gdog

StumbleUpon's eBay Spinoff Valuation: $29 Million

Are you kidding me, their worth at least 30 billion.




On May 01 11:25 AM Cetin Hakimoglu wrote:

> Based on the huge growth of stumble upon, market dominance ,and revenue
> potential I give it a valuation of almost 1 billion.

I Have a Bad Feeling About This Market

SA, unintentionally perhaps, has become much worse than you imply my virtual friend.

People have realized, that with the Yahoo! exposure, anyone can spread information very, very rapidly, true or not, dire more than usual, and do people really want to trust this information.

Can it move the market? If some 3rd party wanted to take down a sector, would it be enough to have 20 people express negative, apparently well reasoned opinions on SA and other target sites.

Does this make it worth while to actually find out who reads this stuff?

Fundamental rule of espionage, the level of effort will rise to the value of information.

I leave it at that.

On Feb 06 09:33 AM gvsmitty19 wrote:

> Seriously, who are these guys?!?! Are they really getting paid for
> this "information???"
>
> His bio said he was an IT professional with no financial background
> or financial education whatsover. He wasn't even a U.S. citizen
> til 2006.
>
> Yet here his analysis sits on Yahoo's Apple page for millions to
> see. No offense to you, Alex, I'm sure you're a nice guy... but
> give me a break!!!
>
> Seeking Alpha has become a joke.

U.S. Dealing with a Boatload of Debt - Moody's

Well said Sir!

The coming period will require the testicular fortitude and foresight demonstrated by the likes of Chris, and Warren Buffet.

Join us! In 30 years we shall be known as the greatest generation.


On Feb 05 03:56 PM Chris B wrote:

> I hate the national debt and I hate paying 9.5% of my taxes to cover
> the INTEREST ONLY on debt that we built up in previous years just
> because we didn't want to pay higher taxes or cut spending at the
> time. We're get absolutely nothing in return for those billions
> in interest spending. Not more infrastructure, not better security,
> not better schools - nothing. The ROI on the Iraq war is negative.
> It's the price we pay for being selfish and irresponsible in previous
> years.
>
> However, if the beginning of the great depression is any guide, now
> is NOT the time to rediscover fiscal conservativism. The good times
> were when we should have been running balanced budgets so we could
> be better prepared for times like this.
>
> 9 out of 10 economists will tell you that cutting government spending
> in the middle of what was then a severe recession was a contributing
> factor in making it the great depression. It was only when the US
> took on unprecedented amounts of debt and put people to work building
> roads, bridges, tanks, and ships that the depression ended. The
> boatload of WWII debt was paid off after several years of subsequent
> economic growth boosted tax revenues (at the higher tax hikes that
> had been justified by WW2).
>
> The world has given us a once-in-a-lifetime gift; offering to loan
> the US government trillions of dollars at interest rates of less
> than 2%. If I could borrow money at those rates, I'd be in business
> because I could surely find a way to earn yields greater than that.
> Similarly, the US should be able to put this money to use to generate
> long term economic gains (infrastructure, technology, education,
> etc.) that will generate revenue above and beyond the cost of the
> loans - just as was done in the late 40's through the 60's.
>
> First, get us out of the depressionary spiral by investing in the
> future, then balance the budget when things get better, then reap
> the rewards.

U.S. Debt Default, Dollar Collapse Altogether Likely

RELAX!!! The US government is the ultimate arbiter of asset prices.

De-regulators have allowed the us financial system to become an incomplete system, by allowing the spread of credit derivatives which cannot be expressed in terms of other assets.

In mathematical terms, we have a n dimensional system, with n-1 actual equations to describe it, and therefore asset prices are left to a bounded vector of possibilities which cannot be agreed upon through logic, rational thought, or anything else, every possibility potentially comes into play, but not really.

What the US government says, goes, implicitly this is so. It is not rational, it may take a while to play out, but this is how the world will work. Get used to, and get on the train sooner than latter so we can all move forward.

The End of the U.S. As We Know It: Tracking the Dollar Downward

Paco is undoubtedly a very smart guy, but he is over-concerned with what I would call false dynamics.

Everything, much of what he speaks about are long term projections of gloom without long term projections of glory.

