CloroxCowboy

Google Chrome: Redefining the Operating System

Gotta disagree. Mac and Linux are completely different than what Google's proposing with Chrome. Apples are too expensive for marginal, if any, computing advantage...it's all about buying an image. Linux is not necessarily hard to configure, but it's not the push-button solution that Goodle is describing either. And neither is really a web-based OS like Chrome would be.

A fast, streamlined, FREE os that gets users on the web quickly...I think MSFT is in serious trouble.

On Jul 08 10:01 AM Larry Bellehumeur wrote:

> The Market won't care.....there has been a viable option in MAC and
> Linux for years, and MSFT is still king. Do you imagine a Fortune
> 500 company, which is where much of their money comes from, switching
> over? The average Home user might put $100 in MSFT's pocket, where
> as GE might put hundreds of millions per year....
>
> When Google cracks the Corporate market, then people will notice.

Bogle: Investors 'Getting Killed' in ETFs

Your opinion only. Some people do quite well trading, you're just not one of them. Certainly the average joe "investor" has no business trading anything.


On Jun 18 06:33 PM ETF Grind wrote:

> We already know that trading is a statistically losing proposition,
> no matter what vehicle you use.

Revisiting the MBS Debate (Which We Should Already Be Past)

On Jun 10 09:24 PM Crocodilian wrote:

> My guess is that the banks got stuck with "slower-moving" inventory
> as the price of putting these deals together. That is, they didn't
> carry the inventory because they _wanted_ it, they carried it because
> these were the parts that they were having a hard time selling.

Your guess is correct.

Revisiting the MBS Debate (Which We Should Already Be Past)

Your analysis is spot-on. I was also involved in this industry, trading loan pools for a sub-prime lender from '05 to '07 and I remember many of the same comments. Our "executives" knew plain and simple that the paper we sold was crap. To be a sales or underwriting manager at that company meant that you spent 90% of your day pressing the manual override button on loans that were kicked from our automated system. There was always some justification to push a loan through.

One of the most interesting meetings I remember was when I saw that our latest operating costs were hovering around 2%. This was mid-2007 and by that time our net revenue from sales to the secondary market was about 1.75%... You might be able to guess the company motto? "Outrun it with volume!" All we had to do was keep selling more loans each month than the month before, and we could make the dream last forever. Luckily, I found a new job soon thereafter.

But as you say, none of this is new. People still defending these business practices are probably also Holocaust deniers and would buy every stock Jim Cramer mutters about in his sleep.

Unhappy with Amazon's (AMZN) Kindle, some newspapers and magazines forge alliances with consumer-electronics firms to create alternative e-readers. High on the request list: better pricing and subscriber options, and a better layout for advertising.

Better layout for advertising?? Why would I buy any of these readers if I have to look at ads? I'd buy a BOOK instead!

Friday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

On May 01 10:33 AM History Buff 24/7 wrote:

> CloroxCowboy,
>
> Let's ignore the self-evident, that Chrysler was a walking corpse
> way before yesterday.

Why ignore it? I'd rather not if you don't mind. It's is the whole issue in my opinion. A walking corpse is something you should put out of its misery by killing it swiftly. If it can be brought back to life in a healthier form, then all the better.

> Obama's comment WAS Orwellian, in the context that it is beyond nonsense,
> absolute nonsense, it is a contradiction in terms. That's what's
> Orwellian, "slavery is freedom", "war is peace". A lie is not any
> less a lie just because it comes from the mouths of the powerful.
> Saying that a company being placed into bankruptcy is not "a sign
> of weakness". What is it a sign of, pray tell?

You're confusing Chrysler with its (soon-to-be former) management. Bankruptcy is a huge sign of weakness for Nardelli et al, proving that they are ineffective at dealing with their creditors, unions, etc. On the other hand, Chrysler, the company, the distinct corporate entity will emerge stronger because of bankruptcy, which is the entire reason Chapter 11 exists. By your line of thinking, a doctor giving his patient medication would be an Orwellian act. You're confusing the patient with the virus.

