« First « Previous Comments 112 - 125 of 125 Search these comments
Sorry, OO, you get the price at closing, right? Executor has dinner on you.
Think of it as karma.
"Or what was being bought at the end."
There are only 30 stocks in the DOW....If I wasn't so lazy I could figure out which components went up right there at the end. I know INTC went up 50 cents in the last few minutes because I follow that stock.
"History has not dealt kindly this vast increase in the market value of asset claims is in part the indirect result of investors accepting lower compensation for risk. Such an increase in market value is too often viewed by market participants as structural and permanent."
“To some extent, those higher values may be reflecting the increased flexibility and resilience of our economy. But what they perceive as newly
abundant liquidity can readily disappear. Any onset of increased investor caution elevates risk premiums and, as a consequence, lowers asset
values and promotes the liquidation of the debt that supported higher asset prices. This is the reason that history has not dealt kindly with the aftermath of protracted periods of lowrisk premiums.â€
Above quote from "A Froth-Finding Mission" by HSBC Global Research on Randy's website. Was looking at it recently to see where we could be heading if we go back to "historic norms". Still trying to reconcile their Penninsula and East Bay data. They claim:
Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, CA (MSAD) Q3 2005
Median Income: $69,572
Median Home Price: $804,363
San Francisco-San Mateo-Redwood City, CA (MSAD) Q3 2005
Median Income: $68,087
Median Home Price: $767,777
In fact, East Bay beats the Penninsula in their historic data too. Doesn't seem right to me.
Our first CA home is in Redwood City. We paid $365K in 1996. It now comps for about $1.1mm. There's skewing going on there alright, not sure which way though.
The Fed's OMC does buy and sell on the open market, but not equities. They buy and sell government paper.
Who could coordinate the thousands of buyers it would require to bid up prices of massive DOW stocks, sopping up all the sell pressure, without being noticed? Unless you think the PPT controls all the mutual funds or something like that, then it just ain't happening.
I don't believe these type of things can be pulled off. Managing complex arrangements is already harder than herding cats. Add in something sinister and there's no way you're going to pull it off without being outted.
I'm sure there's some manipulation going on. But I'm afraid it's the old fashioned kind of manipulation for the old fashioned reasons: greed. Like the examples cited above. Or like when the hedge funds break an ETF like OIH from its underlying index. No complex explanations needed. A single "$" will suffice.
Thanks Harm, I think defining it clearly helps, and your examples were along the same tangent I was going down.
The last 20 minutes surge of 180 pts going from negative territory to positive 150 was most definitely an act of PPT.
Yes, I agree. M3 will increase since government is now giving free money via plunge protection team.
Can you guys tell us, specifically, how the hell this shadowy "PPT" is able to do these trades, even though apparently wiki and everyone in the blogosphere knows about it? Yet they mystically defy arbitrage? If this is true, then it's too good to be true. I'll go raise a couple billion and start my own macro hedge fund.
>> I’ll go raise a couple billion and start my own macro hedge fund.
If you do that, you will be rewaded by Federal Reserve with billions of dollars of free money.
Can you guys tell us, specifically, how the hell this shadowy “PPT†is able to do these trades, even though apparently wiki and everyone in the blogosphere knows about it?
This shadowy group uses shadowy methods including, but not limited to, black magic, voodoo, and animal sacrifices.
Members of this elite group are also known to travel in black helicopters.
from CNBC,
trader: Merril Lynch & Goldman did the buying y'day. he said, there were a lot of shorts and they were forced to buy.
i didn't understand exactly what he meant.if someone here could explain what he meant, i would appreciate.
maybe something to do with Bohemian Grove or the skull and bones...
« First « Previous Comments 112 - 125 of 125 Search these comments
We've had many posts on Laissez-Faire, anarchic capitalism vs. regulated markets here before, and I'm sure we'll have more in the future. Just saw this gem today (nod to Ben Jones) and wanted to share it with you. Here is a succinct real-world example of why I believe that some government regulation of credit/capital markets is necessary and good for the economy, and why private firms cannot always be trusted to "self-regulate" all the time.
Fund manager's fun sailing away
Discuss, enjoy...
HARM
#housing