seriously ?

Total Rating:
0 / 0

38 Comments

    • Sun Jan 13th 17:00 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      AOL Money & Finance Surpasses Yahoo Finance, MSN Money For Top Portal Spot
      I can't even begin to talk about how technologically superior Google is and how powerful and fast they can and will make google finance.

      I have said this too many times, but analysts just don't get why Google is able to monopolize the internet. Its the super-computer, stupid. ( server farms/ dark fiber etc )

      Google finance is not even out of beta, which simply means that they are refining and experimenting with their technology until they have something that is good enough for them.

      When google finance comes out of beta it will be so integrated with googles other "free services" ( eyeball catchers ) that it will make your head spin. Look at how much it has changed already.

      What/Who is stopping them ?
      View article »
    • Sun Jan 13th 16:53 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Should Google, Yahoo, & Microsoft Worry About Countrywide's Takeover?
      agreed, but I think the more important issue is how an overall recession will affect online advertising.

      Also I believe google is really the company in question here. Yahoo is dying and may soon be bought by Microsoft. I would also dare to say that Microsoft is dying because they are fighting an N-front war ( remember they want to be the world's first tech company to be an "N-trick pony" )

      Online advertising is a serious issue for Google but shouldn't be for Microsoft as I believe they have already lost that war.
      View article »
    • Sun Jan 13th 16:37 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Trading Recession Probabilities
      Dear Dean Baker;

      Here, here. We all know it's called the r-word for a reason, I am in complete agreement, once the r-word comes off the lips of economists in the press and not just cocktail parties; we are already there.
      Time to short my friends or hold on tight.

      Also, I would think the VIX should do well in the short term.
      View article »
    • Sun Jan 13th 16:30 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Consensus Economist Estimates Don't Suggest a Recession
      Ok... I am not going to insult anyone with a long cogent article full of link s and numbers that should make the average investor say, "O a recession ? No shit."

      It would be insulting because at this point when asked if our economy is headed towards a recession I think the average investor would ask me where I parked my squad car.

      This article in itself is evidence of a the coming recession, irrational hubris, investors wanting to will the stock market up.

      I am sorry people but we can't stop China's bubble it will have to spectacularly crash on its own and we certainly aren't ever going to have cheaper oil.

      We all understand supply and demand right ?

      We will be effectively "out" of oil by 2013 and the financial times agrees with me.

      How then are we going to simultaneously stop the housing debacle, and get cheaper energy in the next 1-2 years ?? What about 5 years ?

      There will be a recession. I'm sorry but at this point it's a joke to argue otherwise. I just hope it isn't too painful and DC gets a bit smarter ( nuclear energy, non bankrupting foreign policy , etc )

      Until then ya'll keep buying and I'll keep shorting.

      I am short the DOW via DOG.

      I should be long oil and gold and short the dollar for the next year or so.

      I think being long oil (spot price NOT a corporation...volume issues...get it ?) / short our stock market are the most obvious choices here.
      View article »
    • Sun Jan 13th 16:13 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      BofA's Countrywide Purchase is a Huge Mistake
      I agree with the above commenter, many of the articles' critiques of BoFa were very short sited.

      Bofa is aggressive internationally, ( again, China anyone!)
      I highly doubt that it was the case that " They were searching for something..."

      Also, I find even the logic a bit muddled and therefore must fear the author may be suffering a bit from hubris...

      After admitting that, "The reason we shorted BAC was that the company had reached a cap in terms of the percentage of assets that they could hold in the United States" ;

      The author goes on to "politley" insinuate that Bofa may be somewhat naive.
      "Imagine a rookie investor sitting on a wad of cash, and itching to invest it."

      Hmmm... so we have a bank that has literally grown itself as large as it legally can and is then compared to being a "rookie investor" ...interesting... but not asinine.

      What is asinine is saying that you shorted the stock because it had met a limit on its growth and then you go on to talk about how many investing mistakes Bofa is making and will continue to make.

      So, then why did you really short the stock ? For both of these reasons or simply due to the aforementioned "limit" ( which only matters domestically and in terms of assets held, and NOT EVEN all aspects of their domestic business/ATMs/Credit Cards/Free online investing etc. ).

      A much more cogent reason for shorting the stock at 54.5 would be that it was nearly at a ( 3 year !?) high and the housing market crash was painfully obvious.

      This article sounds nothing more than a pump or should I say dump piece. Bofa is the new kid on the block in Manhattan and I have been just laughing when I turn on CNBC as Goldman, Morgan Stanley etc repeatedly and nearly unabashedly bad mouth the company. ( Market cap envy ? ) This just smacks of the typical wall street rhetoric surrounding this company. They don't know how to invest...blah blah blah...

      I wish the people politicking like this would just be a little bit more frank. Or at least make sense.

