1) Cramer provides a valuable service by *always* reminding his audience of due diligence, never taking his advice as gospel and trying to educate his audience. Whether he is right or wrong about specific market events or equities doesn't bother me at all. Until I see him walk on water or dangling from a wooden crucifix I will never blame him for missed or bad calls. After all, in fairness, I don't have enough years left to target all the others that should be criticized *ahead* of him.
2) I've enjoyed Stewart. However his pillorying of Cramer seems rather presumptuous. It's as if he believes that through his exposure to the reported events and public sentiment he is now expert enough to lay blame for the results. That's one hell of an ego.
Allowing that he is a private citizen, as well as an entertainer, he did nothing more that give another public voice to the frustration that many feel. Cramer was the only available "pissing post" and so took it on the chin. I felt a great deal of sympathy for him.
As to Santelli: I like him a lot. He was also "another voice" of what many were feeling. If he chose (wisely) not to be the undeserving target of rantings of an egotistical comedic panderer to populist sentiment (which may be an accurate description of the premise of Stewart's show), I congratulate Santelli. His rant and opting out of Stewart's show does nothing to discredit him either.
3) Why has the most important moment of the whole show has been overlooked? When Stewart suggested that the media was at least partly fault for being "in bed" with financial interests, he was right. He then complained about the lack of investigative reporting. He was right that there are many "showmen", commentators, etc., and few reporters. He asked where was the investigative journalism that was the hallmark of good media in past times.
This was the one potentially useful thing that came out of the show. Where has the true "journalism" and "investigative reporting" gone in our media? The media seems to have forgotten the important role assigned by our founding fathers to it in the preservation of freedom and democracy.
I presume it has gone the way of many useful values in the pursuit of profits - nay, even survival - at the cost of many more important things.
4) Regardless of thoughts to the contrary, it is not just a "financial" crises, it is a societal crises engendered by the wanton abandonment of personal and social values - those that made this country so prosperous and highly-regarded by the world at large through nearly two centuries.
The current situation will bring some of these back to the fore as individuals at all levels are reminded of the results of the abandonment of these values.
Jack Welch recently commented on the stupidity of running a company for purposes of share price. Maybe this is an early vocal harbinger of the "re-education" which will/should take place.
Natural Gas Has Spiked 60% Since Labor Day. Why? [View article]
Dian,
Regardless of others thoughts, your article plugged a couple holes in my knowledge about why we saw this rally in prices recently.
And I just asked those questions this A.M.
The OFO's I was already on-board with. Also be aware that several of the major pipelines are performaing the mtce. you mention at this time. So that will aggravate the situation that any volume-induced OFOs might induce.
Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News [View article]
"Two lawmakers want Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) to relax recently tightened standards for new condominium mortgages, saying the tighter rules could threaten the viability of some projects and 'may be too onerous' for a weak housing market."
Hm, *great* ideas from our lawmakers, as usual. Let's do more of what helped get us in this mess. I mean, these are extraordinary times, right? Let's take the sot to the local bar - again.
Bankruptcies of Large U.S. Corporations Soar [View article]
On Jun 21 10:49 AM cecil91 wrote:
> <snip>
> breadwinners struggle to feed and house their families. Increasing ><snip>
Uh ... under the socialst agenda they may think they are struggling to feed their families, but actualy, via confiscatory taxation throught the income range, they are struggling to feed the families of others. And unfortunately, this did not start with BHO - it's been gravitating in this direction for ages.
Someone smarter than I pointed out that everything can easily be stolen from us a tiny bit at a time whereas trying to take it all in one bite when cause mass revolt.
That is how we got to where we are now, a slice here, a nibble there, ...
What's stolen? The constitution, our property (emminent domain), the gains of our efforts (direct federal income tax, FICA, SS, ...).
There is no true freedom without economic freedom (property rights).
Ten Top Value Traps with Unreasonably High Dividends [View article]
NAT recently forecast the next dividend at about $0.85. At $32.60 x 4 (if they hold at that level) it comes to about 10.43% (non-compounded). With no debt whatsoever, avererage daily operating cost of $9,000.00, new purchases financed with equity issuance (dilutive, but the acquisitions being always acretive to earnings) and dividends constanly adjusted to the cash flows, I can't see it as a value trap.
