Headlines...

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
<p>liz - Yes, theoretically. And all the above posts are correct theoretically.</p>

<p>But, in real life there is a whole lot of naked shorting going on. On a personal note, I always check the total short position before I short or buy puts, because I much prefer to be the one doing the squeezing during a short squeeze. The fastest money I have ever made was being on the right end of a short squeeze. Yjole! </p>
 
"So after two days of run-ups is everyone expecting a big drop tomorrow in the markets?"





I am. When the market rallies hard into the close on short covering and closes just above a key technical level -- in this case the 200SMA -- the next day the market often gaps down and then runs down to new lows over the next several days.
 
<p>A naked short? Gosh, sounds salacious. A short with no covering stock?</p>

<p>Nude--Listen to grandma; grandma is right!!!</p>

<p>She also probably told you to wear 2 socks. That match.</p>
 
Naked shorting is a terrible practice they should crack down on. It is no different than printing money. Selling stock you don't own and never borrowed theoretically adds float in the form of phantom stock.
 
In regards to socks, is there some invisible sock monster that steals your socks in the middle of the night? How come every time I do laundry and start folding it, there are always missing and mismatched socks? Is there some worldwide conspiracy I need to know about? I swear, I have purchased 20 pairs of socks in the last 12 months and I am down to like 4 pairs left out of the 20 I purchased. WTF?
 
<p>I think if you opened your washing machine I bet you would find any number of socks that have migrated over the top of the barrel and have fallen down the inside of the machine. Either that or the Sock Fairy has them.</p>

<p>You can put your socks in one of those mesh bags if you want. Then if the bag disappears you KNOW the Sock Fairy has them.</p>
 
<p>I expect to see more of this in the future, but the story is worth reading:</p>

<p><a target="_blank" href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aAktjXSQujdM&refer=home">Florida local governments and school districts pulled $8 billion out of a state-run investment pool, or 30 percent of its assets, after learning that the money-market fund contained more than $700 million of defaulted debt.</a> </p>

<p>Hat tip to <a target="_blank" href="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/">http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/</a></p>

<p> <em>"The State Board of Administration manages about $42 billion of short-term investments, including the pool, as well as the state's $137 billion pension fund. Almost 6 percent, or $2.4 billion, of its short-term investments consist of asset-backed commercial paper that has defaulted. Those holdings include $425 million in Axon Financial, a structured investment vehicle, or SIV, according to state records."</em></p>

<p> </p>
 
<p><a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/19f73172-9dde-11dc-9f68-0000779fd2ac.html">US homes sales suffer record fall</a></p>

<p>Sales of previously owned homes in the US hit their lowest level since 1999 and single family homes suffered the biggest price drop on record in October. </p>

<p>Home sales dropped 1.2 per cent, more than forecast, to an annual rate of 4.97m, from 5.03m in September, the National Association of Realtors said. Sales were down 20.7 per cent from a year earlier. The level of sales hit its lowest since the NAR started tracking single-family and condominium sales in 1999. </p>



<p>Single-family home prices fell 6.3 per cent from a year earlier, the worst performance recorded since the data begin in 1969.</p>

<p>The NAR said the lower price was partly because of difficulties in the market for mortgages above $417,000, known as “jumbo” loans, that slowed sales in high-price markets.</p>
 
Uh oh. The mainstream media <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20071128/ts_csm/aderivone">is catching on </a>to the vulnerability of the global financial system.
 
I am so sick of this. . . why is it okay for the commerce dept. to put out basically false numbers? It is one thing for the NAR to do something like this but the government? What is the point of releasing such a report if you just revising down your control number. Sounds more like the tobacco industry. . .







<strong>"WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Builders slashed prices at the fastest pace in 26 years in October, boosting sales of new homes from a much lower level of September sales than was originally reported, according to Commerce Department data released Thursday.</strong>






Sales rose 1.7% to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 728,000 last month from a revised 716,000 in September, which was a 11-year low.




September's sales pace had originally been reported as 770,000. August's sales were also revised sharply lower to 717,000, down from 735,000 estimated a month ago and from 795,000 estimated in the first release."





<a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/builders-slash-prices-boost-sales/story.aspx?guid=%7B44AD9E1B-6915-476F-8879-52565C72840C%7D">www.marketwatch.com/news/story/builders-slash-prices-boost-sales/story.aspx</a>





Apparently revising one month's figures are not enough, we need to adjust for two months worth of numbers.





