Genti Cici

Chatter that hedge fund manager John Paulson has taken as much as a $3B long position in the dollar.

"At the end of the day, we believe we will be able to pay back the government and we hope we will be able to do something for our shareholders as well," Benmosche told Bloomberg in an interview

I may add he is in Croatia, vacationing before starting the new CEO job and he knows very well what expects him.

Is this what drives stocks up 30% nowadays? WOW, really interesting times we are living in. I think all CEO's should say the same thing, and their stock will move up about 30% [more or less].

Is this how we are keeping this market up these days?

Let me add something to this: "ALL Debts are forgiven to everyone". See what happens now.

S&P 500 P/E Ratio Nearly Doubles

Really, don't know where that P/E of 10 comes from at that timeframe. The truth is P/E (operating) went up from 17.09 -18.56 during that timeframe. Unless you are looking at Forward P/E (which has for base the Wall Street analysts estimates, before they lowered them). And by the way it's the same analysts forecasting a 12% increase in S&P 500 for 2008. Any comment from the publisher to address these issues with your data?


On Aug 15 02:20 PM Schweizer wrote:

> Looking at John's article and his PE table, taken from Standard and
> Poors data, there was never been a PE anywhere near 10 even for the
> bogus "operating earnings" in the 2007-2008 period as you show.<br/>
>
> You guys need to put up your earnings table history to show where
> you came up with your numbers to support this graph, otherwise it's
> truly "unbelievable" and should be removed.

S&P 500 P/E Ratio Nearly Doubles

Thanks


On Aug 14 05:13 PM cobiacomm wrote:

> A link to S&amp;P data would assist in fact checking and assessing
> your analysis
> www2.standardandpoors....

S&P 500 P/E Ratio Nearly Doubles

Anyway, the website just doesn't want to show up, thus google this "s&p 500 eps" and it's the first link. Thanks

S&P 500 P/E Ratio Nearly Doubles

www2.standardandpoors....

S&P 500 P/E Ratio Nearly Doubles

Here is the link www2.standardandpoors....

Don't know why it was cut the first time.


On Aug 14 04:35 PM Genti Cici wrote:

> BIG,
>
> You might want to get your facts straight, if you click on www2.standardandpoors....
>
> you can see that with 91% of companies reporting 2Q results, at S&amp;P
> of 1005 the Operating earnings P/E is 25.20, and if you look at the
> Real Earnings P/E (that includes all items) it's at a P/E of 127.32.
>
>
> While it's nice to report on Operating Earnings P/E the investor
> really only receives Real Earnings and not before the writedowns,
> for him the writedowns matter as the value of his company [equity]
> is being diminished. Thus, while media completely ignores P/E, and
> you bring a P/E of 18.3 which was at end of 1Q, the real P/E is 127.
> On the data from S&amp;P, above, as they go back to 1988, always
> the real earnings are less than operating earnings, thus they are
> always writedowns and not writeups. Why should they be excluded,
> then, if they always reduce value? These are not 1-time items, these
> are 1-time items always negative to earnings.
>
> Research and data compiled by Standard &amp; Poor's.

S&P 500 P/E Ratio Nearly Doubles

BIG,

You might want to get your facts straight, if you click on www2.standardandpoors....
you can see that with 91% of companies reporting 2Q results, at S&P of 1005 the Operating earnings P/E is 25.20, and if you look at the Real Earnings P/E (that includes all items) it's at a P/E of 127.32.

While it's nice to report on Operating Earnings P/E the investor really only receives Real Earnings and not before the writedowns, for him the writedowns matter as the value of his company [equity] is being diminished. Thus, while media completely ignores P/E, and you bring a P/E of 18.3 which was at end of 1Q, the real P/E is 127. On the data from S&P, above, as they go back to 1988, always the real earnings are less than operating earnings, thus they are always writedowns and not writeups. Why should they be excluded, then, if they always reduce value? These are not 1-time items, these are 1-time items always negative to earnings.

Research and data compiled by Standard & Poor's.

Why Another Stock Market Collapse Could Be Imminent

Your comment makes no sense, "The name of the game is making money" Ok, we know that, AND???

And it's the opposite of what you say : IF I am frightened to buy I would want to read "garbage" like this so I know if my thinking makes sense. And if it makes sense, and someone can explain it better than I can then I should read that, right. Not, not read it.

I thought we had a math problem {www.washingtonpost.com...}
in our society, but I guess English is not our strong point either.


On Aug 05 03:41 PM CLH wrote:

> A smart man knows that making money is the name of the game. The
> market is up nearly 50%, if you are too frightened to buy then dont
> read garbage like the above.

