Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Morning Audibles 5.11.10 - Red, Blue, or "Chill"?

Despite the heightened volatility in the markets these past 3 trading days or so (which included two weekend days), your humble blog host, CV, has been uncannily subdued in mood... Want answers? Well basically, I've decided that instead of taking one of these...

Blue Pill - Red Pill

I'd just take one of these (and be content to watch the fireworks for a bit)...



I was very, very, very lucky to be able to do this... CV had an SPXU position on (basically since March 5th, when the SPX took out the FIBO retrace back to 1150 after the January dip)... With two months of incessant grinding, it was my idea that that position might end up in the dumpster along with everyones SRS & FAZ positions from '09... Alas, in a 'miracle moment' during last Thursdays FLASH CRASH, that position (which had been 'deeply' red), flashed green to the tune of $800 semolians (beer money, I know, but it's better than losing for a thirsty boy like me)... Anyway, I somehow managed to get out of that position right then and there (which was a miracle in of itself)... The SPX was around 1074 at the time (which is even MORE a miracle as it was near the lows for the day)...

Anyway, since that time I've put on no new positions (on either side)... I still have some short SPY positions, but a lot of cash as well... So I've just been "chillin'"... But that doesn't mean things aren't on my mind... This is a short list:

- The FLASH CRASH... We're fairly confident now that it wasn't "fat fingered". But the media reporting did its work well, and I'd say most of the Johnny's out there are still convinced that that's what it was. Since they have the attention spans of the gnat population, they've already clicked the remote back to the regularly scheduled programming. Wrap it up and put it to bed. The "fat finger" is now in the dumpster along with JFK assassination & Area 51... Question is, could "the squid" have triggered this in a way to deflect attention from themselves...Did they Did they?

- $972B is just a "down payment" for bailing out the Euro Zone (trust me)... Consider your appetites "whetted"... They're just conditioning us for what's to come... As we all know, once you throw good money after bad, there is more to follow...

- I'm sure nobody needs convincing of that last bullet point, but if you do, I'll simply nominate the "latest"... Fannie Mae, the mortgage-finance company operating under federal conservatorship, said it will seek $8.4 billion in aid from the U.S. Treasury Department after reporting its 11th-straight quarterly loss... Need I go further?

- Lest anyone get TOO COMFY with all these ideas, let me remind you... Governments bailed the banks out (using taxpayer money), now the banks are bailing the governments (who are insolvent largely because of the bank bailouts) - The banks themselves will net 1.5 billion a year in fees... More bonuses for bankers... Also, The IMF's piece of this thing is allegedly €286 billion... The US is 17% of that (or about $50 billion)... In order for that money to be "appropriated", it has to be "appropriated" (by Congress)... Expect "things" to be tacked on to that "Appropriations Bill"... GET READY TO BE HANDED THE TAX BILL FOR ALL OF THE ABOVE...

- Goldman Sachs, which makes more money from trading than any other Wall Street firm, also disclosed that its traders generated $100 million or more on 35 days during the first quarter and lost money on no days... DO I NEED TO COMMENT ON THIS?

- Warren Buffett Has "No Comment" On His Sale Of $30MM In MCO Shares Just After Moody's Wells Notice Receipt... Hmmm...

- On the subject of "comments", I thought both Bernanke and Geithner had said the crisis was behind us? (I'm too lazy to look these quotes up, but if someone has the right combination of boredom and "bloodhound" in them, they might look it up for extra credit)... Those quotes WILL come in handy some day...

- I kind of 'secretly' hope that the SPX makes it WAAAAY up there on a retest of the highs (personally - I have it pegged for around 1190 at the moment - but that's just a 'crude' guess)... In any case, it would make a HUGE sideways wedge (from 1044)... That's about a 180 point S&P range... Perhaps 'annoying', but hell, for TECHNICAL TRADERS, it might be a dream...

- World Cup is coming in a few weeks to South Africa... I've heard that 40,000 "prostitutes" have descended on the country... Gee - I suppose that that means that Wall St. has effectively SHUT DOWN until the end of July & will be working down there for pay... THE ALGOS REALLY ARE IN CHARGE! Good luck trading against them!

Oh, and finally... In my "browsing", I came across this "click pay" ad the other day...


LOL - All I can say is, something about it seems, well... APPROPRIATE...

259 comments:

  1. We were early with it late last year but the MCO short is probably still a good one.

    Funny, none of the people in that 60 minutes special looked the guy in that mortgage rescue plan ad.

    ReplyDelete
  2. @McF

    I'm still trying to figure out if the guy in the photo is the one getting "saved" out of foreclosure, or INSTEAD, if he is representative of the condition a large percentage of Americans will be in after OBAMA gets through...

    I'm leaning towards the latter...

    ReplyDelete
  3. wow-

    http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01632/Elena-Kagan_1632758c.jpg

    the earrings and pearl necklace are a nice touch- lol

    but she has a great "legal mind"-

    so- as CV would say- she at least has that going for her(-:!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. @ahab

    Speaking of "pills"...

    It seems she (and Romer), took the UGLY PILLS very early on...

    I doubt their prescriptions have run out either...

    ReplyDelete
  5. @ahab

    Ever notice how Obama seems to like to surround himself with ugly TOADS?

    Romer, Summers, now this...

    I suppose it makes his skinny dopey ass look better...

    ReplyDelete
  6. . . .and maybe she (Kagan) and Napolitano can start a girl's club-

    where does Obama find these beauties?

    I mean really- at least give me a little eye candy

    ReplyDelete
  7. That guy looks like he could be one of my relatives...

