mountain view

It's All About Gold

Mr. Butte:

It is painful to read your letters, because of the spelling, grammatical, and punctuation errors. If you really are writing an investment newsletter, consider allocating some capital to a proofreader.


On Dec 02 04:06 PM bobbybutte wrote:

> Hi as aperson who has become fianncially independent SOLELY from
> iallocating capital and now writes an investment newsletter let me
> add a few things
>
> Fact is many banks and big tech names liek apple have done better
> than gold in the past year
>
> Copper did better than gold
>
> Im not bearish gold just saying ALL asset classes went up this year
>
>
> Good large cap multinationals will do great at these levels and provide
> income safety and growth

It's All About Gold

Mr. Butte:

Nice work allocating capital (a line you borrowed from Buffett). Now please allocate some time to checking your spelling. In fact, there looks to be a spell-checker available above the box in which I am composing this letter.


On Dec 02 04:06 PM bobbybutte wrote:

> Hi as aperson who has become fianncially independent SOLELY from
> iallocating capital and now writes an investment newsletter let me
> add a few things
>
> Fact is many banks and big tech names liek apple have done better
> than gold in the past year
>
> Copper did better than gold
>
> Im not bearish gold just saying ALL asset classes went up this year
>
>
> Good large cap multinationals will do great at these levels and provide
> income safety and growth

Financials: Missing the Rally and Warning for the Future

Mr. Butte:

Perhaps you could invest some of your wealth in a spell-checker application or a dictionary.


On Nov 18 11:03 AM bobbybutte wrote:

> as a person who has become fianncially independent SOLELY by allocating
> capital let me add a few things
>
> Guys liek Paulson and Buffett who are much smarter than any of us
> say this is a great times for banks
>
> Yes theres writedowns that are offsetting all the money they make
> but at some point that will stop
>
> Todays new home starts and the increasing pouulation will see to
> that

Are Oil and Natural Gas Cheap or Expensive?

The word you are looking for is "glean."


On Nov 06 08:11 AM apppro wrote:

> So is it expensive or cheap? I really can't gleem your answer.<br/>
>
> What I do read into it is that if NG is SO expensive to process,
> not as clean and plentiful as thought, and SO hard to get to, then
> why the heck is it trading SO cheap?

Are Risk Assets on the Verge of Melting Up?

The Larry Bird head fake line closed your insightful article with style -- more style than most professional writers can muster. I guess you know your hoops, as well as your charts, and how to turn a phrase, making you a "triple threat."

Why GM Is Ready for a Rebound

Mextex:

My dear old dad drove a Chevy Nova from date of purchase in '77 until 1999, and through Quebec and Maine winters at that. He was living in a waterfront four-bedroom house, but that car and patched jeans were plenty good for him.

Only the pleading of his mechanic convinced him to let the old girl go. I often think of the Nova as one of the last durable American cars.

He went out and bought a Toyota Camry (a six-month old fleet car in order to save a few grand) and it has been FLAWLESS.

Your common-sense approach to choosing your next car seems a bygone way. I did the same when buying a Ford Ranger. It was cheaper than ALL of the other pick-ups and nearly as reliable as the best of the Japanese, which were as much as 30% more expensive. The GM and Dodge options were over-priced and had spotty reliability. The Ranger was a no-brainer.

It amazes me how some folks CLING to a brand-name, when it defies logic.

I applaud your thinking. By the way, I'd go Japanese in a minute if the price was right.


On Jul 10 05:37 PM mextex wrote:

> I have often wanted to purchase an American made car, however, each
> time I go to Consumer's Reports and look up reliability and quality
> the American made cars fall far short of the Japanese. Since I drive
> my cars for years and don't trade often I expect low maintenance
> costs and little to no problems, especially since I am retired and
> on fixed income.
> Next time that I replace my current car, I will again go to Consumer's
> Report and check on quality and reliability and repair frequency
> over a long time as a basis to judge if it's time to purchase that
> American made car.

What (or When) Is Up with Natural Gas

Mr. LOL:

"It's like saying Big Macs and carrots should trade at caloric parity." That is the wittiest line I have read in the comments section on "Seeking Alpha" since I started reading this site two years ago.


