Jump to content


Photo

Welcome to earnings Q4 season


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
257 replies to this topic

#196 alceringa

alceringa

    Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,125 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 05:35 PM

Sorry to break things up, but -

No one is saying that the Fed cabal is buying/selling every SPU contract.

Think of the chemical concept of a catalyst. Or the physical concept of momentum.

The Fed cabal just has to get the ball rolling in the right direction or stop the decline, for example (again see the theory of Heller).

If a market is back-stopped such that it cannot go down, what is going to happen? Even a rat when they go down a path that is blocked will normally turn-around and head the other direction.

It only takes a single selected/trained cow to lead a whole herd to the slaughterhouse. (Note that frequently the lead cow is spared and used again and again.)


So, to use physical concepts, you're suggesting that "The Them" is capable of overcoming the entropy of the USA stock markets, right?

Sorry, I'm not going to believe that. Professional stock market arbitragers aren't dumb as cows, even if they occassionly get slaughtered, and they aren't going to let pricing discrepancies exist for very long without closing them.

In any case, all this navel gazing about "The Them" manipulation totally blows up as soon as you start talking about say, the Brazilian stock market and it's recent run, or any market outside the USA.

Could someone please explain how the Federal Reserve Bank of the USA, the US Treasury and the other "The Them" members have managed to juice, lets pick the DAX as an example, for the last 10 months for their own benefit and more importantly what motivation they have to do such a thing?
"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities."
Churchill

"You can fool some of the people all of the time."
Lincoln

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
Jefferson

#197 Jorma

Jorma

    Associate Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,417 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 05:46 PM

US stocks were out performed by most of the rest of the worlds last year. The entire worlds appetite for equities is as great or greater than ever despite the crash. Then too the rest of the world has been pouring money into the financial sphere. The 'one market' phenomenon is global. Despite the crash and all that was lost the amount of money, or what passes for it is gigantic. Central bank foreign exchange reserves are I read 700% higher than in 98. The well managed confidence that more is on the way says there is nothing that unusual about our or any stock markets inflating again.
.

War is the last great hope of the incompetent to order the unwilling to attempt the impossible.
William Eastlake 'The Bamboo Bed'

Change you can suspend your disbelief in.
Fafblog

 

The Treasury

could burn down

We jammin still

Full Extreme   Ultimate Rejects


#198 psyche doctor

psyche doctor

    Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,301 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 05:49 PM

I am using my imagination and I can't imagine them talking about who is going to get up early the next day to juice the GLOBEX futures when the Frankfurt Market opens.

That makes no sense and doesn't pass the smell test.

The fact that GLOBEX seems to get juiced alot during bull runs (a fact) doesn't mean that it is the Fed or one of the PD's doing it. (a belief.) Correlation is not causation, as they say.

Anyone that thinks that being a Primary Dealer for the Fed is an absolute path to huge power and influence with the ability to manipulate markets to unfair advantage needs to explain just one little thing.

How could Lehman Brothers go bankrupt while it was a primary dealer?



Please explain to me why many times the market gets to a critical support level and looks like it is (should be) breaking down and then, all of a sudden, some really big buyers mysteriously show up with really big bids on the futures and jam the market? Not so sure about Lehman, but Bear was not really liked in the circle of PD's. Bear was left to rot in the desert, they were a sacrificial lamb to the lords of high finance. I have read a couple of really good books about the collapse of Bear that explained the reasons for their collapse. I would elaborate on that, but I am not feeling real well at the moment.
I watched a snail crawl along the edge of a straight razor. That's my dream; that's my nightmare. Crawling, slithering, along the edge of a straight razor... and surviving

#199 alceringa

alceringa

    Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,125 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 06:02 PM

Please explain to me why many times the market gets to a critical support level and looks like it is (should be) breaking down and then, all of a sudden, some really big buyers mysteriously show up with really big bids on the futures and jam the market? Not so sure about Lehman, but Bear was not really liked in the circle of PD's. Bear was left to rot in the desert, they were a sacrificial lamb to the lords of high finance. I have read a couple of really good books about the collapse of Bear that explained the reasons for their collapse. I would elaborate on that, but I am not feeling real well at the moment.


