Long US stockS's Comments

Stress Test Leaks: Endgame Emerging

Tue, 05 May 2009 12:49:57 -0400

Fairy-tell???

On May 05 11:16 AM felixd wrote:

> I bet the guy that leaked was Rahm Emmanuel...He has a history of
> that in the past and is skilled in how to best push an agenda with
> a skillful and timely leak. By leaking all this yesterday , (just
> in front of the testimony of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke) the goal
> might well have been to put a little extra pressure on the fed chairman
> and make him feel a little extra heat from riled up (and largely
> uninformed) elected members on the Hill. My conspiracy theory holds
> that Ben might prove to be a thorn in the side of the Obama economic
> team sometime soon as he moves to limit Fed easing to curb future
> inflation. For Team Obama, a conciliatory Fed is crucial and it would
> be far better to put their own guy in there (read Larry Summers).
> To get that done, they need to question Ben's leadership and start
> eroding his credibiliyt. Hey just a theory!

Stress Test Leaks: Endgame Emerging

Tue, 05 May 2009 12:47:25 -0400

You are right. They are " Special Interests"- sort sellers- mostly lost credibilities by now!!

On May 04 07:01 PM mruyog wrote:

> One very important aspect of banks like Citi Bank is not brought
> up by many analysts and critics of the fed's attempt to correct the
> system is hundreds (perhaps a thosand or more) branch operations
> overseas such banks have and importance of those to the U.S. national
> interest. These branches provide a complex cobweb of interconnections
> of various aspects of our national interest. I do not think simple-minded
> analysts or critics or those with limited focus are capable of comprehending
> what Gethner (or Treasury) and Bernanke (or FDIC) have in their mind
> while developing the bank rescue plan. The issue of correcting the
> messed up system thus is extremely complex and those analysts and
> critics do not and can not have all the information Geithner and
> Bernanke has. I suggest that all wise readers of hundreds of half-hearted
> artcles and opinions expressed in the media keep this in mind.

Jones Soda: Sometimes Markets Stay Irrational Longer than You Can Stay Solvent

Mon, 04 May 2009 11:54:41 -0400

I agree-Excellent reading. I too lost lots of money- Reading "Fool's Prediction & Analysis!!!"

On May 04 10:17 AM Uruz1 wrote:

> Really excellent article.

Banks Object to Stress Test Delay

Mon, 04 May 2009 11:37:30 -0400

Do you want to loose more from "theoritical test" results associated remors /Analysis? I don't

On May 03 05:20 PM Alan Young wrote:

> "if equity investors lose 50% of their value...."
> Huh? First of all, equity investors have ALREADY lost 50% of their
> value--in some cases, 100%--last year, as the follies of bank managers
> came home to roost. Secondly, if the information revealed by the
> stress test is not useful to the market, it won't have a long-range
> effect on the valuation.
>
> "..., I smell lawsuit."
> You seem to have your ambulance-chasing hat on backwards. It's FAILURE
> to reveal significant adverse information that's actionable; revealing
> it against the wishes of management is, I hope, still legal.

Banks Object to Stress Test Delay

Mon, 04 May 2009 11:32:20 -0400

me too

On May 03 03:33 PM mruyog wrote:

> All this hoopla in the media about the stress test is just a smoke
> screen or some so-called pundits trying to make their living. Both
> Geitner and Bernenke (and include Paul Walker) have been telling
> everybody that the idea of the stress testing is just to make sure
> that the banks will be O.K. if the economy stays weaker for an extended
> period of time. If certain banks can't lend because their capital
> reserves are likley to be strained beyond required level, if the
> poor economy persists, the Fed needs to know how much help to be
> provided, if necessary. In any case, the government nether wants
> to take over the bank nor wants to the bank to go under but remain
> functional. In other words, the test is just a method agreed by both
> sides to assess the potential capital need, precisely to keep the
> institutions afloat, not to let those go under!! It's like a physician
> diognosing a patient's disease for determination of the medicine
> dosage he needs to recover his health and not to kill him!! I fail
> to see why so much noise and anxiety instead of faith and hope for
> the better!!