    Disclosure: I'm long Love

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks for the money-metrics article Ra-Man

    I have beginning to worry about the "debt baguette" bazooka. What if they announced a massive number to quiet the market but there actually is no money and (as usual) they have no intention of spending it? A sandwich with no filling.
    EURUSD is so one sided its at risk from some nasty short squeezes.

    ReplyDelete
  9. @JPC

    "No time for dancin', or lovey-dovey, I ain't got time for that now"...
    THE TALKING HEADS
    LIFE DURING WARTIME

    ReplyDelete
  10. @Nic (911)

    That's to say NOTHING about the fact that there are supposed to be "strings attached" to these loans...

    Like... AUSTERITY MEASURES to come... Ha! Good luck with that happening... Welcome to the world of Fannie Mae Eurozone...

    ReplyDelete
  11. . . .well as they say- beauty is only skin deep . .

    but damn- c'mon already- there has to be few female government apparatchiks that are a bit better on the eyes

    ReplyDelete
  12. "but there actually is no money"

    Of course there is no money, we certainly don't have any here in the states where money is leveraged 100:1, all countries with central banks are in the same boat on this one.

    Money is scarce....despite the inflationist claims.

    ReplyDelete
  13. You are right CV
    and there is nothing to stop anyone defaulting ... once the ECB has bought all the banks toxic sovereign paper if they do buy

    ReplyDelete
  14. None of the Emperor's have any clothes then, McF

    ReplyDelete
  15. well, CAT is going to open lower for sure, lets see what these puts have in store for me today....

    ReplyDelete
  16. Nic,

    they are all completely bare, lol! The fact that there is no "money" is central to my entire big picture investment thesis.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I'm going to tie in about the last 5 comments...

    @ahab

    You'd think with propensity to fill Washington DC with ex-Goldman-ites, that they have some "hotties" walking around the corridors that they could send Washington's way...

    and with that in mind...

    Get them down there, AND THEN let's see if the Emperor has no clothes on...

    OK, now that those concepts are tidied up, we can move on...

    ReplyDelete
  18. @MCF

    CV predicts that the market will close GREEN today...

    ReplyDelete
  19. I remember the last time a lot of companies started doing this:

    http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/massey-energy-announces-re-initiation-of-share-repurchases,1293102.shtml


    It's strange, they all hated their own stocks at the lows.....

    ReplyDelete
  20. CV

    Unfortunately it has to in order to keep the SEC at bay. Another market dive like last Thursday will guarantee HFT gets knocked out.

    ReplyDelete
  21. @MCF (9:31)

    "Sell 'em Lloyd"... "Buy 'em Aubrey" (on margin) - LOL

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ben

    I always thought it was better to do a repurchase when the stock was at its low. It's better for the company. The stock sellers just want out.

    ReplyDelete
  23. @Amen

    Yeah - I figure about 1139-1143... Then UP WE GO...

    ReplyDelete
  24. Ra,

    sure, but very few companies do it that way. Remember how many were buying shares in 2007?

    ReplyDelete
  25. @Amen @Ben

    Frankly, I doubt its much of an issue with CEO's...

    Think of it this way... If you're a CEO, one of your TOP PRIORITIES is cash flow...

    At the "bottom", you're scared s***less of not having sufficient cash flow (therefore you're not doing stock buybacks)...

    At the top (you may have some spare cash, but can't see clear to do capital expenditures)... You have two choices...

    - pay dividends
    - buy some stock

    It's NOT a trading thing...

    ReplyDelete
  26. C,

    At all the tops the last decade it's been more about credit flow than cash flow...I think they are just herding like everyone else does, to get a board to approve it likely means the trend has to be entrenched for quite some time so that by the time they act on it, it is almost over. Just like the government.

    Pay Dividends?

    lol, I get all mine from HY Muni's (snark)

    ReplyDelete
  27. Morning! today gold is making the move i expected yesterday.. had to celebrate a friend's birthday last night so am a bit fuzzy ..

    ReplyDelete
  28. I still view stock buybacks as an indication of weak organic growth. Usually used to game earnings.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "More Financial Crises Coming Thanks to Global "Wall of Liquidity," Roubini Says"

    seems to me that it is common sense alone that would make a person come to that conclusion-

    world governments on the other hand- that's another story-

    the banks love it obviously- all upside- reward w/ no risk-

    but what does that even mean- should I feel like poker playing stud if I know before hand that everyone else will fold?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Ra,

    yes, good observation, hence part of the reason the earnings peak in 07 was nonsense...among many others, that's why the timing of some of these starting now is funny to me.

    ReplyDelete
  31. And if you ask me... The "line" that the MSM keeps feeding everyone that a CEO is out there to "defend his company's SHARE PRICE" is a load of hogwash...

    A CEO is there to keep his company solvent... There ARE exceptions to the case but I'd basically classify then 3 ways...

    1. Big DOW companies (like Exxon, P&G, or MMM - who actually manufacture something) don't give a rats ass about share price... Since 1982 (the initiation of 401K's) there is a monthly stream of inflow that is FORCED to buy their stock... Since 1999 (Glass Steagall & all of Clintons infinite wisdom), the ante got ramped up when IB's levered that uptake to the "n"th degree... In these cases, if you're a CEO, you just try NOT TO RUN YOUR COMPANY INTO THE GROUND (and keep "vesting" your shares for many years)...

    2. You're a dot.com, or an IB... Sure - your "stock price" is based on some kind of "faux performance"... These are they types of "CEO'S" that might be getting their hands dirty in INSIDER buying & SELLING... They hope they don't wind up in jail in the process...

