America's Top Momentum Sector - Casual Dining? [View article]
A little history lesson for you kid analysts out there telling everyone to buy these overvalued restaurant stocks..
On Apr 24 02:49 PM Sigmax wrote:
> It was originally Boston Chicken (symbol BOST). A high flyer....till > they started buying back the money losing franchises and then the > stock decompressed from like 45 t0 1 where McDonalds bought them > and changed the name to Boston Market.
America's Top Momentum Sector - Casual Dining? [View article]
It was originally Boston Chicken (symbol BOST). A high flyer....till they started buying back the money losing franchises and then the stock decompressed from like 45 t0 1 where McDonalds bought them and changed the name to Boston Market.
America's Top Momentum Sector - Casual Dining? [View article]
Repeat after me: "Boston Chicken." (Does anybody remember that one?) Well a lot of these are starting to smell like that one.
Take a hard look at these stocks mentioned above and see if they are buying back franchises - and at what prices. Also, look at the sales growth at the company owned vs franchised - that'll be another clue.
The Up-Tick Rule Reimplementation Is Bad for Markets [View article]
Brad - Are you talking your "book?" Sorry pal-game over. You now how to work for a living instead of gaming the system. By the way - what did you do prior to opening your hedge fund?
Are you trying to tell us the uptick rule made the market function poorly for 70 years? Is it a coincidence that the market fell apart when the upticjk rule was banished and FAS 157 was implemented? No.
On the flip side - is it a coincidence that the S&P rallied 22% after the gov't hinted that it would reinstate the uptick rule and revaluate FAS 157? No.
The SEC must restore the Uptick Rule in its original format as suggested by the author and state that enforcement will be extremely vigilant for those violating the rule and for those not legally borrowing securities prior to a legal short sale. The legal plus "illegal" short interest acts as an increase in the float on the sell side only and dilutes the interest of the buyers. That dynamic and the lack of enforcement has led us to where we are today and makes it impossible for a buyer of any securities to have any confidence to stay invested in the markets
This plan sounds a lot like where Hank Paulson was going last fall.
For those of you that were wondering - the reason private capital hasn't stepped in is because of the ever-changing plans-they couldn't make a committment.
Its plain and simple. When the uptick rule was removed and FAS 157 instituted it created a "low hanging fruit" scenario for the bears -easy to be picked. Buy CDS's, short (legally + illegally) the financial stocks unmercifully, start rumours, basically force the ratings agencies to downgrade - add a little "negative" juice from the media (yes they have some blood on their hands too) and bingo-capitulation-a negative feedback loop that led to the abyss/recession.
It was so obvious. They went from BSC to LEH to FRE & FNM, back to LEH to AIG to WM to Wachovia to MS to GS to C to BAC and to GE (to name the big names). The SEC was clueless/ culpable because they started the cascade the the rule/accting changes mentioned above. Cox is an idiot and they knew that and proceded without fear.
It is no coincidence that when it leaked out that the SEC is looking at reinstituting the Uptick Rule and FAS 157 is being looked at for modification - that the market rallied. Its game over for the "bad guys" - to quote Tony Montana.
The shame of this is that it could have all been prevented. I'm not saying we did not have a problem in the housing market, we did, but it was a "market functionality" problem that was exploited and caused the situation to get out of control. They were pounding stocks so fast-the gov't couldn't keep up. The market was moving 80 mph in the left lane and the gov't was going 40 mph in the right lane. They kept putting their fingers in the dike to stop the leak without fixing the problem. (Maybe that is why they are throwing so much money at it-because they realized they are culpable.)
Maybe we should put a commision together from the general public to investigate.......that would be fun!
Would Reinstating the Uptick Rule Make It a Fairer Game? [View article]
See S. Forbes in todays WSJ: "Another horrific Bush policy that Mr. Obama has left untouched concerns short selling. In 1938, the SEC, created by FDR, enacted the so-called uptick rule, which held that investors could not short a stock unless it went up in price. In July 2007, the SEC, whose commissioners were handpicked by the White House, got rid of the rule. Market volatility exploded.
Compounding this lunacy was the SEC's inexplicable failure to enforce the rule against "naked" short selling. Before an investor can short a stock, he is supposed to borrow the shares and pay a broker or stockholder a fee. What sellers soon realized was that the SEC was turning a blind eye to naked short-selling, thus adding even more pressure to beleaguered bank equities. Short sellers quickly saw how mark-to-market made seemingly invincible companies vulnerable to destruction. They picked their targets and relentlessly sold financial stocks short.
If the president really takes Roosevelt's legacy seriously, he should suspend mark-to-market accounting rules, restore the uptick rule, and enforce the prohibition against naked short selling."
Jon Stewart on CNBC's 'Worthlessness' [View article]
Did everyone see them all turn white when GE was vaporixzing on Wednesday? Did they think all their negativity was't going to effect them? You reap what you wrought!
