Ax

14 Comments

    • Speculation and the Price of Oil: An Unfriendly Note [view article]
      Those 3 sentences are a fantastic introduction. Now you have laid down the crude, basic idea - that is your thesis. And it captures the reader in a blink of an eye.

      Now all an uneducated reader as myself needs is the answer to:

      "The question is how much, and I say that because of the mechanics of the paper markets, not much at all."

      I don't know what are the mechanics of the paper markets, and I don't know where the "not much at all" comes from... so that is what a reader in the land of the darkness needs an answer to.

      Now you get the 297 sentences and explain.

      I mean, I don't need an explanation here, since I never invest in commodity markets due to the crazy speculative gambling casino that it has become. But that is how an article should be written in my opinion. At least in a non scientific journal as seeking alpha.

      I'm pretty sure you would get better reviews from the investors community.

      I wish you all the best.

      Regards.

      Ax










       Aug 30 05:24 PM
    • Speculation and the Price of Oil: An Unfriendly Note [view article]
      Fred,

      you can be a brilliant economist and a wonderful teacher. I am not saying you are not, because I have never read any of your works and I never attended your lectures. But this article could have been shorter and have more content. That's all.

      Have a nice day.


      Aug 29 06:59 PM
    • Speculation and the Price of Oil: An Unfriendly Note [view article]
      Fred Banks:

      Try to do this task: Try to read your article every day for a period of 10 days... and ask yourself this question: "What are the things I could have left out, and still would deliver the main points to the reader?"

      I mean in this article you have a sentence that begins with: "Needles to say..." If it is needless leave it out!

      What is the purpose of this paragraph:
      "One of my favorite daydreams features me standing in front of a blackboard somewhere, discussing e.g. speculation and the oil market, and suddenly hearing a sturdy, confident voice from some corner of the room informing me that I don’t know what I am talking about. It has been so many years since something of that nature happened, that should it take place in the near future, I probably would find myself immediately reaching for a double dose of aspirin or smelling salts, or asking if there was a doctor in the house who could check my hearing. The problem – as the late president Lyndon Johnson once pointed out – is that very few individuals possess an extensive knowledge of financial or financial-like markets, although in my teaching in half a dozen countries, I have never had the slightest problem explaining to first year students how speculation works in commodity markets."

      Is there any value added here about oil speculation? You could have said it in one sentence, if you wanted - the problem is the lack of knowledge of financial markets. Why you couldn't do that? The paragraph is aimless in regard of the topic you are writing about, but is it absolutely NECESSARY to show the true nature of your self.

      What it shows is your need for confrontation as you put it: it is your favorite daydream!

      I suggest you try some creative writing where you will be able to express your true emotions. You will also get some tips about being articulate. Otherwise your readers will need aspirin in massive dozes and they will not be daydreaming about that.

      As for your footballer story let me tell you one. Heidegger was laughed at and considered a clown by his critics. And yet, today everyone knows who Heidegger is, and no one knows the names of his critics.

      There's a story you can tell to yourself after critics will tear you apart. Because if no one will tear you apart, then you really haven't written anything important at all.

      But you like your article. So you will not improve your apparent lack of writing skills. You are just perfect.

      A Chinese architect once said to me: "My aim is to work 6 hours and a half if my competitors work 6 hours. And if my competitors make 6 mistakes, my aim is to make only 5 of them."

      So, yeah this is a crappy article. It could have been shorter by 2/3.       Aug 29 07:03 AM
    • Speculation and the Price of Oil: An Unfriendly Note [view article]
      I suggest you publish your articles (papers) here, instead of this crappy article which consists of cheap advertisements for your already published works. We need data, charts and the rationale that is derived from that data... This is not an ad campaign. Aug 27 08:33 AM
    • Oil: Demand Destruction Overdone? [view article]
      Nobody wants to hear about fossil fuel anymore. People just don't wanna hear about being kidnapped by the Arabs and paying them their mansions in the deserts.

      What the oil markets showed is that there is no real benefit of having this sort of energy if the price of it can sky rocket at any explosion of a pipeline in some Mumbojumboland in the middle of nothing.

      There is a radical shift in the way people think. Maybe it's not the Americans, but the technology societies of the future are doing something about the problem right now.

      So you can put your charts from the past as much as you like... the money is pouring in alternative energy and all the oil rich countries know this century policies are coming to a brutal end.

      Demand destruction? Wait and see. No one wants to hear about oil anymore except for the ones who made billions. Oil is out of fashion... and anyone who thinks about buying a SUV is now regarded as an idiot, a mere egotistical moron who should be shoot. That's what people in Europe think. So demand destruction? Of course... not only destruction, but complete elimination of this old, expensive, geopolitically dangerous addiction altogether.

      This is going to be an alternative energy century. More expensive than a 100 USD for a barrel of oil, but sustainable and clean.       Aug 17 03:02 PM
    • The Oil Speculator Myth [view article]
      This article has absolutely no added value. Jun 26 04:59 AM
    • Bristol-Myers, ImClone, Genentech Release Promising Data at ASCO [view article]
      Pharma,

      that makes more sense, yeah. The Canadian doc. mentioned the costs... I guess it was because of the negotiations you mentioned. OK.       Jun 04 09:01 PM
    • Bristol-Myers, ImClone, Genentech Release Promising Data at ASCO [view article]
      I agree completely with the post above from pharma... although I am no expert on medical studies. I think the reporting about the new drug Erbitux was just spin. The market and the media wanted to see Genentech drug to look superior.