    3. All the rest are "pe-ons"... When you take a job, there are two scenarios...

    a) The company is "doomed" from the start (you're the captain of the Titanic - you're just collecting a check until the next opportunity comes along)

    b) You're trying to "springborad" the opportunity into a better one for yourself (padding your resume)

    In either case, you hardly give a rats ass about share price... Unless you are TRULY a criminal at heart...

    Bottom line? The idea of "CEO's & share prices is overhyped and not really understood in practice...

    ReplyDelete
  32. @Amen

    "I still view stock buybacks as an indication of weak organic growth."

    and DEFINITELY that too...

    ReplyDelete
  33. If we are in a second wave then this looks more like a B wave and we'll have a C wave up here and a chance to short again. the thing that worries me about this idea of 1190 is that gap just above....do we really think that will stay open?

    ReplyDelete
  34. a ZH headline at its finest-

    "Brother, Can You Spare A Trillion"

    also-

    regarding share buybacks- as b22 pointed out- that was all the rage in 2007-

    a winning strategy to get the share prices to go up- whatever that means in the end

    ReplyDelete
  35. "The idea of "CEO's & share prices is overhyped and not really understood in practice..."

    amen

    ReplyDelete
  36. @ahab

    Share buyback in 2007 = Analyst estimates of S&P EPS (for 2008) in the $90+ strata... Along with, NOT understanding the depths of the housing crisis, & Bernanke telling everyone that "subprime was contained"...

    So you're a CEO, selling products to people doing equity extractions... you have spare cash... you put it into play buying back shares... Simple as that...

    ENTER IB's... To them, it's "distribution city"... They can use whatever amount of LEVERAGE they wanted to SELL AT THE HIGHEST BID...

    Used car salesman... See a desperate customer... Are they going to haggle on the price or the terms?

    Result? Equity prices weren't going up BECAUSE of the buybacks (or announcements)... They were going up because the IB's KNEW that there was cash out there to be put to use that way... Make them pay top dollar for it...

    Lesson learned...

    Basically, they were BUYING AT THE TOP (because they "forced" the top - by announcing they were buying)...

    Corporate JOHNNYS

    ReplyDelete
  37. wonder if today will be another no/low bid day.. i mean, who buys yesterday's rise?

    ReplyDelete
  38. . . .and can anyone look at GS and JP Morgan's numbers- zero losses for an entire quarter- and conclude they are the "smartest" men in a room?

    all upside and no risk- the pay not commensurate w/ the challenge-

    more like "well dressed" thieves in my book

    ReplyDelete
  39. So much for "saving" the Euro. Bought one day anyway. Heckuva job guys.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Well, I covered that CAT put already. Decent little trade, +18%, I think I can get a better price in a day or two.

    so, like the Terminator

    I'll be back.

    ReplyDelete
  41. @karen (10:07)

    "who buys yesterday's rise?"

    Answer: Lloyd & Jamies algos... With your tax dollars...

    ReplyDelete
  42. CV @ 10:05-

    good observation

    ReplyDelete
  43. The modern big corporate CEO's "job" today is to game everything so as to be able to loot as much of that "cash flow" from their company during (and in many cases, even after) their tenures at their firms. Nothing more. Nothing less.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Anon @ 9:58

    I-Man likes the look of that ticker...

    ReplyDelete
  45. @ahab

    "zero losses for an entire quarter- and conclude they are the "smartest" men in a room"

    Frankly - I'd be surprised if they DID have any LOSS days...

    When you ARE the market, you can have it end each day at the level you desire to book a profit...

    Hell, if you find yourself DOWN at 3:30? Just put a bid under everything until you go green...

    ReplyDelete
  46. ...or just pump it all into Citi, AIG, FNM, & ABK until the aggregate turns green...

    piece of cake...

    ReplyDelete
  47. @Manny

    "The modern big corporate CEO's "job" today is to game everything so as to be able to loot as much of that "cash flow" from their company during (and in many cases, even after) their tenures at their firms."

    Hardly worked for Hank Greenberg

    ReplyDelete
  48. "In the mother of all ironies, traders playing a capitulation low on Thursday may be hoist by their own fat finger: the bullish blather that "this was all a glitch!" may mean the normal capitulation by the bears did not occur. This meme is well explored here and here by Trader's Narrative, a site with penetrating debunking of popular fancies in the market, which concludes: "according to the McClellan Oscillator, the market will make a significant low later this week.""

    http://yelnick.typepad.com/yelnick/2010/05/we-have-begun-the-endgame-of-greenspans-experiemt-with-history.html

    ReplyDelete
  49. We have no history really of days like yesterday, third largest open in S&P history.

    on 9/19/08 we had one huge one and then another on 10/13/08. S&P close on 9/19 was 1255, then closed at 1,003 on 10/13.

    if the trend is down that's where we are going...

    ReplyDelete
  50. AT did some chart work on Smith and Wesson, should go back and take a look at that.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Bingo, cv. And countless others. It's all bullshit. Any rational person knows it too.

    ReplyDelete
  52. @karen @McF

    Frankly, I'd wait until Thursday (day 13)... We're on DAY 11 right now...

    But that's just me...

    ReplyDelete
  53. Thanks Karen
    I love that blog and I had forgotten it

    ReplyDelete
  54. check out silver today....and like Karen said...gold as well.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Yeah, that was a good article, K... tons of links in there to kill time with...

    The link to the article about the McClellan Osc was good too.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Karen,

    Any progress getting filled to your satisfaction?
    (Talking short ETF orders here, obviously..)

