting and productivity, yet rising commodity prices imply increased margin pressures. Employment growth certainly seems unlikely if profit margins remain squeezed. The household sector’s income has barely improved let alone improved enough to negate the tax increase effect associated with rising commodity prices. If the US consumer had trouble with rising gasoline prices when employment was robust, then they are surely going to have trouble with rising commodity prices when employment is still weak.
------------

Talk about being afraid of your own shadow!

Flipping NILE

Earnings were OK, but not spectacular.

Putting more coin in Citigroup instead.

Job outlook brightens

Wait--this wasn't supposed to happen--isn't that what we were told?

After Obama warned us earlier in the week that job losses would still be around?

Even the U-6 rate went down-to 16.3% from 16.5%.

Brett Favre has been taken off of the rolls, and the daytraders are back swapping stocks amongst themselves!

Let's face it. Companies are so profitable because they slashed jobs, and the productivity miracle is just over-taxed workers.

I know a brilliant person at a Fortune 100 company, who came up with initiatives that saved the company $7.3 million dollars.

His salary? 140K. And the bonus is maybe 30K.

On Wall Street they would bonus him two of Elliot's girls, and seven figures--because otherwise he would "go elsewhere!"

But corporations, that are now so lean, will soon start hiring, because that is a necessary component of this recovery.

And soon, they'll realize that their valuable workers, are not people that they can walk over and squash.

So we start the recovery.

Despite what the doom and gloomers say.

Thursday, August 6, 2009

A scathing story on the Fed's monetization





47% of the bonds in last weeks auction taken by the primary dealers were monetized by the Fed--after the Fed "trumpted" the results of the auction.

Chris Martenson's comments:

This immediate repurchase of newly auction bonds by the Fed tells us that demand for these bonds is not nearly as high as advertised, and that things are not quite as strong as represented.

That's our Federal Reserve.

Not as advertised!!!

Revisiting a post

A while back, their was a rather unusual cryptic post on this blog, and you could go back and look at this piece, "What's Molech have to do with Madagascar" and think it's nonsense.

But is it?

Let's look at it.

After all isn't this "Madagascar?"



And isn't this where Madagascar's picture came from?

And wasn't that McCartney's fifth album? And wasn't the track, that Picasso's Last Words (Drink to Me?) on that album, lasting 5 minutes and 50 seconds? And isn't 5 the number of the gift? And wasn't that post written at 5:55? And wasn't the price of the stock 5.55 on the Reuters report?

And isn't the surface temperature of the sun 5500 degrees Centigrade? And doesn't the heat come from the corona?

And isn't that the "puzzle" that astronomers don't know? How the corona is so much hotter than the surface of the sun?

But first, isn't this the Canaanite god Molech?


And aren't their seven sacrifices, and one being turtle doves? And wasn't it an abomination, because of the sacrifice of the innocents?

But didn't I write about the "bird lady" who saved the unborn yellow haired parakeet from the serpent?

And isn't she from Colombia?

The serpent didn't steal life from her!

And in Greek mythology, wasn't it when the gods got pissed that the Bull was born, but wasn't it a minotaur--head of a Bull with a tail, and body of man, and didn't he hang out on the island of Knossos?

And didn't Knossos have a huge underground labyrinth?

And wasn't that a puzzle?

So we have the puzzle of the corona, and the puzzle of the labyrinth.

And isn't gnosis in Greek, knowledge that is intuitive, which differs from belief versus faith?

And wouldn't by seeing, you would then know more, than by just believing?

Now isn't this the constellation Corona Borealis?


And isn't the minotaur story is in the constellation Corona Borealis? The constellation of the golden crown?

And didn't the yellow haired parakeet, that was saved, have a golden crown?

And after the daughter of Theseus, who slew the minotaur, didn't then the god Bacchus grab her crown at the wedding and throw it in the sky? Or it is the golden crown of the Messiah, or the crown that King Asheurus gave to Esther? Because since God's name wasn't written in the book of Esther, the story is written in the heavens?

But didn't Picasso have his exhibit "The Minotaur" at the Antioquia museum in Medellin, which ends August 9th, which is right across from the La Plaza Botero?

