Rationalize Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 ...Now that the Ditech cash out ream-fi machine has been cash for clunkered, we are seeing the house of card start to fall. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHanky Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Fixed income now up 25 out of the last 26 trading days......FWIW Muni's still not backing off... Still might have a ways to run if I am right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olduvai Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Barrick management may be slow, but it is a good time for a gold miner to do some capital raising. I am long gold mostly physical and some shares (15%) Thanks TJ for posting this news, although I never feel comfortable when CNBC shills talk my book. Probably time for a short-sharp pull back in gold to get rid of the weak hands before a decisive push beyond $1000. CNBC Breaking News Barrick to do $3 billion equity sale to pay-off remaining hedges To take $5+ billion charge CNBC starts screaming BULLISH BULLISH BULLISH !!!! Great for gold !!!! Great for Barrick !!! EXTREMELY BULLISH !!!! _____________________________ Trader Joe: You azzholes are kidding.....right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted September 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Fixed income now up 25 out of the last 26 trading days......FWIW sell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted September 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 CNBC Breaking News Barrick to do $3 billion equity sale to pay-off remaining hedges To take $5+ billion charge CNBC starts screaming BULLISH BULLISH BULLISH !!!! Great for gold !!!! Great for Barrick !!! EXTREMELY BULLISH !!!! _____________________________ Trader Joe: You azzholes are kidding.....right? And any player buying back $3 billion of short futures is not bullish for gold because ...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHanky Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 sell Soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted September 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 $3 billion is HOW many contracts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted September 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Not to mention the front running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoBear Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Bank walkaways! The irony of it all..... A Bank walkaway is simply a home that the bank started foreclosure proceedings, set a date for a sheriffs sale, and then canceled the sheriffs sale at the last minute leaving the property title in the home owners name. In some cases the home owner doesn't even realize that the home is still in his or her name. Renetta Atterberry thought she had lost her East 102nd Street house. So she was shocked to learn in January -- five years after her mortgage company filed for foreclosure -- that it was still in her name. Worse, the long-vacant rental home had been vandalized and she faced a raft of housing code violations. Since then, she has been saddled with debts of about $12,000 to pay for demolition and back taxes. Mercy James thought she had lost her rental property here to foreclosure. A date for a sheriff’s sale had been set, and notices about the foreclosure process were piling up in her mailbox. Ms. James had the tenants move out, and soon her white house at the corner of Thomas and Maple Streets fell into the hands of looters and vandals, and then, into disrepair. So imagine her surprise when the City of South Bend contacted her recently, demanding that she resume maintenance on the property. The sheriff’s sale had been canceled at the last minute, leaving the property title — and a world of trouble — in her name. http://www.bankwalkaways.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shorty Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Soon! might I humbly suggest the consideration of taking one's winnings in partial fashion if possibre, i.e. selling gradually into the strength rather than trying to time the exact peak of the tit on the top such an approach often reamsults in one being able to live with oneself later reamgardless of how the particular manipulation/speculation in question ultimately blows up, aSS all do eventually having disreamgarded said advice mineself on more than one significant occasion in the paSSt, I currently am unable to live with myself, although I hope to be able to move back in after the autumn $craSSh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatbubble Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 $3 billion is HOW many contracts? A contract is 100 oz (so nominal value $100K), but no idea how the hedging mechanics work. Do they settle short futures with their physical production? The NYMEX position limit is something like 6K contracts, there must be something more complex at work. I dunno. ABX was always tainted by their hedging in the goldbug world. Would be funny if they shed them, via dilution, right at an IT top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takachi Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 I think the point was it could not be bullish for Barrick. It has to be bullish for gold, is the point I saw....... but it certainly can't be bullish for Barrick in this decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rationalize Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Soon! Sell half sooner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rationalize Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 might I humbly suggest the consideration of taking one's winnings in partial fashion if possibre, i.e. selling gradually into the strength rather than trying to time the exact peak of the tit on the top such an approach often reamsults in one being able to live with oneself later reamgardless of how the particular manipulation/speculation in question ultimately blows up, aSS all do eventually having disreamgarded said advice mineself on more than one significant occasion in the paSSt, I currently am unable to live with myself, although I hope to be able to move back in after the autumn $craSSh And what he SSaid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rationalize Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 A contract is 100 oz (so nominal value $100K), but no idea how the hedging mechanics work. Do they settle short futures with their physical production? The NYMEX position limit is something like 6K contracts, there must be something more complex at work. I dunno. ABX was always tainted by their hedging in the goldbug world. Would be funny if they shed them, via dilution, right at an IT top. Kinky Over The Counter unregulated exotica. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.