      The reports focused only on the 40% that the Erbitux drug doesn't apply too... and no one mentioned the other 60%. When you get a drug that shows superior results on a specific segment of people, there is no doubt that the drug will be prescribed to them.

      Also we must not forget that when Mike Huckman asked at the ASCO the doctors if they would prescribe Erbitux to their patients the vast majority said yes. And the one that wasn't sure was from Canada.



      Jun 04 09:49 AM
    • USG Corp: Another Buffett 'Failure to Sell' Mistake [view article]
      Wow, you really don't get it. Buffet bought the stock at an average price of 45. Now the stock is 34. It has been trading in a range between 33 and 39$, so your 70% loss it's pure fiction.

      But the main point you don't seem to get is that he buys only great companies and USG is one of them. It has excellent management, it is a low cost producer, it has a moat and a brand (Sheetrock) and it is a growth story, when the housing market turns.

      Berkshire got 17% of the company at 45$. So what if the stock falls to 25 or 15? Would that be a devastating loss? FOR GODS SAKE! It is a 3,5 billion market cap company and Buffett has 50+ billion of cash! He will buy the rest of the company (83%) at a lower price... so there is no loss for him.

      Instead of focusing on the reasons why (the prospects of the company) Buffett did what he did, you just had to show the whole investment community what a superior investing mind you have... so instead of manufacturing some real ammo (facts) against his decision, you went on an elephant hunt with rubber bullets (your faulty perspective, logic).

      From your article it is obvious you didn't read anything about this company, not even the transcripts. That's why you don't understand why Buffett bought this company in the first place.

      You pissed me off, because if you at least wanted to sound scientific and provide us with a table of earnings for USG from 2000-2007, you could at least explain the stratospheric 11$ earnings in 2005 in a footnote below the table.

      Where did that 11$ earnings come from and where did they go my friend? Do you know? No, you don't, because you didn't take the time to do the things properly.

      You wrote a bad, obviously flawed article, because all you wanted to see was your inflating ego... instead of looking at Buffett's investment in USG from his perspective.

      His investment in USG is a win/win situation.       May 28 09:48 AM
    • USG Corp: Another Buffett 'Failure to Sell' Mistake [view article]
      What an article! Congratulations! You have won the award of the worst article today!

      Listen, before you write anything read at least the history of the company instead of doing a table of earnings and P/E ratios based on a 8 year history.

      And sentences like: "The one brilliant move that USG management did was to give its shareholders a rights offering to buy newly issued shares at $40 on July 27, 2006." Yeah right.

      Management only had to sort out the asbestos claims, modernize the plants, restructure the business in the process so they could lower the production costs for the future outlook. But hey! The one brilliant thing is that they issued shares at 40 bucks!

      What a genius you are. This management is fabulous if you only understand the nature of low cost production in this housing downturn. They continued the vertical integration of the business and that will give a competitive advantage for years.

      No wonder Buffett bought it and will continue to do so. I don't own USG but I am looking at it.

      When judging Warren's investment decision at least try to understand that a year or two years or 5 years for a man who says that the ideal is to own a stock forever... really means nothing to him if the stock dips.

      I guess its easy to look at the stock and see Buffett owning it and then rant about how bad his timing was... instead of understanding the business. But hey! That's why there's value in the first place!       May 28 04:43 AM
    • Time To Warm Up The Helicopters? [view article]
      Great video Barry... and the Wagnerian music... suits the situation just fine... Aug 12 02:57 PM
    • Donald Trump - Bah Humbug! Buy, Buy, Buy! [view article]
      Oh well, let's just be optimists... seems to be the tune of this article, since the author likes "optimistic people. A few of (his) favorite optimistic friends are Don Hayes, Brian Wesbury, Jerry Bowyer and James Pethokowkis."

      So just because an optimist like Bowyer writes that out of 44 million mortgages, 14% are subprime and 13% of them are delinquent (at least a month behind) - you just ignore the ALT-A mortgages?

      This is really some piece of math. There are only 250.000 problematic mortgages... out of 44 million? The 107 imploded mortgage lenders that imploded since the end of last year - were really complete idiots to get some of that 250.000 mortgages in their accounting books. Let's not forget 2 of them were on the list of the 20 biggest in the US.

      But hey! Who cares about problems in the Alt-A sector and even prime! ALT-A is only another 20% of the mortgage market!

      Just because the writer is an optimist it doesn't mean you gave to believe everything he writes!

      You know, Adolph Hitler said he'll conquer Russia in three months! He was an optimist too... and utterly wrong.       Aug 11 02:41 PM
    • Inflation or Recession? Parsing the Fed Statement [view article]
      I also think your interpretation is good. I read the FED statement in the same way. The FED would never cut rates if inflation pressure is rising... and I took a look at the market's last week and I was shocked. A rate cut in by july has 0% chance. Mar 26 04:52 AM
    • Housing and Subprime: Enough Already - This Was No Surprise [view article]
      Please look at this chart and then tell me about some fantastic housing sector revival:

      www.autodogmatic.com/f...

      Cheers!       Mar 20 06:56 PM
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»