> In Obama's doublespeak, I guess what he was saying is "don't stand
> in the way of an orderly settlement", we will steam roller you. "We"
> being the government of the United States of America.

Yes, I imagine that would happen. A big reason he was elected was the concept of change, therefore it's his mandate from the majority of Americans. Changing things doesn't always equate to asking nicely.

Credit Default Swaps May Be Playing a Supporting Role in Chrysler Bankruptcy Filings

...? That was my point. Working on an assembly line is a WORKING class occupation. $100K/year does not fit the job being done.


On May 01 08:59 AM Liz wrote:

>
>
> I'd hardly call $100K/year "working class".

Friday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

What a crock...how else did you expect this to play out, David? Chrysler forfeited ALL their rights the day Nardelli flew in his private jet to beg Congress for spare change. From that moment on, the company existed at the pleasure of the Federal govt. Had money not been forth-coming, the company would have and should have died at that time.

I don't see what's so "Orwellian" about Obama's statement. You kill a sick company, then revive it in a much healthier form. What's hard to understand about that?

Credit Default Swaps May Be Playing a Supporting Role in Chrysler Bankruptcy Filings

I'd have to agree that disregarding senior debt is dangerous at best. IMHO, it is absolutely the union that should suffer in this deal. UAW auto workers are over-paid for their skillset, plain and simple. That is a huge part of what's driven Chrysler, Ford, GM into the dirt. Of course the vehicle designs are lacking, but when exactly did it become status-quo for a working-class job to equate to a middle-class lifestyle? It's just not a sustainable business model.

Examining the 'Sell in May, Go Away' Axiom

Cetin, stop wasting server space with your nonsense! You only need to make one blanket post per quarter telling everyone that you're still a perma-bull.


On Apr 29 02:22 PM Cetin Hakimoglu wrote:

> 'Sell in May Go Away' axiom will fail this year. The momentum is
> overwhelmingly bullish and the economy is improving.

Will the Stress Test Seal Ken Lewis's Fate?

Good riddance! Let's get the next batch of slimeballs in there so we can start this merry-go-round up again...

The Wisdom of Half Positions

On Apr 21 11:55 AM Guru914 wrote:

>You know how what you have
> has (and may in the future) performed but don't really know how what
> you're getting into will perform.

If you think you know any more about the future performance of the first stock than the second, you are mistaken. "May in the future" is not knowing anything...it's flipping a coin. Saying that you don't want to track as many stocks is a valid rebuttal to this article, whereas your statement above is a VALIDATION of the article.

Paired Trades: Short Nalco Holding, Long Met-Pro

Thanks for clarifying, I see what you're trying to do now. This is not the same type of pairs trading I do so I wanted to fully understand your analysis. I think it's just a difference between technical vs fundamental valuations.

For example, my style would be to find a pair where the price ratio is relatively stationary (highly cointegrated) over several years, and enter trades at several standard deviations from the mean. I would exit on a return to the mean, rinse, and repeat. Basically I just look for statistical "tails" but rarely use fundamentals or events when I value my trades. In fact, I try to specifically trade pairs with very little recent news that have slowly drifted apart (for no apparent reason) and wait for a quick rebound to the "correct" prices.

Your method seems to be different than mine, and I can see that it would require more in-depth fundamental research to trade this way. Don't get me wrong though, I think both methods can be successful. I am definitely looking forward to reading about your future trades and learning more about this style. Good luck and thanks for the reply!

Paired Trades: Short Nalco Holding, Long Met-Pro

Typo above: should be "I tend more to the technical..."

Paired Trades: Short Nalco Holding, Long Met-Pro

Alan,

Nice to see that someone is coming out with a series on pairs trading. I have a question regarding this particular trade. Financials aside, when I look at the price ratio chart you attached it seems that the main portion of this correction might have happened already. My question is: Are you doing any analysis on the quantitative side, looking for favorable co-integration characteristics in these pairs, etc? I tend more to the techinal in my pairs trades, evaluating the movements of price ratio more than company financials, so I'm very interested to see how a strategy based largely on fundamentals (that is just my assumption from the article) will go.