Bank of America: 'Amazed by Goldman Sachs' Unmatched Risk Taking / Risk Management Skills'

The show will continue. If we never fire the actors in the first place they will make another movie for us. This movie will involve other actors and scenarios, but just like any movie they want to see the money at the box office. And what can you do, we all love movies where everything is possible and we can be just like our favorite actors, but when we come out of the theater it's just us, having learned nothing about reality and also $10 poorer.

Reports of Bank of America (BAC) needing an additional $34B may not be as frightening as initially assumed, CNBC's Steve Liesman says. According to a report in the NY Times, the $34B cushion required is well below the $45B the bank has already received from the gov't, and "the bank will now start looking at ways of repaying the $11B difference over time." BAC, which was down more than 11%, is now +2.5% premarket.

Clearly manipulation at the extreme, puppet show at CNBC manipulating people home in the morning who may not understand 10% of what they are talking about, but they do get that NY Times report is "misleading".

Than why are we getting these "news" ahead of tomorrow, weren't we suppose not to know anything till Thursday, or does someone wants to prepare us, and give news by bits and pieces.

Steve Liesman doesn't know what he is talking about, if the government will need a 4% TCE/TA (tangible common equity/ tangible assets) and if BOA doesn't have that, yes, they do need to convert the government preferred into common, that is pure dilution, even if no NEW money is brought in, equity is diluted, period. If money is raised somewhere else that is dilution too, what's so misleading.

What's misleading is the CNBC talking non-sense and misleading regular investors into buying BAC stock before it "skyrockets". Sorry, but less media would be best for your portfolio, or would probably make more money (net gains minus losses) if you always go against what you hear on the regular media. It's just a propaganda machine to help "whoever knows" to dump it to "whoever doesn't know"

Open Letter to SEC: Wall Street's REIT Bait-and-Switch

People (or banks) will lie, steal & cheat if allowed. SEC should be substituted with a knowledgeable private institution that gets paid commission for finding fraud, illegal dealings etc. How 'bout you Tyler, getting your team, getting paid 2/20 (like a hedge fund or something like that) for each case brought forward. We have rewards for criminals or terrorists, these guys not too far from that. Illegally partying me from my money is financial terrorism. Oh, and Madoff was and is just the tip of the iceberg.

Goldman Releases Earnings Early; Has World Gone Crazy?

The month of December is not missing, it's there (on pg. 10 of GS report) but not included in any report; 1Q 2009 or FY 2008. Eventhough if included it wipes out 63% ($2.15/$3.39) of ALL 1Q earnings.

I wish I could manage my balance sheet like that, 'cause I don't like loosing as well, and I love to say that my EEV equals $100/share because I am holding it to "maturity". Who cares is EEV trades at $32. By saying that my EEV is "worth" $100, not only I am avoiding a loss, but I am claiming a gain as I only bought it for $70. Get the analogy of "mark to your feelings".


On Apr 14 12:58 PM odin wrote:

> GS has traditionally been on a Nov YE cycle. However, when it converted
> to a bank holding company, it went on a standard Dec YE cycle. Hence,
> the mystery of the "missing" month.

Goldman Releases Earnings Early; Has World Gone Crazy?

Correction

""If you include the month of December the 4-month income is only $1.24/share ($3.39 reported - $2.15 December's loss).""

Goldman Releases Earnings Early; Has World Gone Crazy?

Tyler,

Regarding the 4-month Quarter it seems as they have excluded the month of December 2008 and have filed separate income and balance sheet statements for that month alone. It is on page 10 of the GS report and just on the month of December GS lost $2.15 per diluted share according to that filing. So where will they include the month of December 2008 is anyone's guess. It might just be left alone and not included in any coming reports (10K)!!! If you include the month of November the 4-month income is only $1.24/share ($3.39 reported - $2.15 December's loss). By the way so far as it stands December's $2.15/share so far is reported nowhere as GS fiscal year ends in November and now the new report says for the 1st quarter ended in March, thus starting in January.

Tyler, if you can follow up on this.

Maybe GS just wants to forget December, who cares about the little bit above $1B loss ($2.15/share)

Genti

Goldman Sachs Should Hit It Big in 2009

Maybe you can get a job at GS when out of Penn State, or maybe that's the whole purpose !!! Well, Steve, I don't know if people at GS read these posts at SA. I think they're still in wonderland and refuse to come down to earth...
But you never know, you might be right about GS in 2009. So far it seems like them and some other major banks have "kidnapped" our government and asking for ransom money from us, well not you, you're not working yet, and yes our ransom could be their profit/revenue. You could be right!!!!