TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- The economy is improving
Pages (8): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Tomorrow, the stock opens on the New York Stock Exchange, at $15.50.

Institutional demand will be priced into the stock before you even have a chance to place an order. Don't count on it opening @$15 if demand is high.

We shall see fellas. We shall see. You will see when I make 100% profit in a day!!!11

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated Hey Krypton, you seem puzzled everytime someone makes fun of your little investment hobby. In the Melbourne paper we have a stockmarket competition. Currently coming first is an astrologer, second a 'random' selection by the computer. The fucking stockbrocker is coming last out of six. That's why everyone laughs at you; 99% of stockbrokers and financial advisors have no more idea about the market than anyone else.

...and you are no exception.

i'd just like to point out that this economics noob and liberal arts major has made ~$100,000 in equity in the last 3 1/2 years. go me!

The share market actually does seem to be rallying though. I own shares in two different companies, which I bought for $1.45 and $29.00 respectively.

At one stage they got down to $.29 and $18.00, but now they around $.35 and $23.00.

quote:

[i][b]Originally posted by Domesticated Hey Krypton, you seem puzzled everytime someone makes fun of your little investment hobby. In the Melbourne paper we have a stockmarket competition. Currently coming first is an astrologer, second a 'random' selection by the computer. The fucking stockbrocker is coming last out of six. That's why everyone laughs at you; 99% of stockbrokers and financial advisors have no more idea about the market than anyone else.

Laugh away. I'm neither a broker or advisor. I'm an equity analyst who develops, publishes, and uses financial models. I have had far more positive feedback on these models than anything you could ever laugh at me for. 50% profit for 2009 seals the deal. Try my models for yourself. I've spent thousands of hours on them. www.finance.com

EM opens at $15.50. It's now 12 minutes in, up 16%, $18.

Actually it opened at $17.75. You're up a dime if you had a market order in. Don't brag yet.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton What returns have you made? Anything around 50%?

Well since I haven't sold I've technically not taken any profit but across my DDM holdings I'm up a shade over 60% against my combined cost basis.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Actually it opened at $17.75. You're up a dime if you had a market order in. Don't brag yet.

Yea......guess what. I put in a limit order at $15.55, and since it opened at $17.75, the order didn't go through.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Yea......guess what. I put in a limit order at $15.55, and since it opened at $17.75, the order didn't go through.

Since you thought it would pop 50-100%, shouldn't you have been willing to buy at $18 and ride it up?

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Since you thought it would pop 50-100%, shouldn't you have been willing to buy at $18 and ride it up?

I was joking about the 100% profit.. One thing is for sure. IPOs like this are a very positive sign the economy is improving.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Laugh away. I'm neither a broker or advisor. I'm an equity analyst who develops, publishes, and uses financial models. I have had far more positive feedback on these models than anything you could ever laugh at me for. 50% profit for 2009 seals the deal. Try my models for yourself. I've spent thousands of hours on them. www.finance.com

It's easy when you play with Monopoly money.

You need to be gambling with far more money to make the sharemarket worthwhile. I couldn�t give a shit if I could make �100%" profit if I only had $1000 to invest.

borrow huge amounts to invest! no guts no glory.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN You need to be gambling with far more money to make the sharemarket worthwhile. I couldn�t give a shit if I could make �100%" profit if I only had $1000 to invest. borrow huge amounts to invest! no guts no glory.

It's either the streets or millions!

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated It's easy when you play with Monopoly money.

I don't play monopoly.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton It's either the streets or millions!

haha, exactly! its like an ACU rush on theta

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN haha, exactly! its like an ACU rush on theta

You should get a morgage/home equity loan, and buy a $0.0007 stock...like EWRC...

http://finance.yahoo.com/q;_ylt=Ait...yY3Br?s=EWRC.PK

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton You should get a morgage/home equity loan, and buy a $0.0007 stock...like EWRC... http://finance.yahoo.com/q;_ylt=Ait...yY3Br?s=EWRC.PK

ive been thinking about it. the problem with borrowing for stocks is that paying the interest on the loan through dividends isn't all that viable (unless my maths is completely screwed up). whereas i could borrow more, buy another house, and know exactly how much return i'll see each week.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!! *gasp gasp* hahahahahahahahahahaha!! (continued) Gotta love government statistics. More people are getting fired each month yet the unemployment rate drops...lolol Sorry krypt, but people who exhaust their unemployment benefits and drop off the dole are not suddenly employed and contributing to the economy. They are still unemployed but uncounted..just as people who have given up looking for work aren't counted (they are labeled "discouraged" workers and not included in the statistics.) The true unemployment rate is probably closer to 18% today. If you want to play games and say the number of people filing weekly claims are the only ones unemployed, go for it. Heck, why don't we reduce unemployment benefits to 60 days? That should knock the official unemployment rate down to 1%. Happy days are here again!