And what would be inside on the far west wall? Covering the entirety of it? Drawn by Picasso?

Wouldn't it be this minotaur, drinking wine, drawn by Picasso?



Which brings me back to Wings "Band on the Run" album and the track Picasso's last words, "Drink to me!"

Bacchus would be proud.

The minotaur from Picasso, is at Colombia. And didn't the golden crown in the heavens come from Bacchus throwing it to the heavens? Oh what the minataur has wrought!

So if I was looking for an undiscovered gold stock, that could be 10 or 20 bagger, whose name reminded me of a Minotaur, then, you would understand what Molech would have to do with Madagascar.

Because after all, isn't one of my favorite blogs, AuH2O designs? Wouldn't AuH2O then be "Goldwater?"

And isn't that, what alluvial mining also is?

The play, by definition is a spec, but with the completion of it's recent acquisitions, it could be sitting on assets that probably amount to hundred times its current market cap---but those assets need to be taken from the ground.

And that's an expensive undertaking.

And the company needs a new board of directors, more financial controls, and more upper management, but what they do have is assets. Billions and billions buried in the ground-with over a million acres and a few more million heading their way.

Of both the gold and platinum variety.

It's a story that needs to be played out, but it's also a story only for those patient, but it's also a story with assets that people don't know about, because they haven't done their homework, or research, or their due diligence to find out.

Because you'd have to go to Colombia to do it.

What's it worth?

I'm not hazarding a guess, but that first post, and this, are both written at the same time.

The number of the gift!

And at these prices, it's a gift that can be multiplied many times over!

Blankfein's b*tchy wife

A few days ago, we heard how Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein asked their employees to not make any big-ticket purchases, because it was a "sensitive time" for the Investment bank.

It looks like Lloyd can control his employees but he can't control his wife, who it appears, needs to have some sensitivity training, as she thinks that the money that Goldman stole from the taxpayer, makes them, in the eyes of the masses, better people.

It seems that Mrs. Blankfein was at a designer clothing sale in the Hampton's, and she got all "obnoxious" because, according to page Six of the NY Post:

Laura Blankfein and her friend Susan Friedman, wife of another Goldman honcho, Richard Friedman, caused a huge scene at Super Saturday in the Hamptons last weekend when they arrived at the event before the noon start time and balked at waiting in line with the other ticket-holders.

“Their behavior was obnoxious. They were screaming,” said one witness. Blankfein said she wouldn’t wait with “people who spend less money than me.”

Tudor claims that this is a bear market rally

Come on Tudor--you guys read this blog--a "bear market rally?"

Get real!

That is just plain stupid.

And how can you say this?

“Impressive counter-trend rallies are a feature, not an oddity, of secular bear markets. We are not inclined to aggressively chase the market here. Rather, we eye a better opportunity to be long equities into year-end on a potential autumnal pullback.”

What's the chance of that happening?

Poppycock!

A pull back to 666?

No chance in hell of that happening.

Say it like it is.

We sold out at 850, and desperately need this market to come in!

And to pullback to 850?

No chance in hell of that happening either!

And to pullback to 930?

No chance in hell of that happening either!

Because in hell, you don't get a second chance!

And not even a snowball's chance!

Because we already had that story!

Mother Merrill upgrades FCX

Merrill now has a target on FCX of 87.

So let's go back to the first of the year when China started increasing shipments of iron ore. In fact, that was highlighted here on January 3 with this story:

BHP Billiton appears to have boosted December Pilbara iron ore shipments and may have been spared from most of a flagged 6 million tonnes shortfall from its 2008 sales target.

As spot iron ore prices rebounded somewhat in December and Chinese iron ore demand showed some signs of strengthening, BHP increased the number of ships loaded at its Port Hedland berths.


Now a month before that in December of 2008 I brought up FCX at 19.80, because China wanted to have an early settlement on iron ore shipping costs--settling them in January instead of April. I said, "didn't anybody think that China was trying to game shipping costs?"

Because wasn't China then, purposely not doing any business, so they could get lower prices for commodities and their shipping costs? Why couldn't Wall Street see that?