On Jul 09 02:09 PM LOLcapitalist, CFA wrote:

> It never ceases to amaze me the extent to which the WTI/NG ratio
> myth is ingrained in the minds of so many traders. Let me be perfectly
> clear: the prices for North American Natural Gas and Crude Oil in
> North American have absolutely nothing do do with one another except
> to the extent that they are both driven (to some extent but far from
> exclusively) by GDP growth expectations. Here are two significant
> reasons:
>
> 1) They are not marginal substitutes for each other so the $/MMBTU
> argument is meaningless. Can anyone name a major consuming sector
> for oil that can easily switch to NG? It's like saying Big Macs
> and carrots should trade at caloric parity.
>
> 2) Oil is priced globally, gas is still largely local. If you pull
> oil out of the ground in Louisiana you could sell it in the UK if
> the transportation economics made sense. That just not possible for
> natural gas. North American Natural Gas is stored and consumed in
> North America. LNG is still a one-way supply line into, but not out
> of, North America.
>
> For a statistical analysis of the WTI/NG relationship, see my instablog.
> We really need to stop obsessing about this non-existent relationship.

62% Is the Magic Number

BPYHO:

You cracked me up with your closing line. It may really be that simple ( "Oh sh!t, half the people I know are unemployed and this country is going bankrupt....")


On Jul 09 10:21 PM BPYHO wrote:

> I disagree, I think most companies set the bar so low that 70+% of
> them will beat estimates. I definitely think that there will be a
> 2nd crash but not before we have a little 10% earnings rally. THe
> crash will be in Aug/Sep when people realize oh sh!t, half the people
> I know are unemployed and this country is going bankrupt....

Thursday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

Mr. Ferguson:

Your spelling is so "challenged," that it distracts from what you are trying to say. Pick up a dictionary, use a spell-check feature, or send your stuff to a friend for review before publishing.


On Jul 09 09:13 AM robert.b.ferguson wrote:

> There is no consensus among rational scientists on this issue. The
> notion that industrial activity is driving the warming cycle is rediculous.
> In case you didn't notice the glaciers began melting before the industrial
> revolution ending the last (not the first) ice age. Add to that the
> fact that every volcanic eruption of MT. ST. Hellens magnitude or
> greater puts more pollutants and green house gas into the atmousphere
> than our species has in it's entire history and the picture is much
> different. Even if we could stop global warming it probably wouldn't
> be a good idea. Glaciation recharges aquafers in the northern hemisphere.
> That would be like keeping hurricanes from hitting the North American
> coast, you wouldn't sustain storm damage but you would cause massive
> drought. Lets not inject wierd science into this.

Why the Bear Market Bottom Is Not Yet In

Spartacus(s):

"Untrusting" has you pinned on health care. Why don't you back up your rhetoric with some numbers and explain to "Untrusting" why the U.S. needs to keep its current (disastrous) health care system? While you are at it, please explain why so many other nations are able to provide complete medical coverage at a reasonable cost to their citizens, but the "greatest nation in the world" cannot. We are waiting.


On Jul 05 03:53 PM Spartacuss wrote:

> Your post was interesting in that it highlights that something is
> certainly rotten in Denmark as the saying goes.
>
> What I am not seeing from you guys is a little treatment on the toxicicity
> issue. All those trillions of derivative highly leveraged products
> that are coming off the table. The last I heard, and who knows what
> to beleive is that the face value of this stuff is north of 600 trillion.
> Well, as this stuff at the minimum deleverages we are talkiing a
> huge sump hole of monster proportions eating up dollars.
>
> Despite the bailouts, i.e., not enough money created to keep the
> dike from leaking, the main basis for dollar strength and deflation
> lies right there, YET, non of you guys talk about this. Also not
> talked about is the impact of effectively 'nationalizing' industries
> and the impact on the economy of such new government boondoggles
> such as cap and trade on the economy.
>
> It seems to me in all my reads on the internet that the mantra is
> to study the market and nothing else. ELSE has a huge impact on where
> we are going, so get off the damn technicals and market talk and
> begin to look at the peripheral items such as our crazy leftist
> government who thinks that only the public sector can solve our problems
> by prolificate spending on boondogles like this damnable Obamanistic
> governmet health care thing which may cost as much as three trillion.
> Just where do these morons think this money is coming from?

Positioning for When Water Runs Out: Part I

One Eye:

Try opening it. Fran is warning us that the Federal Government can remove a citizen's rights if it so chooses, be it your right as a shareholder or as a consumer of water.


On Jun 25 10:28 PM one eye wrote:

> Fran: What inspired you to include a comment which has no bearing
> whatsoever to the discussion?
>
> Bankruptcy? who is going to go Bankrupt: A Lake, a River, the Water
> Table?

California's Default Is Certain

Spartacus:

I agree that politicians care more about power than the nation. But what is with pinning the demise of capitalism on the Democrats? What party began the massive bail out of Wall Street, the automakers, the insurance industry, etc., thereby setting you and your children up for higher taxes? Partisanship is clouding your vision.