In the past 300 years we have seen at least 3 or 4 major energy revolutions, each of which has transformed economic potential far beyond what previous generations generally thought possible, the next revolution is within grasp and it will similarly revolutionize our societies. Economic gains resulting from investment is how we ensure that debt obligations will be met.

Invest in america, invest in the future, it's the best bet you can make. Or believe the world is coming to an end, in which case I'd forget about economics and contemplate my immortal soul, or something like it.

Economy Watch: What if Stocks Were Priced in Gold?

Thank you John, I'm glad you find my comment interesting.

Your questions, I believe, are striking at the heart of a long debate in economics over the government's ability to influence output through fiscal and monetary policy, and a general economies ability to maintain or achieve equilibrium.

The basic theory goes that in times of reduced output, governments should spend in deficit to spur growth, this is difficult when sticking to a commodity currency like gold, once the government is out, its out.

The opposition to this view seems to believe that government influence is not needed and a economy will achieve natural balance in a short amount of time. This classical view of human economic behavior is ridiculous in it's reliance on human rationality, which is required to be at an equilibrium.

Humans are not rational, and their behavior cannot be modeled through physical mathematical models alone. Imagine an alcoholic, and his preference for alcohol. Before having any drinks, he would prefer to have none, once having a single drink he would prefer to have 10, once having 10 he wishes he had not had any at all. This preference chain presents serious problems for a mathematical model because of it's inherent irrationality, but this analogy can be extended to Citi, and Morgan Stanley's preference for high leveraged finance; and hence things become very complicated.

Fiat currencies allow for a government to adjust to market conditions to achieve a "more favorable" result for an economy when market participants fail to act in rational manners.

Oftentimes its not even a question of rationality, a simple "economy" with three participants two goods, and two time periods, requires a 12x12 (12 dimensional) system of equations to "solve" for equilibrium conditions. This is very difficult to do. Add in irrational behavior by participants on top of this, and equilibrium becomes nearly impossible to compute, and thus adjustments to observations become necessary, and it is the hope, in our real economy, that these adjustments can be made quickly, and fiat money makes this possible.

(As a side note, the addition of "non-replicable" assets, or assets that cannot be expressed as a combination of other assets, credit derivatives are such an example, means that an equilibrium calculation becomes truly impossible as a n-1 system (with n-1 equations and n unknowns) has been formed, which is solvable only down to a single, likely bounded, vector (prices and general consensus can take on many different values bounded by reason, which is what we are currently observing globally with asset prices in general). The other time we have seen this in recent history was with enron and the manipulation of CA energy prices, now like then, corruption and lax regulation were key to the problems.

I don't think that quite answers your question, but I tried.




On Feb 02 07:12 PM JohnAl wrote:

> Mr. Ahlgren, another well thought out and well written article.
> Thanks.
>
> Your reasoning is sound. Like you, I've lost confidence in the
> dollar, but it appears that we're either wrong or early. I'm in
> gold, but I'm still hedging my bets. They may be able to patch this
> thing up one more time. People want to believe in the dollar, which
> comes down to belief in the US government. Obama popularity polls
> may be the best indicator out there. The expectations are high that
> he's going to be able to fix things. To the degree his popularity
> wanes that's an indication that "hope and change" are on the decline.
> That's an indication that it's time to buy more gold.
>
> Gdog, your's was a very interesting comment. Especially this:<br/>
>
> "Productive ideas, innovation, intellectual capital, these are the
> things the are important in a knowledge economy, in any economy.
> This is where uninhibited scare resources always flow.
>
> Investment in the US is all that matters. New technologies, new energy,
> wonderfully productive things yet thought of that will change and
> shape our lives. This is what the US does. It is what we are very
> good at.
>
> ... Come on people. Believe in this country!"
>
> I agree, but for the life of me I don't see how sound money, based
> on gold or something else, is incompatible with this. I don't see
> how sound money doesn't help this country.
>
> Why do you think fiat currency is good for the US or any country?

Economy Watch: What if Stocks Were Priced in Gold?

Gold...

Imagine a martian looking down, it see's us digging yellow stuff up from the ground, and then digging wholes again to put it back in for storage; he thinks to himself..."these guys are frickn crazy!"

Gold has no productive value (actually very very little productive value).