So how is it that the experts at Merrill Lynch and Bank of America can't come to the same conclusion, until the stock moves 400% in their face, and eight months after the fact?

Why is it that they can't see this at $19.80, but they can see it at $64?

Maybe it's because they were too busy hiding $5.8 billion of bonuses from the taxpayer!

And now, a judge has decided that the $33 million SEC fine/wristslap that BofA/Merrill is attempting to bribe the SEC with, is an explanation that is still found wanting.

And wanting, is also what is found missing on their analysis of Freeport--when they had that information eight months ago, but they did nothing with it!

Because instead of doing analysis, they were more concerned in taking money from the taxpayer, instead of making it in the public marketplace.

Where they could of actually earned a bonus in daylight, instead of having to steal it in the dark from the taxpayer!!

Bank of America--As advertised!!!

Friday I advertised the BAC Aug 15 calls at .45:

Where did the BAC bears go? Heck the Aug 15s calls are .45. Double by Tuesday!

I'm taking them here at 1.97.

400% in four days! Now that's advertising!!

Sleepy Citi waking up!

All the high frequency traders that were trading this for pennies, will soon face the same fate as those who were flipping BAC in the 11 and 12 range when they were doing their ATM offering.

After all, for Citi, what's the difference between 3.62 and 7 when insolvency is taken off the table?

But for shareholders the difference is 100%!

Wall Street seems to be annoyed with this blog

Apparently, some folks decided to contact Google and say that this blog was "spam" and thus I was locked out for violating their "Terms of Service."

Maybe someone on Wall Street didn't like their story being told here!

Diamonds!!

Now I know I touted Blue Nile (NILE 49.70) two weeks ago at 46.81, but now it looks like it can move to the mid 50's, as it looks like it may have finally broken out.

And to complement NILE, you should also look to pick up Harry Winston (HWD 6.18) which had pulled back from 7 two months ago, and has been slowly consolidating higher.

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

The leveraged DOW ETF's

On Sunday, July 19, I touted the DDM long, and the DXD short:

The play on the DOW is the ETF's, and most would just rather buy the DDM (30.67) which gives you 2X the DOW upside, or just shorting the DXD (44.41) which gives you 2X the DOW downside, because these ETF's have a built in churn.

The DXD short is now 39.24, a 13% gain, and the DDM long is now 34.53 a 13% gain. So it's 26% in two weeks and two days.

I'm taking it, just because I need the money moving into something that moves quicker than this, even though I think the DOW is going to move substantially higher, and I'll use the excuse of all the bad press that the leveraged ETF's are getting to dump them.

I'm going to start jacking some of these smaller names around, and place some longer term money in some hugely undiscovered small caps, so I want to redeploy some capital.

Now of course, this talk violates every investment rule on the board. Who would sell a DOW ETF, for some smaller speculative names?

But really, what on this blog, isn't speculative? So why then, would I follow Wall Street's rules?

But I want to start advertising some of these names just too p*ss off those on Wall Street who try and make this game too tough!

This bull market is going to make some geniuses out of some folks, so I need to stay in front of the curve.

So now I need some more alpha!!!

Especially since we have some market commentators warning us of those names getting juice!

They better get a juicer because they're soon going to be complaining about sour grapes!

While warning us not too make money!!!

Cramer gets on board the "Rainbow" twenty!


Whoa Nellie!!!

Looks like the regionals are finally rocking!!!

Tonight Jim Cramer had this to say on his stock tout site:

Regions Financial (RF 4.73 ), Huntington Bancshares (HBAN 4.53) and Fifth Third Bank (FITB - 9.99) are three regional banks that I regard as great calls on the turn in the economy, and I would buy all three. Regions is the worst of the three, and that matters because right now people actually want the worst ones, because they could fly the most if things get better. Huntington didn't have a great quarter but has an energized management, and I think this one could be on track for a double. Fifth Third? What can I say, Goldman Sachs loves it, as it has built a gigantic book of reserves and is doing everything right. It reminds me of the old Fifth Third -- conservative, lean and mean.

