captmike's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/237251/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/161475-cramer-s-stop-trading-cheer-up-obama-9-14-09?source=feed#comment-677793 677793 Tue, 15 Sep 2009 13:24:31 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/123072-let-bernanke-do-the-talking?source=feed#comment-407414 407414 Sat, 28 Feb 2009 23:24:26 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/18864?source=feed#comment-407366 407366
If only I could get such a lousy deal.]]> Sat, 28 Feb 2009 21:19:56 -0500
If only I could get such a lousy deal.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122470-is-a-car-produced-in-alabama-really-an-import?source=feed#comment-402496 402496 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 06:43:26 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/121885-who-wants-to-buy-an-ailing-car-company?source=feed#comment-398975 398975 Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:17:55 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/119697-kuwait-s-desperate-attempt-to-save-its-reputation?source=feed#comment-383259 383259

On Feb 10 10:22 PM Ricard wrote:

> I guess I am lucky...I only began to notice DOW a couple of weeks
> ago.
>
> Sold 7.50 2-year LEAPs for a 30% return. I don't see DOW selling
> for below 5.00, even with Liveris on the board - that would be a
> 90% drop from 5-year average levels. Even if it does, more than likely
> it will pull out of that situation within two years. It's still a
> great company, even without the dividend (if it gets pulled).]]> Tue, 10 Feb 2009 22:39:08 -0500

On Feb 10 10:22 PM Ricard wrote:

> I guess I am lucky...I only began to notice DOW a couple of weeks
> ago.
>
> Sold 7.50 2-year LEAPs for a 30% return. I don't see DOW selling
> for below 5.00, even with Liveris on the board - that would be a
> 90% drop from 5-year average levels. Even if it does, more than likely
> it will pull out of that situation within two years. It's still a
> great company, even without the dividend (if it gets pulled).]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/119291-stage-being-set-for-hyperinflation?source=feed#comment-381545 381545 Mon, 09 Feb 2009 16:40:38 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/117580-sell-altria-during-market-hours?source=feed#comment-371246 371246 Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:05:45 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/117597-after-some-stumbles-pfizer-is-now-being-very-smart?source=feed#comment-370759 370759
I'm long Pfizer too, but I'm not optimistic that all the negatives associated with this deal are actually positives in disguise.

As for committing your entire balance sheet to a mega-aquisition in this economic climate, dividend or ratings be damned, just look to Dow to find out if that's a good idea.

]]> Fri, 30 Jan 2009 06:29:35 -0500
I'm long Pfizer too, but I'm not optimistic that all the negatives associated with this deal are actually positives in disguise.

As for committing your entire balance sheet to a mega-aquisition in this economic climate, dividend or ratings be damned, just look to Dow to find out if that's a good idea.

]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/113017-a-small-cap-alternative-to-leveraged-etfs?source=feed#comment-345264 345264
Don't forget that these funds pay distributions over the course of the year, diluting capital and hitting the owner with a potential tax liability as well.

When investing, it really helps to understand exactly what you're investing in.]]> Sun, 04 Jan 2009 09:55:10 -0500
Don't forget that these funds pay distributions over the course of the year, diluting capital and hitting the owner with a potential tax liability as well.

When investing, it really helps to understand exactly what you're investing in.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105004-yes-we-can-as-long-as-we-re-prepared?source=feed#comment-301641 301641 Mon, 10 Nov 2008 06:31:06 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/101922-5-reasons-to-ignore-buffett?source=feed#comment-290863 290863
One of the previous posters said Buffet had a terrible track record since 2001. Well he called the Chinese market correctly (following Buffet in and out of PTR made me a tidy sum), he called the Euro correctly (not following him in and out was a missed opportunity for me), people claiming having cash in 3 month treasuries cost him 50% should be discounted immediately, and he nailed it on derivatives (which is the BIG one).

Here's what he said in a letter to BRK shareholders:

"...Large amounts of risk, particularly credit risk, have become concentrated in the hands of relatively few derivatives dealers, who in addition trade extensively with one another. The troubles of one could quickly infect the others. On top of that, these dealers are owed huge amounts by nondealer counterparties. Some of these counterparties, as I've mentioned, are linked in ways that could cause them to contemporaneously run into a problem because of a single event (such as the implosion of the telecom industry or the precipitous decline in the value of merchant power projects). Linkage, when it suddenly surfaces, can trigger serious systemic problems."

Mind you, he said this in 2003, not a couple of months ago. He received countless grief for this, and was even accused of being a hypocrite because he had used derivatives to his advantage previously. Well he's still fabulously wealthy and for many who were also wealthy at the time, but didn't heed his warning, they are no longer wealthy.

If Buffet says now is the time to start investing in certain US equities, you might want to pay attention. His record speaks for itself. He didn't amase in is lifetime an amount of wealth comparable to a "second tier economy" because he's misguided, a BS artist, or just plain lucky, so I'd suggest you leave the Buffet bashing to the less informed.