Why can't the U.S. afford socialized medicine when every other civilized nation in the world can? Again, your right-wing goggles are not letting you see. Try looking north to Canada. We get more than adequate care and are not getting it up the *** from private health insurance companies who, along with the drug multinationals, call the shots on American healthcare by holding sway over the self-interested politicians you note in your last paragraph. The U.S cannot afford the system it has NOW.

The Canadian government is not panicking trying to re-make the health care system, BECAUSE IT WORKS. I pay $54 a month for my coverage. Beat that. And go ahead. Call us socialists. We don't lose our homes over medical emergencies up here.

And, letter-writers and author: what you "sow" becomes "sown," not "sewn." And to the guy who wants to tear away the social safety net from people who did not graduate from high school: you would penalize thousands of kids who grew up so disadvantaged that they were not TAUGHT the value of education and thus dropped out. Most kids who drop out are not just "plumb lazy," and if they are, the blame may well rest with their parents.


On Jun 28 10:59 AM sparticus on stocks wrote:

> Jeff, you're a funny man. I'm just going to pick through your column
> and comment along the way.
>
> You're correct in saying the state doens't have the will to make
> $24 billion in cuts. But you don't say why. The reason is that
> the democratic controlled legislature is obligated to the unions
> that put them in power. They won't cut anything union related (we
> taxpayers will have to do the dirty work there and force the changes)
> and have made no meaningful cuts to anything.
>
> But to call Republicans obstructionists is nuts. Citizens of California
> are taxed well beyond any other state. And, if they could, politicians
> would levy another mountain of taxes that would drive even more taxpayers
> and business owners out of the state. The Republicans (though they
> did conspire to implement the largest tax increase in history back
> in February) are the only defense the citizens have against a legislature
> hell bent on destroying the tax base in this state. There are only
> so many rich persons in this state (even fewer as the economy lags
> and the stock market fluctuates). Before any tax increase is considered,
> massive cuts need to be made to show that the legislature is serious
> about correcting the structural defects in California's government.
> For now, we must stop feeding the beast to force cuts in unnecessary
> spending and pare back the size and scope of California's government.
>
>
> Quoting CNN is like me asking my liberal neighbor his opinion....
> not worth energy.
>
> Any federal bailout of California is meerly a temporary band aid
> that would mask the underlying problem. Once the money is spent,
> you're in a worse spot because you don't have any money and no one
> is going to lend you any money.
>
> And, exactly what level of military spending do you recommend? I
> get the feeling that your military stategy is "can't we all just
> get along" rather than peace through strength.
>
> Finally, the Soviet's engineering of their extinction must have been
> a bitter disappointment to you. I think the Soviet's today are more
> capitalistic than our democratic politicians here are. Our media
> resembles Tass of the pre-1990 era. Our media is suppose to report
> on activities of government, not cheerlead and befriend them. <br/>
>
> Most political leaders are only concerned about power and could care
> less about the future of this country. We can't afford amnesty,
> cap and trade, socialized health care, and running the auto industry.
> I see a train wreck coming with little to stop it.

Thursday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

The summation index, I assure you, has nothing to do with "breath."


On Jun 18 09:19 AM User 387628 wrote:

> What is the summation index? Volume or breath?

Investing for Inflation, Part II

Magoo:

I may only be a humble carpenter (and a one-time grammar teacher), but Middleton's writing is plenty clear. Oh, he might miss a comma or an article, or an "s" here or there, but on balance he gets his point across quite well. More important, he nailed the collapse (or share-price implosion) of more than one financial or real estate giant, encouraging followers to short, when the likes of Dick Bove were writing the epitaph of the financial crisis, and others were pasting "buy" signs on stocks that would plummet in the fall of "08.

Read Reg's website, and you might appreciate his intelligence, versus trumping up a charge of poor writing.

Mountain Man


On Jun 16 07:55 PM jjmagoo wrote:

> I find this writer's lack of familiarity with the English language
> a monumental barrier to understanding what the hell he is talking
> about.

Extending Medicare: Medical and National Suicide

ThirtyNineWinks:

My God, do you think we live in igloos too? Injured skiers, hikers, etc. are evacuated BY HELICOPTER daily in Canada to well-equipped medical facilities. Concussions turning rapidly for the worse is unfortunately very common. It IS possible that woman was first taken to a local hospital that did not have a CT Scanner. If that is the case, I am sure there are such hospitals in the U.S. You have people dying because they cannot AFFORD coverage. We don't.


On May 15 11:29 AM ThirtyNineWinks wrote:

>