On May 8th, I had this to say:

The short story, on the regional banks is over. Huntington Bancshares (HBAN 3.89), Fith Third (FITB 5.34) and KeyCorp (KEY 6.78), and SunTrust (STI 18.58) that was downgraded to sell by Goldman yesterday, were numbers in the bears playground, that the bulls will run with. The first three are the under twenty portfolio (the stocks add up to twenty combined) and STI is the under twenty number. It's a rainbow twenty!

I guess we differed on KEY, but that's a buy also. I had to suffer with these regionals as the ATM offerings dragged the prices of these numbers lower, but now I'm getting help, from Cramer, who is pimping the regionals also.

I'll take it, because they are just getting started!

And how about that Bank of America, Whitney Tilson's favorite bank short? Boy that worked out nicely didn't it? Wait--wouldn't it have been nice is someone would of warned you that Tilson's position on shorting BAC was just plain stupid, and that we shouldn't buy his bearish poppycock on housing?

Oh that's right--we were warned--here!!! In my Gilligan piece!!

And BAC now looks like it is heading to my year end target of 22 on my Dow 10,270 piece.

Once again, as advertised!!!

JPM needs to give Madoff's money back

Finally? What took them so long????

From the NY Post today:

A likely target could be JPMorgan Chase, which has been accused of pulling its money from Madoff ahead of the breaking scandal, leaving its clients behind.

JPMorgan gave its clients access to Madoff through a product that let them lever their returns on funds that invested with the fraudster.

The bank invested $250 million of its own money in the product, known as levered notes, but pulled out months before Madoff was arrested in December.

A likely target? Here's the story how JPMorgan srewed Madoff investors back in January.

It's worth a re-read!

But I'll highlight just one part of it:

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.
--------------
And then check out this beauty. JPM then said this:

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.”
--------------------------------

Looks like JPM's losses in Madoff won't be limited to just $250 million. They like Goldman, sold his fund, to get the fees, while they fleed, just like Goldman shorted sub-prime while selling it!

GARMIN ramps!!! As advertised!!!

Whoa nellie!!!!

What happened to all those folks that said GRMN was toast?? Where did all those bearish analysts go with their childish bearish calls?

Where is the NY Times, who said that an app from Apple is all we'll need, and nothing from Garmin?

Where are those folks now?

But it sure would of been nice to have that story before it happened wouldn't it?

Oh, whoops--you did! Right here!! On July 23!! Where I said GRMN was poised to break out.

On January 6, Goldman put out a conviction sell on GRMN when it was 20. I highlighted that piece here. On April 30, with GRMN at 25, Goldman raised it to a sell, with a target of 15.

Yesterday, it finally broke out of the channel it has been trading in. GRMN doesn't report earnings until August. The stock is still a sell by most firms; two weeks ago the NY Times said that the iPhone compass will displace GRMN, and that it will soon go the way of the
tape deck.

So why then, is the stock on the cusp of a breakout?

Maybe because the NY Times can't read the tape!


Let me indulge myself again, now that GRMN is at 33 and up 6!

As advertised!!!!

And you readers from GRMN?

Good job spanking Wall Street, who didn't care enough about your company to do proper homework on it!!

Who sells on these "earnings misses?"

Machines!

Use their selling for entries. ERTS is down a buck and change to 20.77, and RIG is at 77.30 down 3 on their miss.

Remember the bots that sold LVS down to 9.05 Friday on its "miss?" How did that trade do?

Now today no-one is ever going to buy a video game or drill for oil.

Boy that's a clever gamble!

This selling is exaggerated by the high frequency trading, that according to Goldman, doesn't make any money, but we see the effects of it in stock prices every day.

Take it from the 'bots!!

Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Tears for fears?

I love reading Karl Denninger, because he always comes out with some good insight, and some good reads, and sometimes a good listen before a lot of other people, and he's obviously a real bright guy. He's on YouTube.com as the " Ticker Guy." But that being said, his market insight is completely unactionable. So in that jest, I need to poke a little fun at him tonight, because Karl is out warning the world again about the stock market:

The move the last few weeks has been parabolic, and it will end in tears. The people claiming otherwise are wrong - this sort of move is never sustainable. Examples can be found in 1929 ("Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau"), 1999 (Pick an Internet bubble stock - the entire Nasdaq doubled that year!) and more.