]]> Sun, 26 Oct 2008 13:06:50 -0400
One of the previous posters said Buffet had a terrible track record since 2001. Well he called the Chinese market correctly (following Buffet in and out of PTR made me a tidy sum), he called the Euro correctly (not following him in and out was a missed opportunity for me), people claiming having cash in 3 month treasuries cost him 50% should be discounted immediately, and he nailed it on derivatives (which is the BIG one).

Here's what he said in a letter to BRK shareholders:

"...Large amounts of risk, particularly credit risk, have become concentrated in the hands of relatively few derivatives dealers, who in addition trade extensively with one another. The troubles of one could quickly infect the others. On top of that, these dealers are owed huge amounts by nondealer counterparties. Some of these counterparties, as I've mentioned, are linked in ways that could cause them to contemporaneously run into a problem because of a single event (such as the implosion of the telecom industry or the precipitous decline in the value of merchant power projects). Linkage, when it suddenly surfaces, can trigger serious systemic problems."

Mind you, he said this in 2003, not a couple of months ago. He received countless grief for this, and was even accused of being a hypocrite because he had used derivatives to his advantage previously. Well he's still fabulously wealthy and for many who were also wealthy at the time, but didn't heed his warning, they are no longer wealthy.

If Buffet says now is the time to start investing in certain US equities, you might want to pay attention. His record speaks for itself. He didn't amase in is lifetime an amount of wealth comparable to a "second tier economy" because he's misguided, a BS artist, or just plain lucky, so I'd suggest you leave the Buffet bashing to the less informed.


]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/101383-why-gold-will-rocket?source=feed#comment-288438 288438 Thu, 23 Oct 2008 06:54:26 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/100442-sirf-undervalued-or-value-trap?source=feed#comment-284332 284332 Fri, 17 Oct 2008 08:09:49 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/99944-closed-end-funds-understand-what-you-re-buying?source=feed#comment-282748 282748 Wed, 15 Oct 2008 08:28:36 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/99628-failed-short-sales-exacerbate-foreclosure-losses-for-all-housing-tracker?source=feed#comment-281157 281157
The purchase price on the house was $406,000 in 2003. In the not too distant past, that would have meant that Mr Capiro (ex- boat salesman and now motorcycle salesman) and Mrs. Capiro (no job) would have been required to put up $81,200 as a down payment. They would then get a mortgage for the difference, which is $324,800, as long as Mr. Capiro could prove that his income and job history, plus assets vs. debts, qualified them for the mortgage. In this scenario, even though the market had tanked, all they would stand to lose is $6,000 of their down payment, plus commission to the realtor (unless they sold the house themselves) of $12,000 to $24,000 because they've decided to move. No one likes to lose money, but they would have only lost a maximum of $30,000, and likely less and besides, they're the ones deciding to move.

That was in the good old days.

Instead, the Capiros' have a mortgage for $440,000, which is undoubtedly much more now because they are behind on payments! How could this be. Well they paid off credit card and other debt and went in with negative equity in a house that they couldn't afford the payments on in the first place. Now Mr. Capiro has tired of his commute (long but not unheard of) and decides he'd like to move. Surprise, because they had negative equity in the house from the start and are now even deeper because of missed payments, they can't sell the house for what they owe. So like any normal American with an over-sized expectation of entitlement, they expect the bank's shareholders (or at least the taxpayer) to bail them out because it might affect their credit worthiness otherwise!

They should be forced to file for bankruptcy and I'm starting to think that doing away with debtors prisons may have been a bad idea.]]> Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:04:44 -0400
The purchase price on the house was $406,000 in 2003. In the not too distant past, that would have meant that Mr Capiro (ex- boat salesman and now motorcycle salesman) and Mrs. Capiro (no job) would have been required to put up $81,200 as a down payment. They would then get a mortgage for the difference, which is $324,800, as long as Mr. Capiro could prove that his income and job history, plus assets vs. debts, qualified them for the mortgage. In this scenario, even though the market had tanked, all they would stand to lose is $6,000 of their down payment, plus commission to the realtor (unless they sold the house themselves) of $12,000 to $24,000 because they've decided to move. No one likes to lose money, but they would have only lost a maximum of $30,000, and likely less and besides, they're the ones deciding to move.

That was in the good old days.

Instead, the Capiros' have a mortgage for $440,000, which is undoubtedly much more now because they are behind on payments! How could this be. Well they paid off credit card and other debt and went in with negative equity in a house that they couldn't afford the payments on in the first place. Now Mr. Capiro has tired of his commute (long but not unheard of) and decides he'd like to move. Surprise, because they had negative equity in the house from the start and are now even deeper because of missed payments, they can't sell the house for what they owe. So like any normal American with an over-sized expectation of entitlement, they expect the bank's shareholders (or at least the taxpayer) to bail them out because it might affect their credit worthiness otherwise!

They should be forced to file for bankruptcy and I'm starting to think that doing away with debtors prisons may have been a bad idea.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/98706-the-cramer-crash?source=feed#comment-275496 275496 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 08:08:01 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/88737-exxon-mobile-do-record-breaking-earnings-guarantee-higher-stock-prices?source=feed#comment-221383 221383 Sun, 03 Aug 2008 08:42:44 -0400