Not knowing precisely what examples you are referring to, my simple minded guess would be that's the reason they are called "support levels".

Buy support, sell resistance.

If one's trading style is not to buy support and sell resistance, then that is a problem with one's trading style.

Blaming "The Them" for a bad trading style is not a path to becoming a good trader.
"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities."
Churchill

"You can fool some of the people all of the time."
Lincoln

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
Jefferson

#200 cwd

cwd

    Dean of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,435 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 06:15 PM

From the IBM balance sheet, a question for you finance guys, how does IBM get to a -7.6 net equity position? :unsure: ahoo

Balance Sheet Get Balance Sheet for:
View: Annual Data | Quarterly Data All numbers in thousands
PERIOD ENDING 31-Dec-08 31-Dec-07 31-Dec-06
Assets
Current Assets
Cash And Cash Equivalents 12,741,000 14,991,000 8,022,000
Short Term Investments 166,000 1,155,000 2,634,000
Net Receivables 29,097,000 30,476,000 28,655,000
Inventory 2,701,000 2,664,000 2,810,000
Other Current Assets 4,299,000 3,891,000 2,539,000
Total Current Assets 49,004,000 53,177,000 44,660,000
Long Term Investments 12,757,000 13,543,000 18,449,000
Property Plant and Equipment 14,305,000 15,081,000 14,439,000
Goodwill 18,226,000 14,285,000 12,854,000
Intangible Assets 2,878,000 2,107,000 2,202,000
Accumulated Amortization - - -
Other Assets 3,536,000 19,250,000 10,629,000
Deferred Long Term Asset Charges 8,818,000 2,988,000 -
Total Assets 109,524,000 120,431,000 103,233,000
Liabilities
Current Liabilities
Accounts Payable 20,960,000 22,273,000 18,006,000
Short/Current Long Term Debt 11,236,000 12,235,000 8,902,000
Other Current Liabilities 10,239,000 9,802,000 13,182,000
Total Current Liabilities 42,435,000 44,310,000 40,090,000
Long Term Debt 23,391,000 23,573,000 13,780,000
Other Liabilities 26,791,000 19,954,000 17,690,000
Deferred Long Term Liability Charges 3,441,000 4,124,000 3,167,000
Minority Interest - - -
Negative Goodwill - - -
Total Liabilities 96,058,000 91,961,000 74,727,000
Stockholders' Equity
Misc Stocks Options Warrants - - -
Redeemable Preferred Stock - - -
Preferred Stock - - -
Common Stock 39,129,000 35,188,000 31,271,000
Retained Earnings 70,353,000 60,641,000 52,432,000
Treasury Stock (74,171,000) (63,945,000) (46,296,000)
Capital Surplus - - -
Other Stockholder Equity (21,845,000) (3,414,000) (8,901,000)
Total Stockholder Equity 13,466,000 28,470,000 28,506,000
Net Tangible Assets ($7,638,000) $12,078,000 $13,450,000

#201 cwd

cwd

    Dean of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,435 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 06:39 PM

Uh...no kidding. You're a maSSter of the obvious.
That's what makes the cash prices go UP.


Your reamsoning on this pernt would be valid only if taken out of context. The context being, aSS previously alluded to reampeatedly, an effectively infinite margin capacity on the part of the Gov't to purchase those very same futures that are offered for sale aSS part of the arbitrage. They can buy 'em all, no problem.....butt they don't have to, because aSS they bang through the offers other sellers back off (pull their offers, waiting for higher prices) while more third-party buyers step up, some to open, some to cover, and the futures price rises again. Even if they didn't back off it still would not matter because aSS I've already reampeated, the Gov't can buy aSS many aSS they need to, necessitating merely a few additional mouse-clicks between yawns. Therefore yer pernt is reamjected.