Every single one of these ramp jobs has ended in destruction for those who stayed at the party for too long.

Something to think about.

Karl also challenged Paul Krugman by saying there wasn't a snowball's chance of hell that the recession would be over or ended by September 30:

I'll bet you're wrong - not a snowball's chance in hell The Recession is over on or before September. We'll go with the NBER's official claim (even though I'd argue its flawed.)

The loser puts on a clown suit and either shows up at CNBC to wear it and admit they're wrong, or, if CNBC won't have the loser, does it on Youtube.

Game?

I disagreed with Karl:

Krugman won't take Karl's bet, but I will!

Because've already had the snowball in hell. That's when Berkshire was downgraded! After all, wasn't his biography "Snowball?"

Obviously, now he won't need to wear a clown suit on CNBC. They'll just need to look at his market predictions.

And then on June 26, with the S&P at 912, Karl asked where was the SEC because someone was manipulating the S&P.

At 912? When you were short? Whose tears now? Did that end badly?

And then on April 11, with the S&P at 860 Karl warned us again that the light at the end of the tunnel was a train.

At 860?

You want a crocodile without tears? Why don't you re-read this!! And forget about Karl's tears and fears!!
http://aaronandmoses.blogspot.com/2009/04/rabbit-hunting.html

As advertised!!!

So in honor of Karl, I'll give him Adam Lambert, singing Tears for Fears "Mad World!"

Because he can't get it straight either!

Check out the drillers

The drillers had a good rally yesterday, and now some names have pulled back intraday. SLB is at 55, NOV is at 36.62, and RIG, which reports numbers before the bell tomorrow is at 80.25.

I like them on the pullback.

Oh my! The casinos are ROCKING!!!!!!

Wait--wasn't that advertised here last week???

When I said the bears were rolling snake eyes?

I'll refresh your memory from that Sunday night:

Now I know I was in WYNN on April 2 (I said the shorts on the casinos were Wall Street's new cooler) at 27, out at 50 on May 5, and back in at 35 and change on May 26 before Obama decided to visit Vegas. Thursday morning, I said it was time for traders to get back in the casinos that have the Macau IPOs. LVS was 10.25 and WYNN was 42 and change. So why another tout again instead of another "As advertised?" Because I think this time, the market won't be able to contain the moves. Last I checked, there was 70 million shares short in LVS, and 16 million shares short in WYNN. Shorts think WYNN will stop at 50, and LVS will stop here. I don't buy that for a second. I retouting these names because I think WYNN goes to 66, and LVS goes to 17, on their "enterprise" value, which will be unlocked by the Macau IPO's and the market belatedly recognizing that Sand's Singapore casino will greatly help cash flow for LVS. I also think MGM could spike to 12, as I believe negotiations with the NJ gaming regulators regarding Pansy Ho, could soon receive clarification. (I'm long the 7.5s, 9s, and longer dated 10 calls on this number. 12 is just a stepping stone on the way to 22.)

Whoops--WYNN is now 58???? LVS is ramping to over 11 after the high frequency trading morons sold this number down to 9.05 after earnings on Friday? MGM up 11%. Anyone wonder why these names were re-advertised, and re-touted despite the move?

Because they are moving again, that's why!

And MGM, has the most gas left in it's percentage tank!

As advertised!!!!

A word on NVDA

This number reports on the 6th, and I've been touting this number since June 1 at 10.43.

Here's what you can expect when they report. They should expand margins above 33%, easily beating the $709 million estimates. I think they'll do in excess of $800 million the next quarter; a revenue number not in Wall Street's models.

Two weeks after I touted NVDA, they spoke positively about their margins at a conference, and I think those that have been holding this name can make some coin when they report.

Because that's where the street's concern is.

Now what?

So we broke 1000 on the S&P. What's next? How about the NAZ? It's up 34%, and my predictions months ago that we would be up 40% for the year made when we were down close to 30% was looked at as just being foolhardy.

I'll take that foolishness any day of the week.