I know I'm responding late to this post, however, I feel the need to correct the misconception that once you run out of unemployment benefits you are dropped from the unemployment numbers. That is false. I said this during the Bush administration and I'll repeat it, you will be included in the unemployment figures so long as you are actively looking for work even IF your unemployment benefits run out. This has long been a falsehood employed by the left to my constant irrirtation from 2000-2008. The BLS consisted of legitimate statisticians during the Bush administration and continue to be so during the Obama administration. It's quite amusing to see partisan hacks perform a complete 180 to align to their ideaological viewpoints.

As a matter of fact Capitalizt, your suggestion that we should reduce unemployment benfits in order to reduce the unemployment rate is humorously ironical. The Obama administration has been extending unemployment benfits via the stimulus bill which has many economists agreeing that many workers are becoming discouraged at a lesser rate than normal which may be distorting (increasing) the unemployment rate than would happen otherwise.

That said, everything I've said so far is moot on multiple levels. Fine the decline of the official unemployment figure to 9.4% doesn't include discouraged workers ... however the U6 unemployment figure which DOES include that group shows a decline from a record high of 16.5% to 16.3%.

And of course you know that the most important indicators at this point are the second derivatives of these measures ... we're dealing with sine waves not step functions.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider I know I'm responding late to this post, however, I feel the need to correct the misconception that once you run out of unemployment benefits you are dropped from the unemployment numbers. That is false. I said this during the Bush administration and I'll repeat it, you will be included in the unemployment figures so long as you are actively looking for work even IF your unemployment benefits run out. This has long been a falsehood employed by the left to my constant irrirtation from 2000-2008. The BLS consisted of legitimate statisticians during the Bush administration and continue to be so during the Obama administration. It's quite amusing to see partisan hacks perform a complete 180 to align to their ideaological viewpoints. As a matter of fact Capitalizt, your suggestion that we should reduce unemployment benfits in order to reduce the unemployment rate is humorously ironical. The Obama administration has been extending unemployment benfits via the stimulus bill which has many economists agreeing that many workers are becoming discouraged at a lesser rate than normal which may be distorting (increasing) the unemployment rate than would happen otherwise. That said, everything I've said so far is moot on multiple levels. Fine the decline of the official unemployment figure to 9.4% doesn't include discouraged workers ... however the U6 unemployment figure which DOES include that group shows a decline from a record high of 16.5% to 16.3%. And of course you know that the most important indicators at this point are the second derivatives of these measures ... we're dealing with sine waves not step functions.

as always, its a pleasure to read your posts.

as an aside, do you think bernanke will be getting a second term?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN as always, its a pleasure to read your posts. as an aside, do you think bernanke will be getting a second term?

He better be otherwise I think the markets will tank. I always believed that Bernanke's study of the great depression has been critical in the Fed's decision to employ innovative measures to combat the financial crisis. And I'm personally a believer that this would have been the second great depression if the fed had not acted as it had ... I base that decision on my experiences at a major (but not too big to fail bank) and colleagues at too big to fail banks. I was posting here back then and if you remember I was VERY alarmist.

After hearing an interview on NPR and seeing an interview on PBS the book "In Fed we Trust" seems like it would be a good read.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider He better be otherwise I think the markets will tank. I always believed that Bernanke's study of the great depression has been critical in the Fed's decision to employ innovative measures to combat the financial crisis. And I'm personally a believer that this would have been the second great depression if the fed had not acted as it had ... I base that decision on my experiences at a major (but not too big to fail bank) and colleagues at too big to fail banks. I was posting here back then and if you remember I was VERY alarmist.

yeah, i think you'd be asking a lot to expect a better performance in such crazy, unpredictable times. i have a certain amount of admiration for people (like bernanke & paulson) who swallowed their ideology due to special circumstances, and did what was necessary.

god forbid someone like ron paul be involved in such an occasion!

quote:

Originally posted by occrider After hearing an interview on NPR and seeing an interview on PBS the book "In Fed we Trust" seems like it would be a good read.

thanks, i might check it out as ive gotten older i feel economics should've been something i'd taken at school instead of just lazing around in politics

New jobless claims rise unexpectedly to 558,000. (they were expeced to drop to 545,000).

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Fed-s...2.html?x=0&.v=7

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss New jobless claims rise unexpectedly to 558,000. (they were expeced to drop to 545,000). http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Fed-s...2.html?x=0&.v=7

'

Looks like we'v reached a ceiling.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.