Seems to run a lot like my personal finances, which are quite sound.
The only "value trap" here is that constantly declining oil prices may eventually erode the cash flows, reducing the stock price and dividends. However, as less sound companies suffer distress, fleet additions become increasing less expensive (as with the recent purchase of the 1999 tanker), positioning NAT well for the eventual rebound in oil prices.
If you don't have a constructive comment or question, or are not inclined to look for other articles that raise the issues you mention, you might consider a use of your time and energy that is less wasteful to all of us.
Further, I am certainly no expert, as I point out in most of my instablogs, previous articles and many of my comments. For me to make assertions in an article regarding those issues without some good solid facts of which *I* was aware would be nothing more than blowing hot air.
Of course, I could always post an opinion labeled as such. What service or value would I be bringing to the community if I did that based on nothing but suspicion, being that I'm new at this stuff?
If you have a drum to beat, do it yourself. I don't owe you or anybody more than I'm willing to offer. Ditto for any other constructive contributor to the SA community.
However, I have posted questions about that possibility in a previous article here
which is available to any who are interested. It was, I think, a valid *questioning* because it was based on data and knowledge that could be observed by me and others.
In some of my other articles and instablogs and comments I've also mentioned that the "authorized issuers", and others, can take advantage of known roll dates. However, that is not "front runnung" in the classical sense.
I see that *you* have not taken the time or effort to create even one instablog or article. Most of your comments *may* have value (I've not bothered to look) and that may be your preferred method to participate. But if you expect someone like me to satisfy your personal needs, you lose.
Regardless, "my point is", that folks who are still piling into UNG after all the publicly known issues with it may not have gotten the message. I hoped that this might provide some value to them.
If it has no value for you, so be it.
HardToLove On Oct 15 07:25 AM apppro wrote:
> and ur point is?? why don't you cooment on how the front runners > are causing this just to screw over the investors in ALL ETF's.
This Recession Is a Reset to a New Normal [View article]
Great article.
Your piece, with the comments from others, prompts a question for me. It really wanders off topic, but I can't help myself. I see a fundamental weakening of the concept and application of capitalism as a result. I believe this leads to the shift you describe and demonstrate with the charts and statistics.
Ignoring the "cyclical nature" of business, often attributed to the existence of the privately held Federal Reserve, can this new paradigm (whatever it ultimately becomes) be attributed to historical trends encompassing several fundamental shifts away from the foundations of our country?
I think specifically of the concepts embedded in our constitution of "private property" - the foundation of all the capitalist tools that served us so well for so long.
It seems to me that through the apathy of good folks, and the hubris of well-meaning but mis-guided social architects and/or politicians, we have slowly but inexorably eroded the concept of private property and leaned at an ever-accelerating pace towards a pure socialist society and government. There is really no ability to rely on the concept of "private property" any longer.
For recent evidence of such a claim, look at the recent abuse of "eminent domain", serious recent attempts at abrogation of contract law by certain members of government (e.g. AIG bonuses), application of retroactive taxation to specified individuals rather than a "general" policy (AIG again - many thanks to the Senator that has asked for a more lengthy reasoned consideration of the implications of this), and so many other examples that others could cite from our brief (relatively) history as a nation.
Not being a scholar about this or any other major subject, I still have the intellectual curiosity to posit the following.
The single greatest mistake in our history was giving the federal government the power of taxation, ostensibly through representatives of the people - such no longer exist, in my opinion, as they are representatives of corporate bodies now.
The most egregious manifestation of the results of this is the income tax. Why? Because it was the final step in allowing the unrestrained growth of the federal government, a complete contravention of the intentions of the founding fathers. It was also the deepest penetration by government into the direct confiscation of private property for "social purposes" - taking directly from the wages of individual labor before it could even be applied to second-order functions. Money directly taken from the citizens' labor, by coercion, is diverted to Washington and redistributed as Washington desires, including being coercively returned (after frictional losses) to the states - if they comply with federal mandates (think seat belts, helmet laws, national speed limits, etc.).
No more egregious example occurs to me.
In my opinion, the budget of the federal government should be cooperatively set *and* funded by the states themselves - the exact mechanism being open for discussion. Even the "fair tax" or national sales tax concepts fail to address the basic problem I see in the current processes.
This "budget and fund" by states *only* achieves one important goal, keeping decision-making *and* concomitant results as close to "home" as possible. One can envision all sorts of good (and bad) results of this, a discussion of which certainly belongs in other fora. Of course this would seem to be "unworkable", but then so was our form of government considered prior to its successful application. "Politically impossible"? Yes, until it is accomplished.
Well, I'm sure I've taken this further than most would desire.
Battery-Powered Locomotives: Compellingly Green Economics [View article]
You gave him much more than $1000 - you gave him the start (continuation?) of an education in financial literacy and acumen that may serve him well throughout his life!
Chinese Wind Power Plant Coming to U.S. Soil [View article]
Well, we can no longer afford to fund our own projects, even presuming we had leadership and a plan. At least there would be some (temporary?) jobs even though profits went off-shore.
I guess it's fair - GE builds them over there, if I recall.
I don't even want to think about the implications of re-investment of profits occurring over there instead of over here.
Cash for Clunkers May Cost Up to $45,354 Per Vehicle [View article]
"Even most of the marginally extra sales really represent people who were going to buy a new car eventually anyway. They are just buying a bit sooner than they expected. Old clunkers don't last forever, and they are almost all eventually replaced. The government is shifting tomorrow's demand to today, stealing from tomorrow to pay for today, but at great cost to the taxpayer."
Your suggestion that it's a lot of sales being pulled forward is supported by Michael Jackson (not the *dead* one, the one that runs Auto Nation). He states that most of the buyers they are seeing have *much* higher average credit scores (720+) than normally seen. He says that people with good credit scores tend to switch vehicles much less frequently, on average, than those with lower scores. If a *substantial* portion of the program consists of the more qualified, I suspect that the near-term rise in sales will be offset in the future, as you suggest.
Although many rely on what happened last year, there are a couple of things that I think makes that reliance ... unreliable.
First, last year folks watched oil rise to $147 *and* believed that traditional oil/ng price ratios were valid.
We have since learned that the ratio is "broken".
Boone Pickens had just started publicizing his transitional plan that emphasized NG for transportation to wean us from $700B being sent out of the country. People believed, forgetting that our government is populated by clowns, that we actually had a chance to do something constructive and that NG would be a part of that.
Short and long-term investors believed that commodities were their "savior" and NG is in that category. After a while, this religion was proved false.
As others have mentioned, the fundamentals are horrible.
If the shorts try often enough, they will be successful as long as the fundamentals don't improve. Since the fundamentals have actually *deteriorated* this year, my take is that the shorts will at last make some money. In other words, don't count on short-covering to help the price rise here. At best, a little support will be provided.
It has been pointed out in other comments that closing a well has some significant costs, that many suppliers have to keep pumping because of cash-flow issues, that many of the "shut-ins" were moving rigs from older depleted (or nearly so) wells to more efficient sites.
Now - natural gas in U.S. storage has exceeded the 5 year average in storage for two consecutive weeks, - weekly injections show no dramatic decrease yet, - all prognostications for energy consumption world-wide predict reducing energy consumption (except that China and India may start a big recovery and use some, but nowhere near enough to off set U.S. and the rest of the world's decline in use), - milder hurricane season predicted, - milder summer predicted, - reduced import/export activity at ports (where a lot of vehicles have been converted to NG) - etc.
And the final stroke: after perusing all the news stories about the house energy bill this weekend, the only reference I can find to natural gas in the bill is that Alaska will be permitted to borrow from public coffers at a very low rate to build a pipeline down to the lower 48 to increase the supply above what we already have down here (gee! I guess there are no more sources to be found down here, huh?).
I see no up-side catalyst at this time. With oil/ng price ratio hanging around 19:1 and oil not able to maintain strength to the up-side, we can't even count on oil to drag NG up. My feeling is that if the dollar index can even just hold stable around the $79/$80 interface, oil is on a slow trend down.
U.S. Jobs Propaganda Gets More Desperate [View article]
You forget, I guess. This is the government. Its likely it's "Anyone who defends these numbers is (implicitly) a liar *and* an idiot."
HardToLove
Stewart vs. Cramer: A Cheap Shot [View article]
1) Cramer provides a valuable service by *always* reminding his audience of due diligence, never taking his advice as gospel and trying to educate his audience. Whether he is right or wrong about specific market events or equities doesn't bother me at all. Until I see him walk on water or dangling from a wooden crucifix I will never blame him for missed or bad calls. After all, in fairness, I don't have enough years left to target all the others that should be criticized *ahead* of him.
2) I've enjoyed Stewart. However his pillorying of Cramer seems rather presumptuous. It's as if he believes that through his exposure to the reported events and public sentiment he is now expert enough to lay blame for the results. That's one hell of an ego.
Allowing that he is a private citizen, as well as an entertainer, he did nothing more that give another public voice to the frustration that many feel. Cramer was the only available "pissing post" and so took it on the chin. I felt a great deal of sympathy for him.
As to Santelli: I like him a lot. He was also "another voice" of what many were feeling. If he chose (wisely) not to be the undeserving target of rantings of an egotistical comedic panderer to populist sentiment (which may be an accurate description of the premise of Stewart's show), I congratulate Santelli. His rant and opting out of Stewart's show does nothing to discredit him either.
3) Why has the most important moment of the whole show has been overlooked? When Stewart suggested that the media was at least partly fault for being "in bed" with financial interests, he was right. He then complained about the lack of investigative reporting. He was right that there are many "showmen", commentators, etc., and few reporters. He asked where was the investigative journalism that was the hallmark of good media in past times.
This was the one potentially useful thing that came out of the show. Where has the true "journalism" and "investigative reporting" gone in our media? The media seems to have forgotten the important role assigned by our founding fathers to it in the preservation of freedom and democracy.
I presume it has gone the way of many useful values in the pursuit of profits - nay, even survival - at the cost of many more important things.
4) Regardless of thoughts to the contrary, it is not just a "financial" crises, it is a societal crises engendered by the wanton abandonment of personal and social values - those that made this country so prosperous and highly-regarded by the world at large through nearly two centuries.
The current situation will bring some of these back to the fore as individuals at all levels are reminded of the results of the abandonment of these values.
Jack Welch recently commented on the stupidity of running a company for purposes of share price. Maybe this is an early vocal harbinger of the "re-education" which will/should take place.
MHO
HardToLove
Natural Gas Has Spiked 60% Since Labor Day. Why? [View article]
Regardless of others thoughts, your article plugged a couple holes in my knowledge about why we saw this rally in prices recently.
And I just asked those questions this A.M.
The OFO's I was already on-board with. Also be aware that several of the major pipelines are performaing the mtce. you mention at this time. So that will aggravate the situation that any volume-induced OFOs might induce.
Thanks for the article!
HardToLove
Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News [View article]
Hm, *great* ideas from our lawmakers, as usual. Let's do more of what helped get us in this mess. I mean, these are extraordinary times, right? Let's take the sot to the local bar - again.
HardToLove
Bankruptcies of Large U.S. Corporations Soar [View article]
On Jun 21 10:49 AM cecil91 wrote:
> <snip>
> breadwinners struggle to feed and house their families. Increasing
><snip>
Uh ... under the socialst agenda they may think they are struggling to feed their families, but actualy, via confiscatory taxation throught the income range, they are struggling to feed the families of others. And unfortunately, this did not start with BHO - it's been gravitating in this direction for ages.
Someone smarter than I pointed out that everything can easily be stolen from us a tiny bit at a time whereas trying to take it all in one bite when cause mass revolt.
That is how we got to where we are now, a slice here, a nibble there, ...
What's stolen? The constitution, our property (emminent domain), the gains of our efforts (direct federal income tax, FICA, SS, ...).