But what was more ironic, on the day that the S&P was supposedly manipulated, when the NAZ was up 13% YTD, and when I said that it would be up 43%, for the year, and when anyone could see that that was going to happen, that post, was laughed at by the bears. Maybe it was because famed bond king manager, Bill Pimco, had warned the world that we are going to have "sub-par" returns in equities for years to come!

Some may bought that story but many didn't.

You should read it again.

Because now, there are still many stocks that should be selling at 3X their current prices, and some are even more ridiculous. In fact, I have found a gold play, that according to the work that I have done on it, has a discounted asset value at almost 10X it's current price.

Why are these opportunities available?

Because few yet believe. And few yet think those returns are available!

Give me a break!

The S&P has moved 50% from it's lows, and you can't find five and ten baggers?

That's because everyone is still just playing hot potato with stocks, and just traders and momentum folks are riding this wave, when in fact there are names that the traditional investor should just buy and hold and put away instead of trading and looking at the ticker.

I'm mobile though, and have been living on planes, so I'll get back to this, but I just can't believe that the only pumpers that CNBC has is Dennis Kneale and Larry Kudlow.

It makes me gag to be in that group, but why doesn't Goldman or Barclays put out a spin on the economy, that would give CNBC viewers or Bloomberg watchers the intellectual argument of why things need to be so much higher?

But they wouldn't do that.

Because their information is so proprietary!

What's the definition of a bargain?

How about 300%?

Wouldn't it be nice if someone touted Berkshire Hathaway as a "bargain" just two weeks ago? The A stock was less than 92,000 and yesterday, it closed at $ 100,000 which is why I touted it here, along with the banks, which were supposedly then rolling over:

Look at the big Berkshire, the A's, sitting at 91,750. Then look at the little Berkshire, the B's, sitting at 2975. The spread should be 30 to 1, but the B's are at a 2.8% discount. It makes me think that the Sept 3,000 call on the B's at $100 are a bargain!

What happened?

Just a monster move in the banks, and a 300% move in the Berkshire options which were bid nicely over 300!

A 300% move.

Playing Berkshire Hathaway.

That's the definition of bargain!

Allergan now touted as a takeover target

I touted Allergan at 52.75 on Thursday, and it closed today at 55.55. Tonight the WSJ touted AGN as a takeover target:

On Monday Allergan's shares rose 4%, sparking fresh questions about whether a deal could be in development. But with a market cap of $17 billion, some might consider the California-based Allergan a midsize target.

As advertised!!

Monday, August 3, 2009

Anyone remember the Vanity Fair confab?

It was just two months ago!

Remember that?

When no-one on that illustrious panel, of the "best and the brightest" could recommend stocks?

Anyone now wonder, why that confab was highlighted on this blog?

Winds of change

Now they "choked?"

Marketwatch, is now asking if HSBC choked, because it was afraid to buy an investment bank at the market's bottom last year.

Aug 3, 2009, 5:36 a.m.
HSBC blew a golden chance last year Commentary: Banking giant missed chance to snap up Wall St.'s charred remains

Time's are a changing!

GE's loans


As you know, my year end target for GE is 18--a number many may find implausible.

Is it?

Let's look at the bear case for GE, since it was outlined in the NY Times this weekend.

GE Capital has $38 billion of leveraged loans, and has set aside reserves against losses at 1.2%, or about less that $500 million. According to the S&P, leveraged loans trade at about 81 cents on the dollar. If GE is so good at managing their loan book, and their losses would be just 10%, then GE is under-reserving by $3 billion--in just their leveraged loans.

And since GE Capital has $650 billion in loans--Oh my--their whole book is toast!

And that, in the words of Charlie Gasparino, is "what you got."

That's it. That's the bear case. Buy into it, and short it, and then, lose money.

This is not a market, where you can take bits of data, and extrapolate it, and make money off of your bits.

That worked, when you could lay out unlimited shorts on the stocks, buy your credit default swaps and puts, and then wax poetically about the next Great Depression that was going to swallow up the earth.

I could repeat myself, but instead, I'm just going to rehash an old post, snice good ole Bob Doll of Blackrock was on CNBC this morning, now blabbing bullishly, after he was so diligently warning us that stocks shouldn't rally all the way up!