Productive ideas, innovation, intellectual capital, these are the things the are important in a knowledge economy, in any economy. This is where uninhibited scare resources always flow.

Investment in the US is all that matters. New technologies, new energy, wonderfully productive things yet thought of that will change and shape our lives. This is what the US does. It is what we are very good at.

Do I think the price of gold will rise? yes probably, is it a signal of the horrific future you imply, absolutely not.

Come on people. Believe in this country!

In any case, if you don't then consider:

The us has a lot of dollar denominated debt, it also has the gold market close to cornered, if gold rises as the dollar devalues, than the US balance sheet gets better and better, and ultimately nothing changes. (So if you got excess dollars you sure better let the US buy them back).

There is still a lot of undiscovered gold, it just happens to reside in some of the least explored regions of the globe. So there is a ceiling on gold, were just not quite there yet, partly because it has no productive value.

Geithner Is Wrong about China's 'Currency Manipulation'

Laoshi used to say "Pandas are funny bears, but gentle by nature."

And I do not mean for my comments to inflame your otherwise peaceful nature however, you are talking about potentials at least a couple decades down the line. For the time being, China is dependent on exports, and needs to continue depending on it's best trading partners. Or those potential you speak of will be significantly delayed, or even thwarted. Value chain migration does not happen over night, it is a decades long process.

One thing you mention that may be true, china's increasing Ph.ds and patents; i agree. Yet I find this odd; to cite increasing levels of intellectual capital in a country with such disrespect for intellectual capital protection and such a tendency for piracy. These tendencies are natural barriers to innovation, why come up with clever ideas, and why share them if they can't be protected from reckless "assimilation" without regard.

us is a country of scrappy entrepreneurs, innovators, and voracious consumers, and china is ill advised to criticize the very economies that have helped accelerate her growth.




On Jan 29 06:04 AM Panda@War wrote:

> China is a country with little innovation...?
>
> True and false. True is that China is not known for now as a good
> innovator compared to some most advanced economies in the world.
> False that you can not based your entire argument on this, because
> the fact is evolving, fast!
>
> Check out China's current position and trendline on world patent
> filing; or get a grip at her total scientific papers published;
> or just simple take a look on the PhD ( less in quality but improving
> fast) she produced on yearly basis. China is a country of arguablely
> the most innovations in history of mankind and she is coming back
> form a mismanagement of Mao's cultural revolution, which destroyed
> a whole generation of her innovation pool.
>
> This is a country that has many parts of the value chain in control.
> Yes, she needs cheap manufactoring jobs for her many millions of
> peasant. But she also wants to quit the "cheap habit" of thin-margin
> biz and is migrating to higher end of the value chain. The step
> needs to be taken sooner or later, this world recession provides
> a strong motivation. Thus she can afford to "bite one hand that feeds
> her", while grabing tighter the other hand which is "high tech import"for
> assimilation and improvement.
>
>
> On Jan 29 03:20 AM gdog wrote:

Treasuries Struggle Alongside Stocks

If the foreign banks go to gold, the effect will be the same. Euro currencies are in the same trouble as the dollar, and if the chinese don't want treasuries, than what? US equities? Gold? Guess whose got the gold market cornered, and the US gov't usually does everyone a favor by keeping the price in check.

But if us creditors stop believing in us credit worthiness, this implies extreme US asset appreciation. It's just paper after all.

Basically us asset to debt ratio increases as the dollar devalues if treasuries are rejected, it will just happen immediately as the world falls apart, instead of over a controlled period of time. Not a situation that anyone wants.




On Jan 25 04:45 AM dakyne wrote:

> There are other reasons why sovereigns find US Treasuries at these
> yields distasteful:
>
> 1) future threat of inflation over the next 30 years (risk profile
> at these levels are potentially catastrophic)
> 2) they already have too much exposure in the dollar in their reserves,
> which is being debased by monetary easing.
> 3) Because of deteriorating fundamentals of the dollar, the Chinese
> and the Saudis are diversifying their reserves into gold, which is
> a hedge against debased currencies (worldwide).
>
> Basically, there is growing distrust in the US government, and by
> extension, its monetary policies and the dollar. At some point,
> US Treasuries will no longer be viewed as havens in a flight to safety
> and quality.
>
> That's when the game will be over, as rising rates will render servicing
> of the national debt untenable. In other words, these trillion dollar
> bailouts won't be free lunches, and the burden will be placed on
> tax payers to fund, even though the American consumer is already
> tapped out. God help us all if the US Government loses its AAA rating--the
> UK is on the brink due to its teetering banking industry.
>
> On Jan 25 04:33 AM dakyne wrote:

Geithner Is Wrong about China's 'Currency Manipulation'

China's comments at davos, assailing the spending habits of the american consumer is a case of biting the hand that feeds them.