    ReplyDelete
  57. @ahab: I HIGHLY doubt that.

    ReplyDelete
  58. The I has to buckle down and get some work done, in prep for his "STAYCATION" which begins on Thursday...

    I-Man loves a good week off from indentured servitude at "insert favorite TARP bank here."

    ReplyDelete
  59. and assuming the schmoes are Elmer Fudd and the banks are Bugs Bunny-

    here is something I would like to see- lol

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwPRRSiUWzQ

    ReplyDelete
  60. lol ahab, that's laughable, dude had a failed hedge fund I doubt people watch his moves that closely. No one person caused the crash, absolutely ridiculous.

    All they do in that article is describe what happens when people herd and react on emotion....no conspiracy there

    ReplyDelete
  61. ahab

    Nice article. They'll come up with anything to keep the SEC and Congress out of HFT. Now Taleb does use oom puts. I wonder how much he made on the Thursday move...

    ReplyDelete
  62. It's been said before here by many - the market's now a GIANT game of "chicken". This will happen again, probably sooner than people think.

    ReplyDelete
  63. alright-

    gotta roll out- check out that Fudd/Bugs clip-

    it's hysterical-

    later

    ReplyDelete
  64. McF:

    Check "Trilla" by Rick Ross, think you'll like some of those tracks.

    ReplyDelete
  65. I remember quite well the McClellan busting Cramer in 2008, I'll see if I can find the clip.

    That site has it right, people are going to get washed out trying to use the last 20 years when judging tech indicators in P3. P3 isn't "normal".

    ReplyDelete
  66. "Now Taleb does use oom puts. I wonder how much he made on the Thursday move..."

    do you really think he was able to cover? Has anyone confirmed anyone covering any huge shorts on Thursday? Taleb is not RenTech, did he even have the power to sell on thursday at the lows?

    ReplyDelete
  67. @ahab

    That's BS (Taleb)...

    When we all know, in our heart of hearts that it was Col. Mustard in the KITCHEN with a KNIFE

    What's taking the SEC so long?

    ReplyDelete
  68. I personally think it was MacGruber who caused it.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Ben

    If he was using trailing stops he might have. Doesn't mean he gets out at the lows but he'll catch a majority of the move.

    ReplyDelete
  70. lol, I'm with Manny, it had to have been MacGruber, with a paperclip and some gum.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Ra,

    perhaps, and then I suppose the follow up question is did his big win make of for all of his losses. The Black Swan was an interesting book, but that guy is a dreadful trader.

    ReplyDelete
  72. There was another fat finger on the grassy knoll

    ReplyDelete
  73. Who knew Black Swans had fat fingers even

    ReplyDelete
  74. mcHAPPY is avoiding the markets today... a little scared so to avoid doing anything rash I am avoiding. Have a good day.

    ReplyDelete
  75. @Nic: Even American Black Swans are fat these days. Even their "fingers".

    ReplyDelete
  76. We are going to sit on our Phat Phingers today.

    Manny, are you sure that was a red card - not a yellow with a sort of "one more peep out of you and it's the showers, mate"?

    ReplyDelete
  77. Nope, lb. Directly to red for you. Hit the showers, mate. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  78. @McF

    Well if it WAS MacGruber, we KNOW it WASN'T with an old bucket filled with bum sperm... (cause in the video - the guy refused to pass it to him)... lol

    ReplyDelete
  79. @LB

    oooh... At this point in time, that takes you out of the first two games of WORLD CUP...

    ReplyDelete
  80. @CV: Yes, LB ineligible for the big match vs. the U.S.

    ReplyDelete
  81. No Way... I have just been named to the 30-man squad !!

    ReplyDelete
  82. @LB

    Well since you can't play... And you'll be in South Africa anyway... And there are presently 40,000 hookers descending upon the country...

    There's only one thing left to do!

    ReplyDelete
  83. LOOK! We just flashed green for a moment...

    http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413614176800449643

    ReplyDelete
  84. Wrong link...

    http://traders-anonymous.blogspot.com/2010/05/morning-audibles-51110-red-blue-or.html?showComment=1273584265187#c7141500974440602733

    ReplyDelete
  85. CV

    That was the Dow. Not confirmed by S&P.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Brown resigning tonight. Sterling rallying for now. Until they realise it still could be a Liberal/Labour pact.

    ReplyDelete
  87. @Amen

    Don't you hate it when that happens? :-)

    ReplyDelete
  88. @karen

    I know YOU will get a kick out of this...

    http://anonymousmonetarist.blogspot.com/2010/05/randomwalkins-not-pinin-barclays-tis.html

    ReplyDelete
  89. The REAL fat finger trade (good ol Barry Dunham at the keyboard)...

    Debt Aid Package for Europe Took Nudge From Washington

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/11/business/global/11reconstruct.html

    ReplyDelete
  90. CV, I saw that WSJ article someplace this morning and didn't even post it here because of the absurdity! but anon monetarist's lead-in was perfect! much like your morning audibles !!

    ReplyDelete
  91. This day is giving me a headache!

    May 11, 2010, 12:05 p.m. EDT · Recommend · Post:
    Senate OK's one-time audit-the-Fed measure
    By Ronald D. Orol
    WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- A controversial measure requiring the government to conduct an unprecedented one-time audit of the Federal Reserve's economic crisis response programs was approved with overwhelming bipartisan support Tuesday by the Senate as part of sweeping bank reform legislation. The amendment also calls for releasing the names of institutions that received in total more than $2 trillion in loans from the central bank during the peak of the financial crisis. The provision received a vote of 96-0, with many lawmakers agreeing to back it following a compromise reached late Thursday. "This makes it clear that the Fed can no longer operate under the kind of secrecy it has been operating under," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., the measure's author.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Back to "normal" in the market I see. All the fat fingers have joined fat farms and are trimming down. "Biggest Fat Finger Loser" coming up next on NBC.