And those that are shorting GE, because they think they have the facts on their side, will have to read through it just to get to the punchline.

And since you bears, just hate it, if I throw in a bit of a philosophoical bent, I'll throw in another post that you assumed was in error at that time.

Apparently, it wasn't!

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Inherit the Wind


Joe Weisenthal, had a ridiculous call yesterday after the close:

We've Hit The Top!

It's over folks, at least for the time being...The bull run has run out of steam, felled by higher commodity prices and yields on long bonds that keep pushing higher. At this point, all the second derivative news is more than priced in, and we'll actually need to see real first-derivative gains in order to keep moving higher. Unfortunately, these won't be seen for awhile. In the meantime, continued disappointment on the housing, jobs and energy front will drag the market lower.

What Joe doesn't realize is that stocks are just being re-priced as an asset class; and they are being re-priced markedly higher. Just like oil was being re-priced. People will tell you all the stories in the world about oil demand, when it was down, but the price in the 30's didn't have any economic reflection in reality. It's also the same now in housing. Housing prices do not reflect economic reality, or the cost of housing, but you can't trade homes on an electronic marketplace with leverage, like you can with oil--because the bankers won't let you buy a house with leverage, because they're too interested in trading for themselves the things with leverage.

I said before, that I didn't think we could close below 880 on the S&P. Then I said the market will find it difficult to close much below 930--10 points down, and 100 points up. So when the market hits these inflection points, you have the world telling us we are ready to roll over--and to get out now.

Look what Rosenberg had to say yesterday morning:

The equity bull-run looks overdone: The S&P 500 is priced for around $75 of operating EPS, something I don't see occurring before 2012 (probably won't get the number above $43 per share for this year). This rally has all been multiple expansion — from 15x on trailing EPS at the low to around 23x now. The market is NOT cheap.

Bob Doll came on CNBC this morning and said we are going to visit the low 800's on the S&P. Did you see him squirm while he was saying that? That's the position of a person who isn't properly positioned!

The bearish bet from here would entail another marked increase in the price of oil, and another marked fall in bonds. I don't see that from these levels.

I remember trading the bottom in 1982, when the Dow bottomed in the high 700's. Wasn't that 777? And we had skeptics until Christmas break, when the Dow was up to 1000. At that point, the skeptics caved, even though unemployment had risen from 10-10.7% during this market move.

In Reagan's January 1983 State of the Union speech, I remember him talking how the problems "we inherited were far worse than ....expected."

Now didn't Obama use those words the other day? The problems they "inherited?" You talk about "inherited," when you know the economy is at an inflection point. When you differentiate your Administration from the previous.

Today, with the Internet, we have a much better informed electorate, and things operate at a much faster pace.

But just like the play, Inherit the Wind, you need to take a position of belief. When Clarence Darrow asked William Jennings Bryan, about the long day and the sun in Joshua we had this dialogue:

B: I believe he was inspired.
D: Can you answer my question?
B: When you let me finish the statement.
D: It is a simple question, but finish it.
B: You cannot measure the length of my answer by the length of your question.
D: No except that your answer be longer...
B: I believe it was inspired by the Almighty, and He may have used language that could be understood at the time.
D: Was---
B: Instead of using language that could not be understood until Darrow was born.

The wind was the bridge that Darrow or Bryan could never cross. Bryan believed the wind was the Almighty's spirit of inspiration; Darrow believed it to be just foolishness.

And that's why this market is so annoying for the bears.

The bears think they have the facts on their side, but the inspired bulls have the wind on their back!

Despite the arguments of why it shouldn't be!

'Bo knows lunch

Verizon
Wal-Mart
Nucor
Starbucks
Xerox
Coca-Cola
Honeywell

What do these companies have in common?

Their CEO's all paid for their own lunch at the White House!

Obama's aides said it was their "tough ethic rules" and thus it avoids any "conflict of interest."

So for $15 you can have a lunch with the President. That's White House pricing for lunch! Let's check out the private market.

$650,100 was the going price a few years back for lunch with Buffett. Aren't both of these folks in the same rarified air?