E*Trade's Mortgage Snafu: Will It Prompt a Sale?

Fri, 01 May 2009 00:01:11 -0400

Amen!!

On Apr 30 12:26 AM Hirendu Vaishnav wrote:

> There is a bit of fear-mongering in this article which is ignorant
> at the least and fradulent at the worst.
>
> Let us break down the $2.243B in delinquent loans:
> HELOC delinquencies $724M -- Current Provisions $818.6M
> 1-4Family delinquencies $1469M -- Current Provisions $308.8M
>
> HELOC delinquecies are down this quarter. Yet they are provisioned
> more than total delinquencies even assuming 100% loss on all delinquencies.
>
>
> 1-4 Familly loans; which are mostly 1st liens, usually have a much
> reduced loss rate depending on the LTV and recovery rates. Yet E*Trade
> is provisioned assuming at 21% loss on that. Delinquency rates on
> 1-4 Family is likely to come down in future, though charge-off will
> be at current level for one more quarter.
>
> So in my opinion, using $2.243B deliquencies without mentioning over-provisions
> and improving future delinquencies is dishonest.
>
> If anything, E*Trade seems to have finally put all loan problems
> behind and it seems it is suffering now from too much provisions
> intended to push the stock price lower so that private placement
> of equity offerings can be done at sweetheart of stock prices.

>
> In other words, a great company that will be taken over by unscrupulous
> means, aided and abetted by people like this author.

Most of 19 Banks Passed the Stress Test

Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:46:41 -0400

Dreamon The Blog NEWS & subscribers of WS

On Apr 28 09:18 AM jeandit75 wrote:

> dreamon The Good News Economist!

Most of 19 Banks Passed the Stress Test

Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:43:26 -0400

Amen!!

On Apr 28 09:12 AM Ishortyou wrote:

> well like it says its all speculation....no methodology on it.

Most of 19 Banks Passed the Stress Test

Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:42:05 -0400

will be "brutal" for Short covers", and good for the country.

On Apr 28 10:35 AM jeandit75 wrote:

> home prices keep on declining and they are tied to the banks bad
> loans. The market does not seem to care. Pigs can fly too apparently.
> What a crazy market! The drop will be brutal.

Most of 19 Banks Passed the Stress Test

Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:38:18 -0400

means BAC& C investors lost/ are losing monies on "Specuative" writtings and Talking heads

On Apr 28 09:00 AM User 196900 wrote:

> So today's news on Citi and BAC means nothing, right ????

Mr. Roubini, Please Take a Seat

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:38:03 -0400

My 401K is down 80% over the last 18 month's simply from following your predictions/ Remors ( e.g.How does he know value of the toxic waste?) ,and helping Shorters making lots of money at my expense.

On Apr 26 11:15 PM Terry Finn wrote:

> Thank you "Mr. Nouriel Roubini, Please Take a Seat" in the WINNER's
> CIRCLE. Thank you for not cooking your "NUMBERS" like all the Wall
> Street and Washington thieves. My 401K is up 30% over the last 18
> month's simply from following your predictions. You have been spot
> on. The consumer has quit spending and that is all one needs to know.
> Are those 600,000 folks losing there jobs each month going to be
> buying more. I don't think so. It is so simple, just look around.
> The fancy stores are empty. The upscale restaurants are empty. The
> jets are empty. We ain't seen nothing yet.

Mr. Roubini, Please Take a Seat

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:26:46 -0400

You mean-"Talking Heads"??

On Apr 27 12:26 PM ArtfulDodger wrote:

> Larrysyr:
>
> Sorry, I meant to write this, to complete the thought:
>
> But let's say that GNE cherry picks good news out of a mostly rotten
> barrel. Is that not what ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, NBC, PBS, and the rest
> do on the negative side? No good news ever from them!

Mr. Roubini, Please Take a Seat

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:24:53 -0400

You are right.- they fueled the remors & shorts. Now short coverers will pay the price,,,,

On Apr 27 01:09 PM Cetin Hakimoglu wrote:

> Markets surging yet again today, The higher the market rallies the
> more irrelevant Roubini and Krugman become to the public.