Levitt and Chanos Speak Out on Investor Hot Button Issues [View article]
It is amazing to me and the investing public, that our elected and appointed government officials have done NOTHING to fix and enforce the malfunctioning in the financial markets. The SEC must restore the Uptick Rule immediately and state that enforcement will be extremely vigilant for those violating the rule and for those not legally borrowing securities prior to a legal short sale. The legal plus "illegal" short interest dwarfs the shares outstanding in many issues (i.e. the financials). That dynamic and the lack of enforcement has led us to where we are today and makes it impossible for a buyer of any securities to have any confidence to stay invested in the markets. It is mind boggling that they do not make this fix......
Look at the CNBC website and the bios of the talking heads. The cast majority of have non-financial college degrees and never worked in finance. Yet they are all now experts? Pontificating about the markets, writing books, telling theirlisteners what to do with their money. PLEASE!!!!!
Sort by:
Latest | Highest ratedMeredith Whitney: 'I Haven't Been This Bearish in a Year' [View article]
America's Top Momentum Sector - Casual Dining? [View article]
On Apr 24 02:49 PM Sigmax wrote:
> It was originally Boston Chicken (symbol BOST). A high flyer....till
> they started buying back the money losing franchises and then the
> stock decompressed from like 45 t0 1 where McDonalds bought them
> and changed the name to Boston Market.
America's Top Momentum Sector - Casual Dining? [View article]
America's Top Momentum Sector - Casual Dining? [View article]
Take a hard look at these stocks mentioned above and see if they are buying back franchises - and at what prices. Also, look at the sales growth at the company owned vs franchised - that'll be another clue.
The Up-Tick Rule Reimplementation Is Bad for Markets [View article]
Are you trying to tell us the uptick rule made the market function poorly for 70 years? Is it a coincidence that the market fell apart when the upticjk rule was banished and FAS 157 was implemented? No.
On the flip side - is it a coincidence that the S&P rallied 22% after the gov't hinted that it would reinstate the uptick rule and revaluate FAS 157? No.
Enough said.
Exchanges Propose Weakened Uptick Rule [View article]
The Geithner Plan FAQ [View article]
For those of you that were wondering - the reason private capital hasn't stepped in is because of the ever-changing plans-they couldn't make a committment.
Naked Shorting: An IM Exchange [View article]
It was so obvious. They went from BSC to LEH to FRE & FNM, back to LEH to AIG to WM to Wachovia to MS to GS to C to BAC and to GE (to name the big names). The SEC was clueless/ culpable because they started the cascade the the rule/accting changes mentioned above. Cox is an idiot and they knew that and proceded without fear.
It is no coincidence that when it leaked out that the SEC is looking at reinstituting the Uptick Rule and FAS 157 is being looked at for modification - that the market rallied. Its game over for the "bad guys" - to quote Tony Montana.
The shame of this is that it could have all been prevented. I'm not saying we did not have a problem in the housing market, we did, but it was a "market functionality" problem that was exploited and caused the situation to get out of control. They were pounding stocks so fast-the gov't couldn't keep up. The market was moving 80 mph in the left lane and the gov't was going 40 mph in the right lane. They kept putting their fingers in the dike to stop the leak without fixing the problem. (Maybe that is why they are throwing so much money at it-because they realized they are culpable.)
Maybe we should put a commision together from the general public to investigate.......that would be fun!
Financial Media - Making It Up as They Go [View article]
Five Impossible Thoughts After Breakfast [View article]
To the author of this piece-leave the Country!
Would Reinstating the Uptick Rule Make It a Fairer Game? [View article]
"Another horrific Bush policy that Mr. Obama has left untouched concerns short selling. In 1938, the SEC, created by FDR, enacted the so-called uptick rule, which held that investors could not short a stock unless it went up in price. In July 2007, the SEC, whose commissioners were handpicked by the White House, got rid of the rule. Market volatility exploded.
Compounding this lunacy was the SEC's inexplicable failure to enforce the rule against "naked" short selling. Before an investor can short a stock, he is supposed to borrow the shares and pay a broker or stockholder a fee. What sellers soon realized was that the SEC was turning a blind eye to naked short-selling, thus adding even more pressure to beleaguered bank equities. Short sellers quickly saw how mark-to-market made seemingly invincible companies vulnerable to destruction. They picked their targets and relentlessly sold financial stocks short.
If the president really takes Roosevelt's legacy seriously, he should suspend mark-to-market accounting rules, restore the uptick rule, and enforce the prohibition against naked short selling."
Jon Stewart on CNBC's 'Worthlessness' [View article]
You reap what you wrought!
Levitt and Chanos Speak Out on Investor Hot Button Issues [View article]
12 CNBC Pet Peeves [View article]
PLEASE!!!!!