This clause is in error because the marginal cost of manipulating the underlying is obviously much higher than that of manipulating the futures, due to leverage.


If by this you mean that buying futures does not drive up cash prices, you are wrong. A dramatic example corollary being Oct 19, 1987 when "portfolio insurance" selling of futures drastically drove down cash prices (aSS an aSSide that day reamains my personal best one-day percentage profit ever, since I was heavily long OTM puts on over a dozen individual conmon shlock ithues plus several fraudexes). Additional direct examples are commonly found, often on days when the future trades well above the cash (above the spread fair value) prior to the open. After the open, cash prices rise. While it is of course true that the spread converges, that is irrelevant, aSS shown empirically by the fact that it does so by a combination of falling futures prices and rising cash prices, not by only the futures price falling. Thus my pernt is proven -- buying the futures had the effect of raising the cash prices. Now by simple induction, given that it worked once, reampeating the same process with another round of futures buying can extend the effect ad infinitum.


The Fed can, and does, create money for free.


Disreamgarding fer the momernt any negative inference on my part of any intentional implication on your part, of your superfluous quotation marks, I steadfaSStly aSSert that manipulation is in fact purcisely waht is occcurrring hear my friend.


Hear your implication is cleer. Shorty is a CONspiracy whacko. On this dual pernt (i.e. the CONspiracy portion aSS well aSS the whacking :mellow: portion) I plead guilty :ninja: :ninja: , the former habit being of immense amusement value aSS a time-paSSing diversion while I sit front the puter watchin my account balances grind higher; the latter's marginal cost having CONverged <_< aSSymptotically to near zero due to a serendipitous abundance of cheap bandwidth and cheap women.


:lol: :lol:

#202 cwd

cwd

    Dean of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,435 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 06:41 PM

You can blame them, but I don't think that this hedging accounts for what I was trying to explain.



Just check the US night trading volume. B)

#203 Trader Joe

Trader Joe

    Phd, Douchebagology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,570 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 06:44 PM

From the IBM balance sheet, a question for you finance guys, how does IBM get to a -7.6 net equity position? :unsure: ahoo



This was addressed a week or so ago....they took something like a $10 billion hit to their pension assets in the 2008 melt down.

Don't worry

It'll come back

It always does

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA

#204 cwd

cwd

    Dean of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,435 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 06:54 PM

:rolleyes:

Okay.

So, I want to continue to follow this.

So, you & Patents presumably wish to insist that the Fed/Treasury/PTB/Heller/Rothchilds/Zionists/BinLaden/EffingLordKnowsWhoElse is behind the curtain offering chronic marginal demand (a.k.a., "permabid") for futures contracts to bid up the cash markets for US equities.

For want of a specific identity, we are going to call the perpetrators of this manipulation "The Them."

So, are The Them responsible for the rally off the March lows? Is that the claim? In the absence of their permabid, the rally would not have happened? I'm pretty sure that's what Patents has suggested: The Them acted - nay, had to act! - to avoid a revolution or something? This must be the case, otherwise, the whole freaking question is utterly & totally effing moot, right? I mean, if The Them are not responsible for the rally, who effing cares, right? If The Them are sucking umbrella drinks somewhere with toes int he sand through the crisis, well then, some conspiracy, right? Woop-dee-do the "manipulation".....

(Begs the question, obviously, of why The Them with their handy permabid would have allowed the System to run to the edge of implosion last fall, or to have tempted revolution by allowing equity markets to tumble into the toilet bowl with the March climax... but I'm sure there's a simple explanation for the capricious manner with which they toggle the manipulation switch behind the curtain... all to their subtle advantage.)

So, how many contracts have they been long during the rally? You've suggested that, "the entire frickin' front-month open interest of 2,406,352 CONtracts could be controlled for a paltry $13 Billion FRN's, approximately one-tenth of one percent of the total federal Gov't Great-Recession bailout tab." Super. A number. Have they held one-half, 1/10th, or 1/100th of those front-month contracts since March? Any estimate, so we can have some sense of the scope of this incredible scheme?

