Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
  • It's Time To Buy The Oil Panic Of 2014  [View article]
    Thanks John, I agree with your sentiment and I actually entered into a quarter position of UCO @ 12.10 last week, and I also plan to add as it drops. I guess what I'm trying to get at - and this is a serious question not a criticism - is whether or not trading the oil/gold pair would reduce the risk and/or increase the potential return of the trade since you are using the relative value of oil to gold as your metric. I.e. if you take a look back 1 year from now, will long UCO be more profitable than a long UCO/short GLD pair?
    Dec 18, 2014. 11:32 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • It's Time To Buy The Oil Panic Of 2014  [View article]
    If you think the oil/gold ratio will normalize then you would buy oil and short gold until it returns to 14.83 correct? If you just buy the numerator then you risk the ratio normalizing by gold getting cheaper which invalidates the directive.
    Dec 17, 2014. 03:27 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Wall Street Breakfast: Treasury Tightens Rules To Fight Tax Inversions  [View article]
    Enough people with a brain voted with their feet back in 2009 to send the company into bankruptcy, but this crooked administration bailed them out, resulting in countless deaths. Seems like "voting with your feet" isn't enough when sound law and judgement is replaced by crony politics.
    Sep 23, 2014. 08:51 AM | 11 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Zions Bancorp only one of 30 not to pass Fed stress test  [View news story]
    and to think I was worried... buy buy buy!
    Mar 20, 2014. 05:04 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • DGAZ - What Is Next For Natural Gas And DGAZ?  [View instapost]
    Thanks for the response. I'm enjoying the articles.
    Feb 20, 2014. 11:41 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • DGAZ - What Is Next For Natural Gas And DGAZ?  [View instapost]
    Thanks... I do appreciate the analysis. While I agree that the March contract is "substantially relevant" to what DGAZ does, isn't the April contract completely relevant, i.e. wouldn't it be more informative to dissect the April chart? For example, the March contract could spike 30% to $8 but the April contract might not make much of a move, at all... which means the correlation between DGAZ and the spot price of NG is rapidly deteriorating as the last March trade day approaches on Feb 26th. Am I incorrect in my assumption?
    Feb 20, 2014. 11:11 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • DGAZ - What Is Next For Natural Gas And DGAZ?  [View instapost]
    Feb 19, 2014. 06:55 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • DGAZ - What Is Next For Natural Gas And DGAZ?  [View instapost]
    $DGAZ is tracking April NG futures which are currently at $4.87. The March contract is irrelevant to this ETF.
    Feb 19, 2014. 06:53 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Discover to enter student loan refi market  [View news story]
    "for borrowers, there's not a ton of incentive to refinance. Private loans typically have rates higher than government ones and have fewer consumer protections."

    Not true if you refinance through Sofi or another crowd sourced lender. I refinanced and saved 200 bps. You know why? I am no longer subsidizing people that have their loans discharged because of "public service" or they make under a certain threshold of income. If the government lenders want to dole out charity, fine, but I'm not paying for it.
    Feb 3, 2014. 03:19 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Individual Bullish Sentiment Back Above 50%  [View article]
    "As shown below in the chart of the AAII reading going back to 1987, sentiment has been above the 50% mark many times in the past."

    Yes, but the Bulls-Bears spread is at an ALL-TIME high at close to 45%

    Might be helpful to include this stat next time you report on sentiment.
    Dec 26, 2013. 05:37 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Zero Hedge Is Wrong About Gold  [View article]
    Mines whose marginal cost of production is above the price of gold will shut down only leaving low cost producers (basic economic theory).

    The question is whether or not the price of gold is affected significantly by the supply, i.e. will the price be affected by these high cost producers being shut down. Last I checked the supply of gold only increases by 1-2% each year, so tiny fluctuations in this production has a small affect on overall world supply, especially because gold is not "consumed". I would expect only overall demand and expectations for the strength in the dollar to affect the price, and the effect of shuttered mines to be minimal. Or am I way off base?
    Dec 19, 2013. 07:43 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Zero Hedge Is Wrong About Gold  [View article]
    @WMARKW - good point. Although he has mentioned numerous times that gold "is not money" and is a "barbarous relic" which to me implies that he doesn't think gold is a prudent investment.

    He has also said he (or any other economist) doesn't know why long term rates are rising - that and his other brilliant calls (there is no housing bubble) will come back to haunt us in a few years, I fear.
    Dec 19, 2013. 07:31 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Zero Hedge Is Wrong About Gold  [View article]
    Teller, gold has collapsed because monetary velocity is at 60-year lows. QE4EVA does not translate into inflation when consumers and businesses are up to their eyeballs in debt and have no capacity or the qualifications for borrowing

    Just because gold and overall inflation are subdued does not mean that Bernanke knows what he is talking about - FED GDP forecasts have been way off, the FED denied the existence of the housing bubble that they (along with some inept regulation) created, and capital is currently being grossly mis-allocated due to ZIRP. Yellen just denied the existence of a stock market bubble - I hope that Mr. Yellen's forecasts and denials are more accurate than Mr. Bernanke's - otherwise, look out below.

    In other words - Bernanke has been right about Gold, and wrong about EVERYTHING ELSE
    Dec 18, 2013. 10:16 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Zero Hedge Is Wrong About Gold  [View article]
    Chris, I agree that they over-highlight drops in the S&P and 1% "surges" in gold, but they also highlight every big market move, up and down, while offering plausible explanations for both. While their claim gold that is manipulated downward and the S&P is 1:1 correlated with the Fed's balance sheet is certainly debatable, it certainly seems plausible given the charts and data they present. I think their thesis is that stocks ARE correlated with the Fed's balance sheet but that it the mid term it is creating a speculative bubble - recently they have had a lot of pieces on stock market collapses in the 2015-2016 range. If I used their articles for investment advice, I certainly wouldn't be short right now.
    Dec 18, 2013. 07:15 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Zero Hedge Is Wrong About Gold  [View article]

    What are you claiming Zero Hedge's thesis to be? Is it that stocks are bound to go down? Or is it that we are part of a corrupt, fascist, crony capitalist, (poorly) centrally planned klepotcracy that shifts wealth from the poor to the rich while announcing intentions to do the opposite? I read ZH a lot and I don't suddenly obtain the urge to buy some value-destroying 3x inverse ETF, or protest in Zucotti Park, or buy gold, guns ammo and canned food. ZH is in effect a news aggregator with a very tinfoil-like slant, but IMPORTANT: I find most of the facts that they post to be more insightful that anything I find in the MSM and even sometimes SA. In terms of this article, I have no idea where gold will go, but ZH presented their thesis, much like you presented yours. At this moment I don't give greater weight to either one of you.

    As for the stock market, what if we get a 50% correction? Is ZH right then? What is the threshold that you would require to give credibility to their views?
    Dec 17, 2013. 05:43 PM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment