Lincoln National Corp. (LNC)
Loading...
Symbols:
LNC Forum Topics
- All Comments on LNC
- General Discussion on LNC
- Biggest Gainers, Losers Since 9/29 [view article]
- Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
- 12 Stocks Ben Graham Would Like Here [view article]
- Not All Financials Are Poison [view article]
- Some Bargain Stocks to Consider Buying [view article]
- 22 Stocks Going Ex-Dividend in Early July [view article]
- Closed-End Funds: The Preferred Way to Play the Financials [view article]
- 25 Stocks Benjamin Graham Would Like [view article]
- 35 Stocks That Ben Graham Would Like Here [view article]
- It's Time to Break Up AIG [view article]
- Radio Companies: Untapped Value at Apocalyptically Low Levels [view article]
loading ...Recent LNC Articles
- Biggest Gainers, Losers Since 9/29
- Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones
- Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News
- Earnings Preview: Lincoln National Corp.
- Not All Financials Are Poison
- 12 Stocks Ben Graham Would Like Here
- Some Bargain Stocks to Consider Buying
- 22 Stocks Going Ex-Dividend in Early July
- Closed-End Funds: The Preferred Way to Play the Financials
- 25 Stocks Benjamin Graham Would Like
- Full List of Articles »
Trading Center
Hedge Fund Jobs
Job Seekers: Search jobs by category, get job alerts by email or live feed, apply online See full list of jobs »
Employers: See all recruitment options, get applications online or by email Post a job »
Biggest Gainers, Losers Since 9/29 [view article]
Thank Tou Mr.Sense for taking the time to create this list.me, I am going to sit on my hands for awhile.
it is to early to trust this market. Reply
Biggest Gainers, Losers Since 9/29 [view article]
Buy and hold is bogus we are back to 1999 levels. I am down this year but far less than the averages because of watching stocks, taking profits and cutting losses. In retrospect I should have cut even more losses. The most frightening thing I am hearing in the media is just sit pat and hold, it will come back and even worse one so-called financial expert on TV advising to only looking at your 401K statements once or twice a year! I learned something from the tech crash. I am working on educating my friends who are now willing to pay attention about having some cash and at least knowing what you own and not to blindly trust so-called financial advisors. ReplyBiggest Gainers, Losers Since 9/29 [view article]
Let this latest crisis teach all investors - ALWAYS have your Protective Exit Strategy in place from the start. Do your fellow American a favor and show him that Buy&Hold is the riskiest approach to investing and can be shown so. Put something in place that ensures that one can protect profits and keep losses to a minimum. Use an approach smarter than trailing stops, moving averages etc. Use an approach that will adjust itself continually to the stock's behavior and market conditions. Be smart! Replycharlie
Biggest Gainers, Losers Since 9/29 [view article]
The mother of all depressions is right around the corner. Get out and let Polisi Galore buy up your stock with her husbands money.Reply
San
Francisco
Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
Good point "just a hick". There are lots of us "law and order" types, who have been pushed too far by the exit packages at Fannie and Freddie and hope that the government just says no, regardless of contract provisions. ReplyDistinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
The real cost of bailouts should be bourne first and foremost by the people running the companies being bailed out. Until a CEO and his handpicked board of directors go bankrupt along with the company, we will have no moral hazard. Instread the best paid job continues to be the CEO of a bankrupt company.What we need is the embrace of a new compensation scheme whereby executive officers and boards of directors are directly responsible for a portion of the company's debts that is related to the amount of stock rewards and compensation they receive.
Of course you may say no one in his right mind would take such a deal, but everyday people take such risks- they're called small business owners! Reply
Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
The title of this article is very nice:Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones
But we also have to look at Favor Countries and Doomed Ones.
Let me give you link and quote:
ft.com/cms/s/0/e30472a...
The price of credit default swaps on five-year US government debt hit a record 18 basis points in early trading, according to CMA Datavision. This means that it costs $18,000 a year to buy insurance on $10m of US government debt.
Comment: So I just had to advice to the European pension funds to buy this cheap bond insurance while the issuer still is alive.
Remember those bond insurers where USA municipals could buy AAA ratings on their issued bonds?
They are gone.
Remember Freddie and Fannie that were supposed to guarantee the mortgages?
They are bailed out...
What will happen to idiots who sell US government bond insurance at only 18 basis points or just 0.18%?????
Municipal bond insurers ==> Frannie ==> 18 basis points on five year US government bonds.
Who knows? Reply
Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
Jason C,Those "institutions&quo... and "creditors" mostly include communist China, jihadist Saudi Arabia, and fascist Russia. They are grown up investors, just like anyone else, and should have known that bonds can and do lose money. Companies default. It happens to investors daily. These particular bonds were bets that the U.S. housing market wouldn't decline, an event that has happened several times before, despite having run up at a faster rate than has ever occurred.
The fear was that if the Chinese, Russians, and Saudis ever actually lost money on a US bond investment, they would refuse to accept dollars from then forward and our economy and currency would collapse from a lack of their debt. However, who would the Chinese, Russians, and Saudis sell their products to without the U.S? They have to trade with us, in dollars, or they would destroy their own economies. They could take their lumps and be all right, yet they had enough influence to persuade the govt. to confiscate the wealth of taxpayers by shifting these losses to them. Did the government socialize the losses of technology investors, who were mostly taxpayers, in 2000?
The fact that the government forced these bond losses onto taxpayers just shows how much influence the national debt has on the decision making process.
Assets = Liabilities + Equity
Government = Foreign Debt + Taxpayer Equity
Because liabilities account for a larger portion of assets than equity, the assets are being used to pursue the interests of the owners of liabilities instead of the owners of equity. Foreign debt keeps the government in business. Therefore, whether taxpayers like it or not, government serves the owners of foreign debt. Reply
Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
DM: On an unrelated note, what should be the terms for bailing out Lehman Brothers?What? Why do you assume a bailout is necessary?
Lehman's counterparties are all "institutional investors". People with MBAs and PhDs. People who collect millions of dollars per year in compensation because they are supposedly so much smarter than everyone else.
The argument to bail out Lehman (or WaMu or any other) is ridiculous. The consumer is roughly 70% of the economy -- that's more than ALL the banks put together. If XYZ bank is too big to fail, then the consumer is way way way too big to fail.
So we should all send our mortgages and credit card bills to Paulson. And under the too big to fail doctrine, we have every right to expect him to pay every single one of them. 70% of the economy is clearly too big to fail. And the majority of consumers do not have MBAs or PhDs like the "sophisticated investors" who work on Wall Street -- we are far more deserving of help. Where is our bail out?
Or, we could follow the ideas that once made America the great country it USED to be (and could be again). Let the people who made poor investments bear the consequences of their decisions.
If you traded with Lehman or WaMu or whomever -- you get the results of your decision good OR bad. If you make money, its yours. If you lose money, its also yours.
Of course, this means a lot of Wall Street will fail. But they are hardly "victims" of anything, except their own decision making. Reply
Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
Socialism cannot compete, dude you are an idiot. You think the market would be ok with 5 Trillion in debt being at Risk? The private markets aren't going to find a "better value" for that debt. They would mark it WAY down, even though most of it isn't at risk and will be paid off eventually. The market ALWAYS overreacts to the upside and the downside. Period. End of Story. The efficient markets theory was thrown out eons ago. Perhaps you had your business schooling in the 70s or something. Replycannot
compete!
Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
The costs need not be borne by everybody. They need to be borne by many, though - the mismanaged lenders, as well as buyers who paid inflated prices. It's simply not going to work to prop up home pricing by backing bad loans. You seem to be forgetting that the conceptual solution to the problem of overpricing is apparently to prop up the prices rather than let them normalize...which is the only thing that will actually work.I'm going to leave you with one thought to ponder: that debt has market value based on the assets underlying it. Those values aren't going to change based on the government stepping in - they will only change based on demand for those assets. The private sector can get better value from those assets, based on free markets, than can the U.S. government, which does not know how to operate in those markets!
On Sep 10 02:38 PM JasonC wrote:
> "How is sending the stock to zero avoiding a cascade?"
>
> I can't believe this needs to be explained to anyone sane enough
> to operate a web browser.
>
> Fannie and Freddie had *debts* into the trillions, all of it owned
> by other institutions, since no one owns their own debts. The whole
> issue is whether all those who *lent* to them, would be dragged down
> with them as well. By protecting the creditors and sending the stockholders
> to the wall, regulators avoid a cascade of additional failures from
> the failure of Fannie and Freddie - and my sending the stockholders
> to the wall, they maintain incentives to avoid failed investment.
>
>
> The prior comments on Lehman are equally uninformed, while the article
> takes a sensible position.
> Do all those screaming for destruction as more moral think we are
> talking about Lehman? We are talking about anyone who ever traded
> with Lehman, which includes oh about half the financial world.
>
>
> The costs are already going to be born by everybody, because they
> are too large to be born by a few narrow institutions or people.
> No amount of whining about it will reduce the losses one iota, or
> keep any of it from ever mattering to you. "But its unfair that
> other people's mistakes hurt me!" Tough toenails. If everyone dropped
> dead tomorrow it'd effect you too. Everything does. It is called
> existence, grow up and deal with it already, and stop the bleeping
> whining. Reply
Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
Or stop the wrangling. It won't get you any closer to Valhalla. ReplyDistinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
"How is sending the stock to zero avoiding a cascade?"I can't believe this needs to be explained to anyone sane enough to operate a web browser.
Fannie and Freddie had *debts* into the trillions, all of it owned by other institutions, since no one owns their own debts. The whole issue is whether all those who *lent* to them, would be dragged down with them as well. By protecting the creditors and sending the stockholders to the wall, regulators avoid a cascade of additional failures from the failure of Fannie and Freddie - and my sending the stockholders to the wall, they maintain incentives to avoid failed investment.
The prior comments on Lehman are equally uninformed, while the article takes a sensible position.
Do all those screaming for destruction as more moral think we are talking about Lehman? We are talking about anyone who ever traded with Lehman, which includes oh about half the financial world.
The costs are already going to be born by everybody, because they are too large to be born by a few narrow institutions or people. No amount of whining about it will reduce the losses one iota, or keep any of it from ever mattering to you. "But its unfair that other people's mistakes hurt me!" Tough toenails. If everyone dropped dead tomorrow it'd effect you too. Everything does. It is called existence, grow up and deal with it already, and stop the bleeping whining. Reply
cannot
compete!
Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
The author is right regarding one point on Lehman - the equity and sub debt must go first. But we should not be doing bailouts. He is wrong on why Fannie and Freddie needed to be bailed - he says that was to avoid a cascade effect? How is sending the stock to zero avoiding a cascade? It's protecting special interests, is what it is.Reply
Distinguishing Between Out of Favor Sectors and Doomed Ones [view article]
PS: Are you one of those big hedge funds that screw everything up? I hope not. Just think, I might have invested with you. Reply