Meanwhile, they're long this ever growing mountain of contracts, right, and they're making a motherload fortune with them contracts off the freaking rally they are creating, right, cause of all the leverage. Yippy, right?! Woooooo-hooooooo!!

They hold until expiration, right? I mean, they don't turn around and trade out of these positions, do they? I mean, cause otherwise the permabid becomes an equivalent permaask, right? And we know they don't cover in the cash market, uhhhhhhh, 'cause that was the object of their manipulation.

So, effectively, they have cornered the equity markets, right, with their permabid?

:mellow:

And they have to do this sneaky stuff despite...

THE FREAKING GIGANTIC INTERVENTION THAT WAS DONE PUBLICLY AND OUT IN THE WIDE OPEN BY RUNNING UP THE FEDERAL DEFICIT TO 13% OF GDP IN 2009 OFF A BASE OF 3.25% OF GDP IN 2008; THE NATIONALIZATION OF GM, AIG, FANNIE, AND FREDDIE; TO SAY NOTHING OF THE FED'S OUTRIGHT PUBLIC PURCHASE OF LONG BONDS, MORTGAGE BACKED SECURITIES, AND AGENCY DEBT IN THE TRILLIONS?


:mellow:

So. They conduct this conspiracy on the side, too.

Fascinating.

Tell me more.
Tell me again about the rabbits.


But it is against the law for the Fed to purchase stocks. :lol:

#205 Dharmaeye

Dharmaeye

    Doctor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,943 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 07:01 PM

Gold 1152 and moving fast

#206 psyche doctor

psyche doctor

    Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,301 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 07:13 PM

Not knowing precisely what examples you are referring to, my simple minded guess would be that's the reason they are called "support levels".

Buy support, sell resistance.

If one's trading style is not to buy support and sell resistance, then that is a problem with one's trading style.

Blaming "The Them" for a bad trading style is not a path to becoming a good trader.



My trading record speaks for itself, it definitely does. I am not blaming them for anything, I do o.k.. Like I've said before, when they are reflating, like they are now, there is a floor under the market and I have also stated that it is not wise to fade this type of game. Now as far as buying support and selling resistance, duh. I have been doing this for nearly 12 years: I think I understand how this works. What I was saying was that doesn't it seem a bit ironic that when the market is at a critical level and falling apart and there is some serious selling pressure and everything thing in the book is suggesting that this level should not hold and then, bam, from out of nowhere tremendous buying pressure hits the tape and then a massive rally ensues. Shouldn't this raise some eyebrows? I think it should. Don't be so naive to reason that there isn't manipulation in the markets, because, really, you don't have any proof that there isn't. Don't be so condescending in your "simple minded" guesses.
I watched a snail crawl along the edge of a straight razor. That's my dream; that's my nightmare. Crawling, slithering, along the edge of a straight razor... and surviving

#207 cwd

cwd

    Dean of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,435 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 07:16 PM

That the Fed meets with the Primary Dealers each morning is a fact. They are not having tea and crumpets and talking about last night's football match. They are determining what they need to do to meet the "needs of the Primary Dealers". The Fed may use euphemisms in describing these meetings, but it doesn't take much imagination to envision what goes on. The meetings are held between the FOMC trading desk and the trading desks of the PDs-- traders talking to traders with direct pipelines to the highest offices in the land.

Use your imagination.


Those meetings are not about last night's ball games, they are about what needs to be done and getting it done. It is better to low key it, but when push comes to shove the government is going to do what ever is necessary to achieve their goals as Jimi said in big BOLD print.

