Jump to content


Photo

They Bought Yom Kippur


This topic has been archived.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

#16 phatbubble

phatbubble

    Associate Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,331 posts

Posted 28 September 2009 - 10:49 PM

EDIT: After reading the reviews, sounds like not too much substance except for a chapter or two.

For a book intended to raise mass awareness, he prolly needed to keep it simple.

A deep dive on the Fed-related issues that we jabber on about week in & week out here would put most folks to sleep.
Quod Severis Metes

Your life is the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the programming of the Matrix. You are the eventuality of an internal anomaly, which despite my sincerest efforts, I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a harmony of mathematical precision. While it remains a burden assiduously avoided, it is not unexpected, and thus not beyond a measure of control. Which has led you, inexorably, here.
You haven't answered my question.
Quite right. Interesting. That was quicker than the others.

#17 Takachi

Takachi

    Doctor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,882 posts

Posted 28 September 2009 - 10:53 PM

For a book intended to raise mass awareness, he prolly needed to keep it simple.

A deep dive on the Fed-related issues that we jabber on about week in & week out here would put most folks to sleep.



Like, Why would the Fed buy futures when they can buy stocks today?

#18 phatbubble

phatbubble

    Associate Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,331 posts

Posted 28 September 2009 - 11:06 PM

Like, Why would the Fed buy futures when they can buy stocks today?

Maybe it's an availability thing. TJ's already bought all the stocks.
Quod Severis Metes

Your life is the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the programming of the Matrix. You are the eventuality of an internal anomaly, which despite my sincerest efforts, I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a harmony of mathematical precision. While it remains a burden assiduously avoided, it is not unexpected, and thus not beyond a measure of control. Which has led you, inexorably, here.
You haven't answered my question.
Quite right. Interesting. That was quicker than the others.

#19 shorty

shorty

    Clinical Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,938 posts

Posted 28 September 2009 - 11:08 PM

Why didn't they like IBM on such a fine bull day today?

maybe because the POS common shares are worthless
negative net tangible aSSet value

Cynical Pontificator of Crock Stocktology

Tiger's Wood, Anthony's Weiner, Barney's Frank, Herman's Cain, Harry's Reid, Elliot's Spitzer
 


#20 shorty

shorty

    Clinical Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,938 posts

Posted 28 September 2009 - 11:12 PM

Like, Why would the Fed buy futures when they can buy stocks today?

Like, because for a margin deposit of slightly over $10 Billion they can control the entire open interest in the front-month electronic S&P 500 stock index futures.

Next question please.

Cynical Pontificator of Crock Stocktology

Tiger's Wood, Anthony's Weiner, Barney's Frank, Herman's Cain, Harry's Reid, Elliot's Spitzer
 


#21 shorty

shorty

    Clinical Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,938 posts

Posted 28 September 2009 - 11:14 PM

"Arse-blarstin' fer $100 please Shorty."

"THE ANSWER IS: 'BEHIND THE WOODSHED'."

"Ummm......Ummm........."

"BZZZZZZZZZZZT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Cynical Pontificator of Crock Stocktology

Tiger's Wood, Anthony's Weiner, Barney's Frank, Herman's Cain, Harry's Reid, Elliot's Spitzer
 


#22 patents

patents

    Master of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,838 posts

Posted 29 September 2009 - 12:06 AM

Like, Why would the Fed buy futures when they can buy stocks today?

In addition to all of the above given reasons, I repeat what I said this weekend. (The following comments are for a normal business, and I believe that the CFTC exempts the major market players from even the standard margin requirements for individuals and other businesses.)

1. The accounting treatment for Futures and stocks are vastly different. The nominal value of futures do not appear on most financials.

2. The amount of money needed (assuming that the Fed would have to have margin, which I think is not a good assumption) is vastly different. The margin tied up or encumbered for a future is a much, much smaller percentage of the nominal value of the amount controlled versus stocks.

3. For stocks they would have to pay "money" to buy. For a future, only existing funds are encumbered (at worst) and no actual money changes hands when the future contract is purchased or sold.

If the Fed or any other business entity bought a future contract, I am not sure where the nominal value of the future contract would appear on any financial statement. I think only the mark-to-market change would appear at the close of the accounting period.

Finally, the purchase of stocks leaves footprints or fingerprints (shows and can be traced on financials for example). On the other hand, the purchase of futures leaves few fingerprints or footprints for tracing purposes.

These are the mechanics of the system that I struggle to understand and would sincerely appreciate any corrections if I am wrong in my analysis/reasoning.

#23 psyche doctor

psyche doctor

    Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,301 posts

Posted 29 September 2009 - 02:32 AM

Like, because for a margin deposit of slightly over $10 Billion they can control the entire open interest in the front-month electronic S&P 500 stock index futures.

Next question please.


And $10 billion is mere pocket change for banana ben, like a couple pennies wedged in your car seat or a dime that fell into the urinal.
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

#24 Goldmember

Goldmember

    Professor of Stock Proctology

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,042 posts

Posted 29 September 2009 - 04:07 AM

"Arse-blarstin' fer $100 please Shorty."

"THE ANSWER IS: 'BEHIND THE WOODSHED'."

"Ummm......Ummm........."

"BZZZZZZZZZZZT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"


:lol: :lol: :lol:

...everytime I sit in my leather La-Z-Boy I laugh my ASS off. :lol:

:P :o :huh:
Anthony caused pearls to be dissolved in wine to drink the health of Cleopatra; Sir Richard Whittington was as foolishly magnificent in an entertainment to King Henry V; and Sir Thomas Gresham drank a diamond, dissolved in wine, to the health of Queen Elizabeth, when she opened the Royal Exchange; but the breakfast of this roguish Dutchman was as splendid as either. He had an advantage, too, over his wasteful predecessors: their gems did not improve the taste or the wholesomeness of their wine, while his tulip was quite delicious with his red herring.here





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