    ReplyDelete
  93. @karen

    I don't want to be Johnny Raincloud here... But my gosh...

    While it's GREAT that CONgress has voted to get this out in the open (elections looming)... My FEAR is that the only result will be to shift the raping and pillaging to broad daylight...

    Remember YEARS AGO, when the "image" of a burgaler was some kind of prowler with a mask on or nylon stocking over his head lurking about in the shadows of the night?

    Nowadays, robberies occur in BROAD DAYLIGHT... A carjacker just walks up to you and steals your car at gunpoint (in front of 100 spectators who do NOTHING)...

    Great, so the FED will now be exposed to the light...

    Think people will be pissed? Not if they think their 401k's are going to take a hit...

    On the contrary... When they realize that their 401k's would GO TO ZERO without Fed intervention (or that they would lose out on entitlement benefits)... THEY'LL BE LEADING THE CHEER... PRINT! PRINT! PRINT!...

    When they are so deep into it that there is no going back (a point we've basically already reached)... That's when they get the switch flipped on them (and their 401k's get confiscated - and benefits stop anyway)...

    ReplyDelete
  94. May 12 (Bloomberg) -- Australia’s government aims to bring the budget into surplus three years ahead of forecast, seeking a “solid buffer” against a European debt crisis that threatens to undermine the global recovery.

    Treasurer Wayne Swan, releasing the annual budget yesterday in Canberra, estimated a A$1 billion ($900 million) surplus in 2012-13, from a A$40.8 billion deficit in the year to June 30, 2011. He said he’ll keep a 2 percent cap on spending growth until the surplus reaches 1 percent of gross domestic product.

    The pledge reflects concern that investors will punish countries that fail to rein in deficits, which swelled during the world recession. Australia, whose public debt is projected to peak at 6.1 percent of GDP, is reaping the rewards of Chinese demand for its resources, and the surplus forecast is aided by a proposed “super” tax on miners.

    ...."debt at 6.1% of gdp"...hee hee hee hoo hoo hoo what a knee slapper. We can spend that on one failed car company! Fannie and Freddie must think these boys just fell off the turnip truck....couldn't we interest them in some underwater home loans or get Morgan Stanley to move their headquarters or something?

    ReplyDelete
  95. I keep trying to tell you people...

    ...(and most, I'm sure, think CV wears a tinfoil hat)...

    Buy yourselves farms, and learn how to become 'self sufficient'... That's wher this is going to end up... Within the span of most of your lifetimes...

    ReplyDelete
  96. @BinTn

    Great... The Aussies are so balanced and austere... Let THEM pay a 17% contribution to the IMF...

    ReplyDelete
  97. While you weren't watching (or maybe you were)...

    GLD printed an all time high today...

    ReplyDelete
  98. Great idea CV, I'll call my spiritual advisor in Washington, as soon as he's through nominating that ugly broad who's never been a judge, and let him know that there may be another sucker to possibly kick cans with...

    sounds like that may dance to a different drummer, though. But my guy, he'll show them the error of their ways...

    ReplyDelete
  99. CV @ 12:28

    At some point in the near future (next few weeks maybe), a long oil/short gold paired trade will pay off substantially if held for a few months.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Do I detect a misogynist theme here? She's no good if she isn't "cute"? Like Ahab is a prize?

    ReplyDelete
  101. I'm thinking that, by the end of this week, we'll see the SPX drop at least as far down as the 1135 level.
    1120 by Friday would also not surprise me.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Karen @12:46

    I don't know what that symbol means ("<3"), but there are only a few possibilities.

    ReplyDelete
  103. @BinT (12:29)

    Rumor is, she's a lesbian...

    So at least you won't have to worry about her hitting on you...

    Or then again... Doc... Maybe you could do some fancy work on her and turn her into Rita Hayworth or something...

    ReplyDelete
  104. actually, I found it.

    Along with some other weird ones:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_emoticons

    ReplyDelete
  105. @Anon

    "Anonymous said...
    Do I detect a misogynist theme here? She's no good if she isn't "cute"?


    Two responses...

    1. I don't detect a "misogynist" theme... But I do detect an "anonymist" theme...

    2. Nobody said she was NO GOOD... All I think anyone said was that she was uglier than the backside of a toad...

    ReplyDelete
  106. So it looks like now we've wiped out last Thursday's closing point loss, as if it never happened.

    ReplyDelete
  107. @DL

    "I'm thinking that, by the end of this week, we'll see the SPX drop at least as far down as the 1135 level.
    1120 by Friday would also not surprise me.


    I'm sure that will EVENTUALLY happen (and, perhaps this week)...

    After all, there's a friggin 11 handle gap on the SPY chart down there... If one thinks that's not going to get filled, they're outta their minds!

    ReplyDelete
  108. @Lord John...

    See TWSWB bailed EARLY!

    Where's the HERO WORSHIP now?

    ReplyDelete
  109. @cv: Not to quibble but there are A LOT of ugly men in politics but hardly anyone ever says anything about their looks. Why is that? It IS a tad sexist, if you ask me........

    After all, Antonin Scalia hit a few ugly branches when he fell of the tree as well but one never hears about his looks.