Mr. Roubini, Please Take a Seat

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:20:47 -0400

Good for you & shorters.

On Apr 26 02:08 PM Dave Wrixon wrote:

> Sorry, but I still have more inclination to listen to him that you.
> To quantify that a little much much much more!

Take That, Paulson: Finally, One for the Good Guys

Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:44:04 -0400

Would you to put predecessors in jail? -Who are making lots of monies writing books & lecture circuit

On Apr 24 12:58 PM ArkansasAngie wrote:

> I'm thinking Bernanke needs to resign.
>
> And Geithner had better start answering questions or we might just
> have to impeach the SH.

Take That, Paulson: Finally, One for the Good Guys

Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:39:14 -0400

They are Shorters.

On Apr 24 01:02 PM GENIE_US wrote:

> I HEARTILY AGREE THAT PAULSON IS A BUM. BUT WHAT IS THE "DAILY BAIL"
> IS THERE AN AUTHOR OF IS THIS COLUMN PRODUCED BY AN AUTOMATRON? IF
> YOU DON'T IDENTIFY WHO YOU ARE YOU ARE NOT CREDIBLE.

Take That, Paulson: Finally, One for the Good Guys

Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:36:57 -0400

Why the them ( the following). They tried or is trying to manage the crisis created by others before them!!!

On Apr 24 01:58 PM Jasper M wrote:

> Author expresses my feelings eXACtly.
> Bad times tend to be mean times, and I try extra hard to control
> those impulses these days. But things like this BoA atrocity remind
> me that at least Some of the bad feelings of bad times are fully
> justified.
> Indict Paulson. Impeach Bernanke. & Giethner, while we're at
> it.
> (If the chinese note we are cleaning house, might our intereset rates
> go Down??)

Take That, Paulson: Finally, One for the Good Guys

Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:33:04 -0400

Most of them (writers) losing lots of Money in short covering. Those who started the problems are safe heaven!!

On Apr 24 04:47 PM D. McHattie wrote:

> GENIE_US, you need to read a few more articles on seekingalpha to
> understand the format before you start complaining.
>
> Seekingalpha applies meritocratic principles. It doesn't matter what
> the author's name is or this/her background. Articles are evaluated
> on the basis of their merits. Try reading a few.

BofA Given Hush Money: Will Lewis Step Down?

Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:09:46 -0400

I say -move on

On Apr 23 09:55 AM Mark Bern wrote:

> Well, surprise, surprise! Keep this quiet until we tell you. We need
> to raise consumet confidence in the financial system before the economy
> can get better so what does our government do? They have hidden the
> truth because it might hurt.
>
> It's like having my wife ask me, "Does this dress make me look fat?"
> I know the required answer to that one. But this is different. When
> it concerns information that would affect investors' perspective
> and the free market system the only answer is always "the truth."
> That is why hiding the truth or lying to shareholders & the public
> is illegal. How do the laws change when the lying and hiding of information
> is done by the government?
>
> I believe such actions are classified as market manipulation. Have
> Bernanke, Geithner & Co. changed these laws? If not, who has
> been aware of the deceptions, who executed the deceptions, and who
> else was complicit within the government and the leadership of financial
> institutions? How many other deceptions have been perpetrated on
> the public? How many more are planned?
>
> I'm not calling for heads to roll. I just want to know the truth.
> Then we, the people, should be allowed to sort through the information
> and determine whether court actions are appropriate or even necessary.
> If attempts at market manipulation have actually occured, and if
> those attempts were specifically intended to manipulate through public
> deception or misinformation, then there should be no one who is above
> the law. If not, we just struggle through this mess and move on.

BofA Given Hush Money: Will Lewis Step Down?

Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:06:18 -0400

Amen

On Apr 23 09:57 AM Johnc222 wrote:

> Ken Lewis is a Hero...Not a Villian. he saved America from ruin,..yes
> his stock holders took a huge hit but America was saved.
> Lehman it'self almost took the country down can you imagine couple
> with a Merrill failure wha would have occured..?
>
> This is what happens when you play ball with the U.S. Government
> in the end they shove the Bat right up your...AZZ.

BofA Given Hush Money: Will Lewis Step Down?

Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:04:09 -0400

Certain types of Transparency in WS- fuel remors & help shorters make lots of money at the expense of common investors!!!

On Apr 23 10:19 AM VVH wrote:

> Transparency??? Right!!! Do not believe eveything our government
> tells us! Lewis was asked to step into the fire at a time when the
> financial world was burning--and, he did. For his actions, he was
> offered protection for BofA against Merrill losses. In the long run
> shareholders (me included) as well as, the Financial Markets and
> Main Street, will benefit from this acquisition because it prevented
> further hemorrhaging and panic during one of the most chaotic times
> in our financial history. So, wise up and let Mr. Lewis finish the
> task of putting Bank of America on the right path again. We need
> intelligent CEO's behind our largest companies to manuever thru these
> turbulent waters---and, Ken Lewis fits that mold.

BofA Given Hush Money: Will Lewis Step Down?

Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:58:16 -0400

Read yourself & do not bring your agenda here.

On Apr 23 11:49 AM dcb wrote:

> The Ken Lewis supporters are clearly getting paid to put stuff on
> blogs as part of the government disinformation campaign that has
> been going on. Ken Lewis deserves hard core jail time.
> 1) He stated they didn't need to see Merills books because htye already
> knew the assets
> 2) he then sent his flunk (I forget his name) over to Merrill to
> value those assets
> 3) the merrill guy resigned instead of agreeing to the site down
> of the assets, and the BofA guy signed off on them
> 4)Using these newly lowered values he created he went to the government
> and said he was thinking about getting out of the deal because of
> the lowered balance sheet he created
> 5) he essentially blackmailed the gov't into giving another 20 billion
> 6) then on the new financial reports Merrill is the part of the company
> that is making money
>
> This report once again proves the disinformation campaign going on
> by our government
>
> Let us not forget that he also lied about the bonus, and in fact
> he was aware. The bonus was hush money. I will bet a large amount
> of that went to the group that valued those lowered value toxic assets.
>
>
> The same hush money went to AIG keep quiet while we pay off GS in
> full.
>
> These same powers would like you to believe that without them our
> system will collapse. In fact the exact opposite is true. In order
> to make excessive profit their business model depends on excess credit.
> excess credit destabilizes the system. it does not make it stronger.
>
>
> This is one example of the concerted power grab by wall street that
> is happening. It is being done in stealth, and will lead us to ruin
> not health.
> If you don't believe me read what a former head of IMF has to say.
>
> www.theatlantic.com/do...

BofA Given Hush Money: Will Lewis Step Down?

Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:54:42 -0400

Would have been ? Hindside anaysis of a Crisis ( fueled by rumers/Shorters)

On Apr 23 11:25 AM HBWOW wrote:

> Lewis states that he was told to keep quiet but did this also mean
> that he would be so stupid as to also allow the Twain bonuses and
> simply act like a empty headed top management figurehead. The deal
> he made for Merrill was not in the best interests of B of A nor its
> stockholders. It should have been a bargain basement transaction
> based on Merrill real condition and the "surprise" bonuses.

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

Tue, 21 Apr 2009 13:42:13 -0400

I agree, do not blame blogs include those "Talking heads" @ CNBC etc.

On Apr 21 08:35 AM herbert hoover wrote:

> Where the hell have you been? This market has been driven by rumor,
> lies and innuendo for the last two years!

Banking Industry Watch: Quick Move from Bust to Boom

Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:33:29 -0400

Is not "Market " knows better than analysts???. No oneone (other than bnks) sure what Banks' real value -(assests) ....

On Apr 19 01:04 AM schlumpf wrote:

> Good article. But the market see it different, in the moment.

Why BAC Will Beat: Understanding a New Bull Market Is Not Underway

Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:07:01 -0400

No, your Not speaking for yourself. I had same problem with writting & B.words.