#208 cwd

cwd

    Dean of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,435 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 07:21 PM

My trading record speaks for itself, it definitely does. I am not blaming them for anything, I do o.k.. Like I've said before, when they are reflating, like they are now, there is a floor under the market and I have also stated that it is not wise to fade this type of game. Now as far as buying support and selling resistance, duh. I have been doing this for nearly 12 years: I think I understand how this works. What I was saying was that doesn't it seem a bit ironic that when the market is at a critical level and falling apart and there is some serious selling pressure and everything thing in the book is suggesting that this level should not hold and then, bam, from out of nowhere tremendous buying pressure hits the tape and then a massive rally ensues. Shouldn't this raise some eyebrows? I think it should. Don't be so naive to reason that there isn't manipulation in the markets, because, really, you don't have any proof that there isn't. Don't be so condescending.



Right on, I have done fine, a lot of it due to this board, but a lot of people are going to end up in poverty as the fraudsters loot the country. :angry:

#209 jickiss

jickiss

    Doctor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,716 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 07:28 PM

jickiss is back!



jickiss is back!


and

For The Record, and forever,

dear patents,

your jickiss salutes you, for asking questions, for being tough minded, and really, in a loop closing sense, for making your jickiss thimk that Doc is Right evermoreso in a Major Sense when advise is given to one and all that

"Price Matters."

based upon your questions, and the way you have engendered debate, you have convinced your jickiss to pay more attention, this year, Twenty Ten, to price. thank you!

also, for the record, and forever,

your jickiss and da General really decided against going "Big Time all in" when Ford Motor was $1.01.

your jickiss will never change the Bedrock Belief that there is a Wire for every entity, for every Force, for every Spirit.....the Greatest Game is to get to your own Wire a Real Winner. Then, get off the horse and Shut Up, and, if you can, help them that can run a better race.

For sure, most who post here have type A personalities, and would equally argue most points vocally with the other posters.....but when we all left the bar, if anybody said anything to YOU, they would hit That sob real hard First, in Defense of Stoolville forever!

squabbles, fine, real divisions should exist only between them that have crossed their own Wire, and them still racing along the Backstrech!

Ggggrrrrrrr f f Ford F ! = your jickiss = the leader of the dumb in 2009!


best regards to you patents!

jickiss!!!!!!!
"Every Bubble ends in fear and panic. This one will too." --Machinehead, March 29, 2005

On September 06, 2006, TRE closed at $6.50.
On September 19, 2006, CDE closed at $46.30 (adjusted for reverse split)
.


On Oct. 17, '06, Goldman (GS) closed at $183.07 (jickiss Sell) whilst Newmont (NEM) closed at $43.24 (jickiss Buy).

"Politics in America has become a playground of fictions. The politicians tell the public what the public wants to hear. Whether the question is social security, education, budget deficits or national security, the public wants to believe that things aren�t so bad." --Written by J.R. Nyquist, December 8, 2006.

"Private sector employees will never retire, they will work literally to death, dying sick broke and busted with absolutely no hope whatsoever." -- Shorty, on March 15, 2009.

"Luck is the most precious commodity in the world." Brisbane Bear, October 25, 2007.

"Luck favors the prepared mind." Mr. James Dines, back in the 80s, in "The Dines Letter."

"With Luck, anything is Possible, but without Luck, virtually nothing Good ever happens." --- The jickiss Mantra, sad but True.

#210 Ags Nightmare

Ags Nightmare

    Associate Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,214 posts

Posted 10 January 2010 - 07:31 PM

what caused the EUR to gap up and gold to rocket a few minutes ago.....
"I went out and bought an Apple Computer; it had a worm in it"....."When I was born, I was so ugly that the doctor slapped my mother"....'I played hide and seek; they wouldn't even look for me.'- Rodney Dangerfield

My Blog






Stock market portfolio giving you the runs? See Dr. Stool.

Take a subscribatory!
Download 
The Anals of Stock Proctology now!



The Daily Stool - Stock Market Message Board
Stool's Gold- Gold and Precious Metals Forum
Look Out Below Message Board

Support your local Stool Board.


The Al E. Greenspeuman designer line at Stoolmart. Get yours today! Click here now!
Get Mugged!


Dr. Stool's
Book Search

Enter title, author, or keyword
Just books
All Products





Old Stool Depository

Live Steaming Pile Chart