    This only happens with women in power as a way to somehow delegitimize them, IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  110. @DL

    <3 either means:

    1. She LOVES you
    2. She thinks you're an asshat (whose fallen down drunk)...

    ReplyDelete
  111. @Manny

    No offense, but I could really care less...

    As for me, no underlying thing... She's just butt ugly...

    ReplyDelete
  112. DL, I'm always using that <3.. wondering what you thot it meant !!

    As a matter of fact, I <3 Andy Xie, too!

    ReplyDelete
  113. Do I detect a misogynist theme here? She's no good if she isn't "cute"? Like Ahab is a prize?

    Yes, you do. If she, has never been a judge, is a judicial activist of the nth degree, will make the Supreme Court an alumni association of only Harvard or Yale graduates, (not so subtle GS dig, ok?) then please don't be as homely as a mud fence.

    I don't really care about her sexual proclivities or her skin color, but she is a neophyte (another dig about neophytes in Washington) in judging cases and an elistist. How about some Harry Truman or General Powell type people on the supreme court? Someone who graduated from Arizona? I am getting a little tired of these folks lately who are better than the average bubba. Bubbas and bubbettes are my type of people..

    ReplyDelete
  114. Just thought I'd share some of my trading notes, might help navigate the chop... these types of diary entries are really helping me to stay centered, even though I'm not trading right now:


    Here's my set up for my next short on the SPX, if you are interested... I had my friends in SPXU (the 3x short SPX etf) take in half of their positions at the close on friday, to reduce risk, and protect their profits from last week.

    This is the plan for their re-entry:

    Wait for SPX to print 1175, should happen today or tomorrow. Buy half of SPXU position at 1175. There is a chance the SPX could trade up to 1190 before the downtrend resumes, so we will save half the powder for that. Our maximum pain level is 1200 on the SPX... all shorts will be abandoned on a weekly close above that number.

    If 1190 is not tagged, then you will look to add the other half position on the way down, on a bounce off 1150 support. If there is no bounce at 1150, then you will add that half on the breach of 1150.

    Our downside target to close this trade is 1126. At that level we will either close half, or close out and regroup. My intermediate downside targets are much lower, but we will take the swings if we get them.

    SPXU is the 3x inverse of the SP500, you can also apply this same strategy with SDS (2x) and SH (1x).

    I prefer SPXU, because these are short term trades, with a stated target objective. I'd rather keep the 3x leverage, and reduce position size according to volatility to keep risk in check.

    ReplyDelete
  115. I especially <3 Nic! LOL..

    I refuse to get dragged into this discussion about someone's looks! And, it is impolite to call someone ugly.. their heart and mind may be beautiful which would override any and all physical characteristics.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Manny:
    You are right. Scalia is butt ugly too. However the new girl's got him beat.

    ReplyDelete
  117. @Manny

    and as for "sexist"... Is it "sexist" if everyone calls Bush, or Bernanke, or Summers, "idiots" every day?

    What about Obama?

    Is anyone "racist" if they criticize him?

    ReplyDelete
  118. I-Man, chop? chop? I'm seeing up and up.. not chop.. laughing.. but thank you for your thotful thots.

    ReplyDelete
  119. @cv: Neither could I. Just making an observation. My wife often helps me see things that we obtuse men often do not. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  120. @cv: Clearly not the same thing. Women are in our culture judged far more on their looks as opposed to the merits of their talents, intelligence and accomplishments. It's a totally different thing and you know it. False argument on your part.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Karen as usual you are right. she is NOT ugly. But she is a challenge for my retinas.....

    ReplyDelete
  122. @BnT: But why is looks a factor for women in power but not for men in power? I think you know the answer to that question.

    ReplyDelete
  123. @karen

    Actually, you're right... It IS mean...

    & it is furthermore COWARDLY to call someone (who you don't know) that from behing the curtain of a blog (so CV "apologizes")...

    But in this world, where we are FORCE FED these policies (and politicians), and can do little about it (or are surrounded by ignorant & otherwise unmotivated people)... These are just SIMPLE WAYS to vent the pressure...

    It's cheap medecine... And it CERTAINLY doesn't inflict as much damage on THEM as they're inflicting on us...

    End of debate (by me)...

    ReplyDelete
  124. Manny:

    Actually, as you probably already know, looks are a factor for men as well. Tall men are usually get preference over short men. In dating and in business. Lean men are more likely to get the job than the fat applicant. These things have been studied by pop psychologists for years. Jack Elam always got the sidekick part to James Garner's lead.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Manny,

    How many presidents have been totally bald?

    ReplyDelete
  126. @Manny

    & Jeff... Before you take the NEXT LOGICAL STEP (and make the argument of - "Well, you know NOTHING ABOUT this nominee - How can you PREJUDGE here)...

    My answer?

    Name me a "nominee" from Obama that has worked out thus far... Geithner? Summers? Holder? Yellen?

    Best case? Odds suggest F-A-I-L (I'm not talking about getting the post - I'm talking about being an effective person for the job)...

    Obama, remember, doesn't have the "life experience" of having to decide when the chocolate & vanilla machines at the Dairy Queen needed maintenance...

    ReplyDelete
  127. "karen said...
    I refuse to get dragged into this discussion about someone's looks! And, it is impolite to call someone ugly.. their heart and mind may be beautiful which would override any and all physical characteristics."

    X 100
    I <3 Karen

    ReplyDelete
  128. @Bruce in Tn

    The only two BALD MEN I can think of immediately are:

    - Lloyd Blankfeind
    - Dr. Evil

    ReplyDelete
  129. @Nic

    I already apologized...