Consider the following:





July:


Original Sales Number: 834,000, Revised: 798,000 (down 4.6 percent)





August Sales:


Original Sales Number: 795,000, Revised: 717,000 (down 9.8 percent)





September


Original Sales Number: 770,000, Revised: 716,000 (down 7.0 percent)





October:

Sales Number: 728,000.





What gets reported?





"New home sales [in July] rose 2.8 percent to an annual rate of 870,000 from a revised 846,000 rate in June"





<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/24/news/economy/newhome_sales/index.htm">money.cnn.com/2007/08/24/news/economy/newhome_sales/index.htm</a>





"Sales of new single-family U.S. homes rose 4.8 percent in September"





<a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/21470011/">www.cnbc.com/id/21470011/</a>





"Sales of new single-family U.S. homes rose 1.7 percent in October"





<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22024575/">www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22024575/</a>





Such a sham.



 
And the GDP being reported today as 4.9% gain with a PCE deflator of 0.9%? The really sad thing is I know intelligent people who do not question this nonsense.
 
<p><a target="_blank" href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d3529774-995b-11dc-bb45-0000779fd2ac.html">Dr. Copper</a> speaks.</p>



<p>Base metals have come under strong selling pressure in recent weeks amid growing concerns over the possibility of a US recession and knock-on effects in the rest of the world. News that the Chinese government plans stricter controls over new investment projects has heightened concerns about further price weakness.</p>

<p>The S&P GSCI industrial metals price index has fallen 9.4 per cent this year, sliding almost 25 per cent below its 2007 peak in early May.</p>

<p>The deterioration in sentiment has been dramatic. As recently as early October, participants at London Metal Exchange week, the largest industry gathering of the year, met against a backdrop of record levels of investor interest to discuss the potential longevity of the strongest bull market in a generation. Since then, the continued deterioration in the US housing market and the weakening of global industrial activity have prompted a reappraisal.</p>

<p>John Kemp of Sempra Metals says: “We’ve seen a general darkening of the macroeconomic outlook, a deterioration in risk appetite, a broad repricing of assets and increases in metals supplies, and this has left the base metals complex dancing in thin air.”</p>

<p>Goldman Sachs estimates that a one percentage point decline in the pace of global industrial activity corresponds to a fall of about 9 per cent in most metals prices.</p>

<p>Mr Kemp says that, as base metals markets are relatively small, liquidity is an issue. Hedge funds trying to exit large long positions (bets on further price gains) in copper, lead and zinc have put severe downward pressure on prices.</p>

<p>The decline in spot prices has led to significant shifts in most metals futures curves, which have flattened from steep backwardation (spot prices above forward prices suggesting tight supplies). Zinc has been the most notable casualty, falling almost 47 per cent this year. Stephen Briggs of Société Générale says zinc prices could slide below $2,000 a tonne from its current level of $2,237 a tonne, reflecting increasing supplies.</p>

<p>Global zinc mine production could increase by at least 18 per cent between 2006 and 2008, according to Mr Briggs, who is forecasting a supply surplus of 250,000 tonnes next year.</p>

<p>Copper, the bellwether of the base metals sector, has fallen almost 19 per cent since the start of October because of a substantial increase of almost 55,000 tonnes in LME stocks.</p>

<p>Concerns that the Chinese government may impose restrictions on investment spending and fears that prices have further to fall have stopped many traders from buying. An absence of Chinese buying interest has been noted by traders in London in recent weeks. But James Gutman at Goldman says: “Worries over a pause in Chinese manufacturing and construction growth are still only worries.”</p>

<p>Amid the gloom, analysts at Deutsche Bank are relatively upbeat. “We remain convinced that this environment provides good buying opportunities across the complex as our economists have yet to forecast a full-bore recession but, instead, see a more restrained slowdown in the US economy in 2008.”</p>
 
<p><em>"The really sad thing...</em></p>

<p><em>Oh, the humanity!"</em></p>

<p>Prof - Sorry, but it sounded nicer than my first thought which was "I am amazed that otherwise intelligent people can be so stupid as to believe this nonsense."</p>

<p>Better?</p>
 
<p><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aDdJ4GDZ6eao&refer=home">I dub thee "Bagholder"</a></p>

<p> </p>
 
<p>A <a target="_blank" href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a3TPxddNJSfM&refer=home">two-handle</a> on the 91-day this time.</p>

<p><em>``The credit crunch began in earnest back in July, but what you're seeing now is it's deepening and spreading out,'' said Kathleen Bostjancic, an economist in New York at Merrill Lynch & Co., which expects the Fed's target lending rate to fall to 2 percent by the end of the second quarter of 2009. ``You're seeing a tremendous flight to quality.'' </em></p>
 
Back
Top