China needs the US consumer. This is a country with little innovation, and little inclination to spend, with huge reserves of us treasuries. They could choose not to take more, but to what end? Much higher interests rates that devalue their us treasury reserves, and cripples their exports? Yeah right.

Instead of buying their cheap goods with all this cheap printed money, we need to invest in this country, and they sure better finance it after we financed their manufacturing infrastructure. In fact they need to.

I guess some people just don't believe in this country.
On Jan 28 06:56 AM User 346013 wrote:

> Geithner is an old China hand. One must be mistaken in taking his
> PC argument as the face value. He knows what's going on.
>
> Beyond served well in getting his job, the remark is a calculated
> move to gain some virtual negotiating power. We all know without
> China's strong commitment, both Obama's urgent bailout/s and his
> financial reform would doom to failure. To negotiate with China,
> US has few chips left, namely, human rights, currency manipulator,
> military threat to the world, no religious freedom, T&amp;T (Taiwan
> &amp; Tibet). It's Obama's desperate attempt to pull one of these
> skeletons out of closet, in order to "secure" China's first round
> of commitement buying into the massive new govt debt issue.

Geithner Is Wrong about China's 'Currency Manipulation'

China slows rate of currency adjustment, huge trade imbalances ensue.

China re-invests money in us treasuries, rates are held low, everything must balance, simultaneously financing chinese manufacturing sectors.

Us awash in cheap financing, and poor regulatory control, (thank you very much) goes on spending spree, mostly on houses, but also on chinese goods furthering the cycle of imbalance. Crash and burn.

How is that not negative manipulation?

U.S. Mint Actions Discourage Gold Ownership

rising gold prices implies devaluation of the dollar.

gov't has lots of gold, and lot's of dollar denominated debt.

strong dollar means controlling price of gold.

Ten Micro Predictions for 2009

This guy's either getting serious tips (from sources in serious violation of SEC regulations), or he's a loud mouthed idiot trying to manipulate the market.

So which is it...

As cynical as I am, he's still more than likely an idiot.

Is It Time to Buy? What History Shows

Mark10r: I would say this true except that the gov't is artificially inflating treasury prices.

Is It Time to Buy? What History Shows

Sideways?

Maybe for some...

Govt allows banks to use toxic assets for loans to buy treasuries, pushes price of treasuries up, foreign govt's also want treasuries as their currencies tank. Interest rate goes to zero.

Gov't is flush with cash, goes on the biggest building spree since whatever year. Bridges, barracks, roads, bio tech, clean energy tech, stem cells, tunnels, levees for new orleans, schools, hospitals. Everything a caring government might build with oodles of free cash. If this creates any economic activity at all, it's a net gain for the gov't and everyone who invests.

Probably also a great time for small business sub contractors.

Allocate accordingly.


On Dec 09 06:52 AM The LFB wrote:

> I really don't know why you and everyone else who writes about this
> stuff doesn't see this:
>
> Put EPS on an S&amp;P chart. You will see that the sustained 2003-2007
> rally didn't begin until long after earnings had crashed and AFTER
> they begun to rise once again.
>
> And if you look at the EPS during the rally, you'll see it goes up.
>
>
> Of course there will be intermediate ups and downs-we're in a 18%
> upswing on the S&amp;P right now from the Nov. 21 low. But these
> are moves for traders, not investors.
>
> Stocks are probably more likely to move up and down like this without
> a sustained rally for several years because earnings still have further
> to fall.
>
> The ones who saw price declines coming and bought debt are way ahead
> of the game. Why? Because in the three months to October, headline
> CPI fell at a 4.4% annualized rate which means during that time they
> were earning maybe 8% annualized. And they got to sleep at night.
>
>