    I'm just "lashing back" at society here... :-P

    ReplyDelete
  130. Thank Jah the womenfolk are here to keep us well mannered...

    ReplyDelete
  131. I knew you guys would try to defend the indefensible. Of course looks are a factor but men aren't derided for their less than photogenic looks anywhere near as much as women are. And you know it. Let's move on, please.

    In fact, when she was selected, I predicted in my mind that we'd hear these kinds of comments. And, of course, I was right. It's just not classy or kind, IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Bingo, CV, as far as I know, the hairy bubba always gets the presidential job. If you checked Zero, you get to co-sign an underwater mortgage as your prize..

    ReplyDelete
  133. Besides... You don't think we're being SERIOUS here...

    It's just comic relief for crying out loud!

    ReplyDelete
  134. Did someone just call me ugly?

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  135. @McF

    No... but keep losing that hair and we surely will :-)

    ReplyDelete
  136. Actually, Manny, you know I could care less if she's ugly or not. Frankly, I just dislike what this administration is doing, and if she's a part of it, then I dislike her too. The looks, I don't care.....her record of aggressive elitist thinking, be it at Harvard, or her worship of Thurgood Marshall's goofiest ideas, or the entire idea of not appointing a good, liberal (if you want) appellate judge to the next higher rung...these are things that are wrong with this appointment.

    Besides, she couldn't be uglier than Leftback...

    ReplyDelete
  137. Well this rally today is hardly inspiring is it?

    ReplyDelete
  138. @manny

    "It's just not classy or kind, IMO."

    My reputation around the blogosphere couldn't get any WORSE no matter what I say...

    "When you've got nothing - you've got nothing to lose"
    (Bob Dylan)

    Kind of a "liberating" emotion - actually...

    ReplyDelete
  139. I tend to <3 people's minds. I am not in love with Hugh Hendry for his looks.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Now, this is one UGLY rally.

    ReplyDelete
  141. lol C, I think it'll likely be all gone after P3. MJ was bald, seemed to work out ok for him, but yeah, I'll probably never get to be President then. Darn.

    Nic,

    agreed, pretty slow day, nothing really jumping out here.

    ReplyDelete
  142. @Nic

    Well this rally today is hardly inspiring is it?

    I was wondering when we'd get back to talking about markets...

    I was going to ask AMENRA... So far, yesterdays candle covered about 40 handles... Today? about 20 (half)...

    Does that play into any "stick" configuration scenarios you know of?

    ReplyDelete
  143. Nic...obviously you are not totally up to date on the latest lingo:

    This is not a rally. This is the pre-rally rally. Or the about-to-rally rally. Or the chance of a lifetime pre-rally opportunity rally.

    ReplyDelete
  144. Nic @ 1:25

    The calm before the storm.

    ReplyDelete
  145. put/call got up to 1.27 at 11 today, been dropping since...

    ReplyDelete
  146. Sean Connery made his money with his "little friend"....CV!

    ReplyDelete
  147. @McF

    Couldn't you see 1090-ish as an "A-B-C"?

    Just asking...

    ReplyDelete
  148. @ Nic

    Familiar with this? Today is the first time I've seen this site:

    http://www.bbh.com/fx/index.php/fx2/commentarypage/

    ReplyDelete
  149. So in October 1929, on a Thursday, the week before the big drop there was a flash crash, followed by a big rally.
    Whodathunk it?

    ReplyDelete
  150. @Bruce

    Speaking of "beauty/ugly"... I was watching THE GREAT GATSBY on TV last night...

    Lois Childs (Jordan Baker)... Now SHE's a beauty... She also played "Dr. Goodhead" in a James Bond movie...

    ReplyDelete
  151. Looks like we may get a close above the 55 SMA also.

    ReplyDelete
  152. Nic @ 1:32

    I see parallels between the recent flash crash, and the crash of '87.

    In both cases, the computers did a lot of the thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  153. I-Man
    BBH have some very good resources, yeah.

    ReplyDelete
  154. Actually CV, I probably fall into the women's lib category. Most of the women I know in the medical field make better workers for the same job and take less risks than the men do. I think given what I've observed over the years, less testosterone makes a better leader.

    ReplyDelete
  155. Thats a vault of good info... glad I found it.

    ReplyDelete
  156. I-Man
    Mellon have good resources too
    https://gm.bankofny.com/Research/

    ReplyDelete
  157. B/T @ 1:41

    I've often assumed that women physicians make better "general practitioners" than men.

    But aren't men better in surgery (especially cardiovascular surgery)...?

    ReplyDelete
  158. Thx amiga, you got all the hookups...

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  159. The indices are rallying hard and crude has not bounced at all after a 1000pip drop. There must be some longs wondering what hit them. I know one firm of guys who are feeling some pain ...

    ReplyDelete
  160. Big 1min gap just now...

    1175.

    ReplyDelete
  161. DL:

    As I man, sometimes it seems so. Men do work longer hours than their female counterparts. But I used to teach residents. Actually intelligence and being mentally nimble makes the best surgeon. Plodders tend to make mistakes....

    ReplyDelete
  162. FWIW

    I always liked JANE SEYMOUR (Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman) better than SEAN CONNERY (Medicine Man)...

    So see... I'm not "sexist" at all!

    ReplyDelete
  163. @Nic

    I gotta think that some of the oil spill action in the Gulf is clouding up the oil pits in some way...

    ReplyDelete
  164. C,

    sure it could play out that way, the wave two's in Primary 1 did fairly large retraces each time 78.6, etc.