There is no true freedom without economic freedom (property rights).
HardToLove
Ten Top Value Traps with Unreasonably High Dividends [View article]
Seems to run a lot like my personal finances, which are quite sound.
The only "value trap" here is that constantly declining oil prices may eventually erode the cash flows, reducing the stock price and dividends. However, as less sound companies suffer distress, fleet additions become increasing less expensive (as with the recent purchase of the 1999 tanker), positioning NAT well for the eventual rebound in oil prices.
Calling All Silver Investors [View article]
However it is done, I believe they will get some kind of "lucky break". The TBTFs always do.
HardToLove
UNG: The Effects of Contango [View article]
Further, I am certainly no expert, as I point out in most of my instablogs, previous articles and many of my comments. For me to make assertions in an article regarding those issues without some good solid facts of which *I* was aware would be nothing more than blowing hot air.
Of course, I could always post an opinion labeled as such. What service or value would I be bringing to the community if I did that based on nothing but suspicion, being that I'm new at this stuff?
If you have a drum to beat, do it yourself. I don't owe you or anybody more than I'm willing to offer. Ditto for any other constructive contributor to the SA community.
However, I have posted questions about that possibility in a previous article here
seekingalpha.com/artic...
which is available to any who are interested. It was, I think, a valid *questioning* because it was based on data and knowledge that could be observed by me and others.
In some of my other articles and instablogs and comments I've also mentioned that the "authorized issuers", and others, can take advantage of known roll dates. However, that is not "front runnung" in the classical sense.
I see that *you* have not taken the time or effort to create even one instablog or article. Most of your comments *may* have value (I've not bothered to look) and that may be your preferred method to participate. But if you expect someone like me to satisfy your personal needs, you lose.
Regardless, "my point is", that folks who are still piling into UNG after all the publicly known issues with it may not have gotten the message. I hoped that this might provide some value to them.
If it has no value for you, so be it.
HardToLove
On Oct 15 07:25 AM apppro wrote:
> and ur point is?? why don't you cooment on how the front runners
> are causing this just to screw over the investors in ALL ETF's.
Dollar / Euro Short Squeeze Race [View article]
Here's 1000 "'Atta boys". Then when the 1 "Aw shit" comes (which wipes out 1000 "'Atta boys") you're covered.
Thank you,
HardToLove
This Recession Is a Reset to a New Normal [View article]
Your piece, with the comments from others, prompts a question for me. It really wanders off topic, but I can't help myself. I see a fundamental weakening of the concept and application of capitalism as a result. I believe this leads to the shift you describe and demonstrate with the charts and statistics.
Ignoring the "cyclical nature" of business, often attributed to the existence of the privately held Federal Reserve, can this new paradigm (whatever it ultimately becomes) be attributed to historical trends encompassing several fundamental shifts away from the foundations of our country?
I think specifically of the concepts embedded in our constitution of "private property" - the foundation of all the capitalist tools that served us so well for so long.
It seems to me that through the apathy of good folks, and the hubris of well-meaning but mis-guided social architects and/or politicians, we have slowly but inexorably eroded the concept of private property and leaned at an ever-accelerating pace towards a pure socialist society and government. There is really no ability to rely on the concept of "private property" any longer.
For recent evidence of such a claim, look at the recent abuse of "eminent domain", serious recent attempts at abrogation of contract law by certain members of government (e.g. AIG bonuses), application of retroactive taxation to specified individuals rather than a "general" policy (AIG again - many thanks to the Senator that has asked for a more lengthy reasoned consideration of the implications of this), and so many other examples that others could cite from our brief (relatively) history as a nation.
Not being a scholar about this or any other major subject, I still have the intellectual curiosity to posit the following.
The single greatest mistake in our history was giving the federal government the power of taxation, ostensibly through representatives of the people - such no longer exist, in my opinion, as they are representatives of corporate bodies now.
