|
dv6speed posted:Who doesn't love that? I don't care what kind of investor or trader you are... you will buy that one. It's pretty easy to find closed-end funds selling at significant discounts to their NAV, it's not exactly what you're talking about but it is an equity priced lower than the assets it represents.
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2010 07:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:27 |
|
|
11b1p posted:I invested in POT http://www.potashcorp.com/ Fertilizer, everyone needs to eat right? I'm curious, did you do research into this or did you just buy it on the idea that "Everyone has to eat"? Because when I look at POT, I personally see one of the most overvalued companies out there right now... a trailing PE of over 30, a forward P/E of 15 (which seems absurdly optimistic to me, considering the company guided for $4-5 in 2010), and a price/book of nearly 5, not much cash and plenty of debt. What attracts you to POT at this price? I admit I don't have any understanding of why people would value a fertilizer company like its the next Google, but I'm curious to know. This is an old school company that has been around for a *long* time and for some reason in the past 5 years or so the market has decided it is some kind of spectacular and unique growth stock, rather than a stock in an admittedly hot commodity space. greasyhands fucked around with this message at 02:13 on Feb 12, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2010 01:22
|
|
|
I WANT TO EAT BABBY posted:This is super-creepy. I kept expecting it to become obviously satire, but no, just kept on being creepy. this is amateur crap but why is it creepy?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2010 23:15
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:How the gently caress did gold not tank today? Why was the market not predictable on a short term basis??????? This is unprecedented!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2010 23:08
|
|
|
Free Gucci Mane posted:You mean it's easy just in terms of being able to make riskier decisions? What exactly prevents someone from replicating that in real life? It's more like it's an extremely risky strategy that can pay huge sums and he, while playing with fake money and the entire goal being "go for as much appreciation as possible with no worry about downside because its fake money", happens to be doing really well at it. There are hundreds of people on investopedia trying the same strategy who lost it all. If you take 100,000 people, sit them at a virtual roulette table,give them virtual money, and have them all bet it all on single numbers, someone is probably going to hit 4 or 5 in a row and make a billion dollars- it doesn't mean they are an expert roulette player, it just means 100,000 people were trying an extremely risky strategy and the mathematics of it allowed one (or several) to clean house with it. Everyone else lost all their money. It's not an investment strategy, it's an "I'm playing a simulation and want to see if I can hit a jackpot" strategy. It's like the difference between playing online poker where everyone has $100 in the game and playing online poker where everyone is playing with imaginary money- they're two completely different games. greasyhands fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Mar 12, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2010 01:24
|
|
|
I think if anyone buys PALM it will be GOOG, and that would be great for the entire smartphone space.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2010 19:03
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Why would sell a financial ahead of JPM's earnings this morning? Hell, half my portfolio is FAS. I wish posts like this were probatable...honestly, shut the gently caress up.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2010 17:35
|
|
|
PsychoAndy posted:It's a zero-sum game. When you make money, someone loses it. A biotech company's stock is halted pending news... turns out the news is they cured cancer and the equity reopens at +300%. Short interest going in was <10% of the float. Who lost money other than the <10% short?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2010 01:07
|
|
|
ayekappy posted:Two things, would a stock really be halted pending really good news? Also, I think even the largest company would probably go up more than 300% for finding some universal cure for cancer. Probably would have a market cap of a trillion. Could you maybe address the actual point, obviously it's a hypothetical situation exaggerated for effect and yes equities are halted all the time pending really good news. Pretend I said it opened up 500000% if that puts your brain at ease.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2010 01:17
|
|
|
ayekappy posted:When that company goes up so much the capital pouring into it has to come from somewhere. Likely divested from other investments or bought with cash that might have gone elsewhere. Ok, you have no idea what you're talking about, but when an equity is halted it isn't trading, no money is exchanging hands. When it opens +300% that price has been set by the market makers as a result of the underlying company suddenly being so much more valuable, the equity will begin trading +300% from the moment before the halt without a single share changing hands. To head off the "well someone had to sell that share and that's a lost opportunity cost for them" imagine our BIO is selling for $1. I sell my 1,000 shares to you at the asking price ($1), I now have $1,000 and you have 1,000 shares of BIO. 15 minutes later BIO is halted pending news. A CURE FOR CANCER WOW! after the news disseminates, the equity reopens +300%, you immediately sell your shares for $3 apiece leaving you with $3,000.. I still have my $1,000. You gained money, I lost no money. Wealth has just been created. I suppose you could make the argument that the money you just made will be coming from cancer patients and their insurance companies when BIO sells their hot new cure to them, but if you want to abstract it that far the entire world is zero sum and I suppose that's true. The argument that for one person to make money in the market another person has to lose money in the same market is demonstrably false. destructo posted:To answer the above question, when you have instant valuation of intellectual property, the whole zero-sum thing doesn't entirely work until all the shares have changed hands after the fact. What occurs in a very short time with my example occurs every day with other equities, it's an incorrect assumption that for an equity to increase in price there has to be a precisely equivalent buy/sell imbalance. Equity prices can and do go up due to anticipated demand as well as actual exchange demand. Anytime news breaks outside of extended trading hours (or when an equity is halted) you see this happen in an easy to digest and perfectly clear way, it also occurs during market hours it's just a little trickier to see. greasyhands fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Apr 15, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2010 01:25
|
|
|