    What I don't like is that

    1. There is a gap just above there that tells me it'll be hard to stop right there and

    2. The whole failure right into the 61.8% on the DOW is suspect to me.

    ReplyDelete
  165. "Men do work longer hours than their female counterparts."

    I think this is true of bull markets, not bear markets though. Women should gain power and authority in the business place and in the household in the coming years. Men will generally desire this whether they realize it or not. I'll see if I can dig up some data over the weekend.

    ReplyDelete
  166. Nic @ 1:46

    Interesting observation.

    Has that divergence ever signalled anything in the past?

    ReplyDelete
  167. @mcF

    Yeah I know what you're talking about... The "gap" is at 1197-1202 (just above)... Hell, for that matter, there's one above THAT at 1209-1211...

    But the first one was just closing the 1190 gap (which is what I alluded to YESTERDAY as perhaps being a target)...

    I'm just looking at the GAPS (and crude wave patterns - not exactly being a rocket scientist)...

    ReplyDelete
  168. DL
    The whole crude bounced has lagged equities the past year in the scale of the bounce but in terms of correlation is normally pretty tight.
    I think CV is right, the oil slick on the doorstep is not good news for the industry and there are likely some trapped longs too.

    ReplyDelete
  169. DL
    I forgot to add the talk is of a nasty inventory build tomorrow too

    ReplyDelete
  170. Ben,

    Male surgeons very significantly work more than women. Understandably so. Some don't return after getting pregnant, and most women don't feel as driven to work 10 hours days as some men do. Many women go into dermatology and fields that are more manageable like radiology...

    ReplyDelete
  171. I fail to understand how the oil slick in the Gulf is affecting the global price of crude oil. A one-day glitch, maybe. But that is very old news at this point.

    ReplyDelete
  172. Meanwhile, on the oil spill...

    BUCKPASSING 101

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37079761/ns/us_news-gulf_oil_spill/

    ReplyDelete
  173. @Nic

    Now that El Nino is abating (and the hurricanes will be back in force)...

    It's likely that there will be QUITE AN INVENTORY BUILD come late summer (when the hurricanes pick up the oil spill and dump it all over the SE USA)...

    ReplyDelete
  174. Hey Ben,

    You think Grayson's Red Roof Inn speech has given strength to the fed audit movement? It looks now like it may happen....

    ReplyDelete
  175. ...and you all WONDER why I'm starting a fish farm...

    Answer? NO FISH! (soon)

    ReplyDelete
  176. @Bruce in Tennn

    I think If he'd have satyed at a HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS, he'd stand a better chance...

    ReplyDelete
  177. DL
    Last year every time Obama gave a speech about alternative energy crude fell and every time global demand estimates get revised down crude falls. I think this is for the same reasons, fear that a spill of this magnitude will drive *some* to alternate cleaner energy sources.

    ReplyDelete
  178. @Nic (2:12)

    You may be onto something there...

    FWIW - I hold a few "penny" stock in my portfolio (Ironically - they're my LONGEST holdings - timewise - several years)...

    They're all various ALTERNATIVE energy...

    NO SOLAR - But some WIND & BIOMASS types...

    Today, they're both POPPING... Last year, (when what you described was going on), my BIOMASS stock popped 1000% (whereby I whittled it down by about 95%)...

    Anyway... I keep these on hand as a kind of reminder (they DO sort of serve as "canaries in the coalmine" - or should I say "ducks on the oil slick")...

    ReplyDelete
  179. Nic @ 2:12

    One-day moves don't mean much to me insofar as long-term "cause and effect" are concerned.

    Regarding green energy, it'll take many, many years before we have any hope of replacing oil. Over the next 5 years or so, I would think that the debate over whether or not to grant more drilling leases in the Gulf will have little impact on the global price of oil.

    My understanding is that global consumption is on the order of 80 million bls/day. So it would seem that the prospect of a million more or a million fewer barrels, five years in the future should have little impact on the spot price.

    ReplyDelete
  180. The Vitter amendment got voted down this morning:
    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/senators-once-again-show-they-only-work-fed-and-wall-street-vote-vitter-amendment-down-62-37

    ReplyDelete
  181. FWIW, I really think that it'll pay to get short at the 1170 level.

    Buy a few SPY puts, if nothing else.

    ReplyDelete
  182. Well DL, they just gamed the first mice to sniff that cheese...

    Maybe better luck for the seconds?

    ReplyDelete
  183. I-Man,

    I'm not saying that 1170 is the final top of the rally. I just think that if you short at 1170, you won't have to suffer the indignity of being in the red for very long.

    ReplyDelete
  184. Bruce,

    hard to say if Grayson got it going or what but I thought that was great. Did I see correctly there were no votes against?

    More important though, what was it that actually passed? I haven't read anything about it yet.

    ReplyDelete
  185. @DL (2:17)

    Frankly, I think one has to factor in GEO-POLITICS...

    Never forget that more than 25% of the daily barrels that get consumed come through the Straits of Hormuz...

    If "sovereigns" are going broke GLOBALLY, there's LITTLE DESIRE for conflict (although TERROR OPERATIONS may operate on a different agenda)...

    Basically - It's about what's in the headlines... All you hears about for 8 years was THE MIDDLE EAST...

    Today all you hear about are BANKS, CB's, PIIGS, POLITICIANS, & THE GULF...

    Keep peace in the Middle East, the marginal 25% is brought to market (or delivered to Lloyds tanker flotilla)...

    If Israel gets it's feathers ruffled... maybe a different story...

    ReplyDelete