Last year, Zhao Danyang paid $2.1 million for lunch with Buffett. This year, Salida Capital, a Canadian firm paid $1.68 million for lunch.

So now you can buy lunch at the White House for $15! Put me at that table!

But does this really mean anything? Well, didn't Goldman Sachs benefit the most from the White House handouts?

And what did Goldman Sachs do, during this imbroglio? How did they prove to the world that their people were suffering during the meltdown, right before they got the hand-outs from the White House?

Goldman got rid of the free sodas and bottled water!

Tap water for you! They got rid of the perk that cost a buck!

Because didn't a Goldman spokesperson say this?

"When business declines you have to cut somewhere and perks are a lot easier to cut than jobs."

That was Goldman's definition of a "cut." But if you wanted to have a sex change (excuse me-sex reassignment) operation costing $150,000 Goldman's insurance covered it. No cuts when you're getting one!

So now it looks like the White House, has learned some PR tricks from Goldman!

So when we hear all this blather about taxes and health care, understand it's just talk.

Because the markets are heading higher, and soon the coffers at the Government will be filled with the most unlikely of tax receipts coming their way.

Capital gains!

Courtesy of the administration that supposedly knows diddley!

Sunday, August 2, 2009

Clusterstock finds a V


Even if it's sarcasm! But haven't they been one of the more vocal bearish touts?

Mattress Dominoes

£4billion in bonuses for UK bankers

After taxpayers picked up £37billion bill to bail out the banks.

Remember when Lord Myners said bonuses would be reigned in?

Now they need to pay the bonuses to "retain" the top talent.

What a joke.

But it shows that in Wall Street, and across the pond, the philosophy is the same.

Rape and pillage the taxpayers, and then bonus the bankers!

Wall Street is starting to spend again


Bloomberg has some anecdoctal info that Wall Street is spending again.

Delmonico's steakhouse said Wall Streeter's are starting to spend again. Last week, he sold a $4,000 bottle of wine.

US Helicopter, which shuttles executives from Manhattan to JFK and Newark has seen an increase in traffic.

Cipriani Wall Street, which caters to Wall Street says business is up 15%.

According to Summit Express Car & Limousine Service Inc., the smaller financial firms are increasing their business: “They’re traveling, they’re entertaining, they’re going out. They’re actually doing more business with us than big firms. They’ve been doing very well.”

Pretty soon the green shoots will be a beanstalk!

Saturday, August 1, 2009

The desperation of the bears increases

Look at David's Rosenberg's latest chart. Oh my! We are heading into a Depression--and stock prices are going to fall off a cliff!

Really? And this passes as analysis??



Look at Clusterstock yesterday. Another "Oh my" chart! Run for the hills. The sky is falling! And the title, "Shades of 1929"

The same story. Wow. What an original idea!


From the low of the crash of 1987, to the high in 2000, the S&P moved 666%.

Why doesn't anyone mention those figures, since we bottomed at 666 in the S&P?

Because 666.666 x 666.666=4,444 and no bear wants to admit that is where the S&P can go.

In the same 3,141 trading days that it took last time.

That's the pi chart the bears should consider!

Harvard Management under the microscope

The IRS is now investigating the pay that those at Harvard Management earned, while being a tax-exempt institution. Jack Meyer, Harvard Management head from 1990-2005 earned as much as $7.2 million a year, and some folks got $35 million.

Furthermore, Harvard set up staffers with their own management firms; and then they "farmed out business to them."

And then, Harvard, which had jammed their endowment with hedge funds, put the income in offshore entities, so it wouldn't be subject to UBTI-(unrelated-business taxable income.) Why was that important? Because what hedge fund doesn't use leverage? Thus the offshore entity to avoid paying UBTI because debt financed income isn't excluded.

A whistleblower resigned from Harvard in 2001, because of the UBTI, and sent his concerns to Larry Summers, and now that Harvard's endowment has taken a dump, the whistleblowers want the spotlight, so they can pretend they are the next endowment Markopolos.

But does anybody really think that Harvard hasn't lawyered up these concerns?

And these concerns will soon fade, because the markets aren't.