The most egregious manifestation of the results of this is the income tax. Why? Because it was the final step in allowing the unrestrained growth of the federal government, a complete contravention of the intentions of the founding fathers. It was also the deepest penetration by government into the direct confiscation of private property for "social purposes" - taking directly from the wages of individual labor before it could even be applied to second-order functions. Money directly taken from the citizens' labor, by coercion, is diverted to Washington and redistributed as Washington desires, including being coercively returned (after frictional losses) to the states - if they comply with federal mandates (think seat belts, helmet laws, national speed limits, etc.).
No more egregious example occurs to me.
In my opinion, the budget of the federal government should be cooperatively set *and* funded by the states themselves - the exact mechanism being open for discussion. Even the "fair tax" or national sales tax concepts fail to address the basic problem I see in the current processes.
This "budget and fund" by states *only* achieves one important goal, keeping decision-making *and* concomitant results as close to "home" as possible. One can envision all sorts of good (and bad) results of this, a discussion of which certainly belongs in other fora. Of course this would seem to be "unworkable", but then so was our form of government considered prior to its successful application. "Politically impossible"? Yes, until it is accomplished.
Well, I'm sure I've taken this further than most would desire.
HardToLove
Battery-Powered Locomotives: Compellingly Green Economics [View article]
Kudos on "good parenting" in that regard!
MHO,
HardToLove
Chinese Wind Power Plant Coming to U.S. Soil [View article]
I guess it's fair - GE builds them over there, if I recall.
I don't even want to think about the implications of re-investment of profits occurring over there instead of over here.
HardToLove
Cash for Clunkers May Cost Up to $45,354 Per Vehicle [View article]
Your suggestion that it's a lot of sales being pulled forward is supported by Michael Jackson (not the *dead* one, the one that runs Auto Nation). He states that most of the buyers they are seeing have *much* higher average credit scores (720+) than normally seen. He says that people with good credit scores tend to switch vehicles much less frequently, on average, than those with lower scores. If a *substantial* portion of the program consists of the more qualified, I suspect that the near-term rise in sales will be offset in the future, as you suggest.
HardTolove
The Fall in Natural Gas Is Over [View article]
First, last year folks watched oil rise to $147 *and* believed that traditional oil/ng price ratios were valid.
We have since learned that the ratio is "broken".
Boone Pickens had just started publicizing his transitional plan that emphasized NG for transportation to wean us from $700B being sent out of the country. People believed, forgetting that our government is populated by clowns, that we actually had a chance to do something constructive and that NG would be a part of that.
Short and long-term investors believed that commodities were their "savior" and NG is in that category. After a while, this religion was proved false.
As others have mentioned, the fundamentals are horrible.
If the shorts try often enough, they will be successful as long as the fundamentals don't improve. Since the fundamentals have actually *deteriorated* this year, my take is that the shorts will at last make some money. In other words, don't count on short-covering to help the price rise here. At best, a little support will be provided.
It has been pointed out in other comments that closing a well has some significant costs, that many suppliers have to keep pumping because of cash-flow issues, that many of the "shut-ins" were moving rigs from older depleted (or nearly so) wells to more efficient sites.
Now
- natural gas in U.S. storage has exceeded the 5 year average in storage for two consecutive weeks,
- weekly injections show no dramatic decrease yet,
- all prognostications for energy consumption world-wide predict reducing energy consumption (except that China and India may start a big recovery and use some, but nowhere near enough to off set U.S. and the rest of the world's decline in use),
- milder hurricane season predicted,
- milder summer predicted,
- reduced import/export activity at ports (where a lot of vehicles have been converted to NG)
- etc.
And the final stroke: after perusing all the news stories about the house energy bill this weekend, the only reference I can find to natural gas in the bill is that Alaska will be permitted to borrow from public coffers at a very low rate to build a pipeline down to the lower 48 to increase the supply above what we already have down here (gee! I guess there are no more sources to be found down here, huh?).
I see no up-side catalyst at this time. With oil/ng price ratio hanging around 19:1 and oil not able to maintain strength to the up-side, we can't even count on oil to drag NG up. My feeling is that if the dollar index can even just hold stable around the $79/$80 interface, oil is on a slow trend down.
My Humble Opinion
HardToLove
The Scariest Financial Site on the Web, Part 4: Unsustainability [View article]
HardToLove