On Apr 19 10:52 PM lawboyd wrote:

> Mr. Kim, I say this with no animosity to you whatsoever as I have
> never met you. But, in fairness I went to your various sites just
> to get a 'sense' of you and what you are ultimately selling.
>
> Absolutely no problem with a guy trying to make a living, and if
> you can get people to give you thousands of bucks a year for your
> investment 'insight', 'perspective', 'picks', 'bs' - anyone will
> do and point to the same thing - more power to you.
>
> The actual writing on the sites is horrendous. You really shouldn't
> have an "In conclusion" beginning to 2 consecutive paragraphs and
> the cliches and standard 'buzzwords' are infinite and somewhat puke
> inducing after just one reading.
>
> Again, nothing personal and maybe that 'bad infomercial' style of
> writing works in this arena. But, and I'm only speaking for myself
> (who else could I speak for), good writing at least gets my attention;
> horrendous writing loses me forever.

Why BAC Will Beat: Understanding a New Bull Market Is Not Underway

Sun, 19 Apr 2009 23:44:09 -0400

yes

On Apr 19 09:20 AM nmau wrote:

> Seems like a lot of chatter from desperate shorts or those that have
> missed the rally and are kicking themselves.

Pfizer's New Structure: Has The Company Learned From Past Merger Mistakes?

Mon, 13 Apr 2009 20:54:50 -0400

You are Right...

On Apr 10 01:55 AM EGGBEATER wrote:

> WE DON'T KNOW FOR SURE AS YET IF THE PFIZER/WYETH MERGER WILL TURN
> OUT TO BE A SUCCESS OR A FAILURE. IT'S TOO EARLY TO TELL.-
> PFIZER'S ACQUISITION OF WARNER-LAMBERT BECAME A SUCCESS THANKS TO
> THE W-L BLOCKBUSTER DRUG LIPITOR, WITH SALES OF $ 12+ BILLION LAST
> YEAR.-
> PFIZER'S ACQUISITION OF PHARMACIA BECAME SOUR DUE TO THE SUBSEQUENT
> FAILURE OF PHARMACIA'S 2 BLOCKBUSTER DRUGS CELEBREX AND BEXTRA THAT
> HAD TO BE, OR WILL BE, DISCONTINUED.-
>
> A PHARMA COMPANY WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE TO DOWNSIZE (OR PERHAPS EVEN
> DISAPPEAR) IF: 1) IT HAS NO SIGNIFICANT/PROMISING NEW COMPOUNDS IN
> ITS R&D PIPELINE, AND, 2) ITS BESTSELLING PRODUCTS GO OFF PATENT
> PROTECTION, WHICH IMMEDIATELY BRINGS IN THE GENERIC WOLVES WHO HAVE
> BEEN WAITING TO FLOOD THE MARKET WITH SIMILAR PRODUCTS AT A FRACTION
> OF THE ORIGINAL PRICE.
> CAVEAT: GENERICS NOT ALWAYS PROVIDE THE SAME STANDARD QUALITY AS
> THE ORIGINALLY PATENTED PRODUCT.

Pfizer's New Structure: Has The Company Learned From Past Merger Mistakes?

Mon, 13 Apr 2009 20:52:42 -0400

I agree. Last 5 yrs this type of analysis -"May or may not"- has been meaningless.....

On Apr 09 11:09 PM a. palmer jr. wrote:

> I hope this new structure will translate into higher stock prices
> for PFE so that eventually I can sell.

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

Fri, 10 Apr 2009 15:46:27 -0400

Write your Congress person, I do

On Apr 10 02:15 PM slipperyrazor wrote:

> I would really like to see the method by which banks say that raising
> the rates on people carrying a balance on their credit cards,which
> the banks say is only 10%,is computed. Of all the banks that are
> using this scam, BANK OF AMERICA is the one that concerns me the
> most. As a receipient of TARP,imho they have blatantly abused the
> peoples largess every way conceivable. They amplify the word GREED!