      If you think that Bofa if full of rookie investors, just come out and say, "I am shorting the stock because Bofa is very bad at investing."

      If somone said this and had any sort of data/numbers to back this up ( I've looked BTW and I hate to tell you but they have a "bit" of cash and assets ) I would actually listen.

      The rhetoric in this article quickly lead me to read it with the same "inquisitiveness&... that I lend to politicians and talking heads.

      I feel dumber now; ergo, a bit upset.

      But no worries, I encourage you and whomever to continue to publish pieces like this because I enjoy reinvesting a 7% dividend in a stock with a P/E of 8.

      Especially, if that stock just happens to be the biggest bank in the USA.

      O and BTW how have those non-rookie savvy investors been doing lately, like say...Morgan Stanley ? I haven't been paying attention.
      View article »
    • Wed Dec 12th 22:24 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Google's Android Will Lead to New Class of Mobile Internet Devices
      I agree that no one likes a monopoly, but look at Microsoft. It is very possible,especially in the computer industry sans government intervention.

      I also agree about the facebook debacle, but I believe I addressed this issue and insinuated that google is very aware of the need to keep the consumer's trust.

      However, I believe your statement, "And free internet connectivity will never yield the dream they envision for the simple reason that most people don't want a pop up ad driven internet experience" has already been proved incorrect by both google and nearly every website on the net (notice any ads here ? )

      And finally I cannot agree that are so IFS in this scenario. There is only one. All they have to do is win spectrum in the auction everything else is in place.
      AT&T is not sitting by and letting that happen, they are in the auction. Verizon knows this as well as they are also in the auction and attempting to push THEIR OWN open standard. Apple is primarily in the business of selling hardware. With their ties to google, they might very well be rooting for google to go through with this. As for Microsoft, I simply don't know, maybe without Bill Gates, they are just too dumb ?
      .


      View article »
    • Wed Dec 12th 16:33 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Google's Android Will Lead to New Class of Mobile Internet Devices
      sorry, to reply again, but I just re-read the article and felt compelled to say;

      Google wants to/is going to be THE MID market.

      I'm talking about shoes that instantly plot your path on a google map if you tell them to (the shoes), friggin' lights that turn on when you tell google to tell them to. space age shit. get it ?

      I know I sound insanely cocky, but spectrum isn't bandwidth. Physics teaches us spectrum is UNLIMITED bandwidth. It's will be just like radio but with the internet.

      The biggest challenge a company would face would be creating the server infrastructure necessary to move and store all of this information

      Guess which company has the most massive/ fastest /cheapest server farms ever known to man (seriously) ?

      Why won't microsoft or any company be able to touch google for at least the next 5 years ( unless the gov breaks them up ) ?

      It's the super-computer, stupid.

      That statement is not directed at the author or anyone in particular, but I feel like I need to repeat it as to inform possible google investors.
      View article »
    • Wed Dec 12th 16:16 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Google's Android Will Lead to New Class of Mobile Internet Devices
      Google's plan is fairly obvious to me. You got some things right, but its much simpler really and much bolder.

      1) Android and Google's spectrum bid are 100% correlated.
      2) If google controls spectrum they will provide (most likely) free internet to ANY device running Android.
      3) Android is completely open source because they want any and everyone to work on these devices (everything from watch/cell phone/ to computer - anything goes! ) and develop with Android.
      - btw if google gets spectrum they wont have to persuade anyone to engineer devices, those selling "devices" make $$$. They will also not have to persuade anyone to develop with Android, they will force them to if they want to use free ubiquitous wireless. Of course everyone from your 6 year old to your grandmother will want to be using these devices.
      4) so we have free wireless throughout the country, devices ranging from cheap wrist watches to iPhones running googles software and using googles spectrum. How does google make any $$$ ?
      5) The same way they did before, only this time you must imagine a scenario where the country is getting on the internet through google, from anywhere at anytime. Do you think this might bring in a few more clicks ? Do you think more people might start using adsense ? As the original author said, imagine the possibilities ! having the advertiser know exactly where you are. He is right Android will give google yet even more information about their users but they wont be so dumb as to give advertisers your gps location ( you will use triangulation anyhow ), and destroy all trust that is left in their corporation, this would be 10x worse than facebook's beacon fiasco. But they will do even more amazing things and give advertisers and users options that I can't even begin to imagine.

      6) in sum with android and spectrum, google should be able to monopolize the internet in ways that mock the monopoly they currently enjoy. All google needs to make money is your eyeballs, why do you think they called it ANDROID ? ( someone over there is getting a little too cocky in my opinion, should have stuck with something much less spooky )

      Yes, I own google stock, but less than ten shares now, took profits much too soon.

      -peace
      View article »
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»