Midget Mafia posted:Except an entirely new party is now out $3,000 for those 1000 shares of stock, thus finishing the zero sum (ignoring brokerage fees). Wealth hasn't been created, it has been transferred. It will again be transferred when that holder sells his shares to someone else, regardless of whether it's more or less than his buy price. Well you have a misunderstanding of what a zero-sum game is. A zero sum game requires someone to gain value, and someone to lose value. When a person buys your position for $3k, he doesn't "lose" the 3k, he exchanges his money for an asset worth the same amount. (I.e, when you buy a house for 100k you dont lose the 100k, you get a house worth 100k (that's called investing).. if you bet 100k on black at roulette and it comes out red... you lose 100k with nothing to show for it and the casino gains $100k (thats a zero sum game)) There is no loss taking place- yes the equity valued at $3k is changing hands but no one is out any money, because the institution the equity represents has created value (a new discovery, just being a well run business...whatever.) On the other hand, options are zero sum- the seller of a put/call, who directly gains/loses wealth vs. the buyer of his put/call. http://www.theessentialsoftrading.com/Blog/index.php/2007/06/22/the-zero-sum-game/ Investopedia Says: Options and future contracts are examples of zero-sum games (excluding costs). For every person who gains on a contract, there is a counter-party who loses. Gambling is also an example of a zero-sum game. A stock market, however, is not a zero-sum game because wealth can be created in a stock market. edit: no one is saying the stock market literally prints money, but most of the people in here are throwing around "zero-sum" game without understanding what it actually means. Midget Mafia posted:You're confusing what market cap is; this is the amount all outstanding shares are worth if they were to be sold at the price of the last trade. In practice, only a company being bought out will result in all outstanding shares being purchased at the price of the most recent trade (usually significantly more, even). Attempting to sell every outstanding share of a stock at market value will never, in practice, happen. Try to sell even $100k worth of stock for a random small cap and you'll almost certainly drive the price down a bit. This doesn't even make sense. You completely missed the point of his argument. He's demonstrating how the amount of money invested into an equity on any given day does not have a 1:1 correlation with the increase/decrease in market value of said equity. It would be 1:1 if it were zero sum I kind of understand what you're getting at, but you're removing the whole idea of a market from your argument... if someone tried to dump the entire float into the open market there would be a decrease in price *only* if there were more sellers than buyers (equities often trade their float 4 and 5x over on big up or down days)... If there were more sellers than buyers at a given price, then yes the price should go down...that's how a market works... greasyhands fucked around with this message at 07:52 on Apr 15, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2010 06:52
|
|
|
Don Wrigley posted:The report said that investors lost about $1 billion. So in order to make the investors 100% whole, Goldman would have to take a 1 time charge of $1 billion, plus probably a couple million in penalties or the like. Generally speaking, when a company is accused of fraud just paying the investors what they lost due to the fraud is not the whole picture... What about the business lost due to the stigma of being an investment bank that is accused of fraud? What about all the uncertainty that has just been introduced to Goldman's business model and the now increased likelihood of increased regulation?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2010 21:00
|
|
|
It's funny how this thread swings towards cockiness when the market has been friendly and it falls silent when the market turns nasty.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2010 23:10
|
|
|
I WANT TO EAT BABBY posted:What's the motivation to be long stock in BIDU as an earnings play rather than short puts or long calls? I don't know what kind of roll you're playing with but it seems like an expensive directional bet and am curious how you're playing it. If you've got 7+ figures feel free to tell me suck it. What do you mean by expensive directional bet?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2010 08:34
|
|
|
SSH IT ZOMBIE posted:Argh, bastards. Yes, people have failed to realize smartphone sales are exploding... you're the only one who noticed.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2010 19:09
|
|
|
ayekappy posted:Or the fact that FiOS would compliment a nationwide internet type government infrastructure plan the most. FioS is kinda dead. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g49dcJwB9f4ThxaYzwK-FsaaWY5QD9EMFVEO0 greasyhands fucked around with this message at 07:52 on Apr 25, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2010 07:41
|
|
|
Hobologist posted:I'm surprised that Goldman Sachs wasn't taking a more strident tone, with or without the financial reform package coming up in Congress. If I'm walking to the dumpster with a bag of garbage, and someone comes up and offers to buy my garbage for $500, of course I'm going to sell it to him. And then I'm going to start looking for more bags. What about if you shop your garbage around and tell people it's gold in the bag, not trash... And you have a long-standing reputation as a gold seller, then they buy it for $500.... Still ok with it?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 04:24
|
|
|
Mulletstation posted:bought SOLF at 5.01 Are you really posting just to reply to yourself with brags about trades? Really?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2010 19:07
|
|
|
I WANT TO EAT BABBY posted:I have no idea who ITMN is but wtf is this? ITMN going to go down as one of the all time "wtf was the market thinking" stocks... They had a drug that clearly had little effect, had failed a phaseIII and the recommendation from the FDA panel was "the drug doesn't show much effect, but I voted for it's approval because if I had the disease I would want to be able to try it." (why not FDA approve wombat blood as a cure for autism also? If I had autism I'd want to be able to try it) Oh, and their CEO nearly went to jail already for pumping useless drugs less than a year ago! - http://industry.bnet.com/pharma/10004521/intermune-ceo-faces-20-years-in-prison-for-writing-a-press-release/ I wanted to play it short, but Etrade had no shorts, I can't write uncovered calls, and the premium on the puts was insane... If I had bought may $45 puts before the halt today and it opens ~10 tomorrow, I would have made just 3.5x my money on a 80%+ drop... just insanity. I almost did some way out of the money puts (the $20 puts would've paid about 10x) but I couldn't bring myself to put any substantial amount of money into 50% out of the money puts.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2010 23:06
|
|
|
VH4Ever posted:Can someone give me a quick rundown of somewhere reputable I can go to purchase precious metals like gold and silver? I'm just starting to play the market a little and I was just thinking of adding silver to my portfolio. if you are talking about buying actual metal, you will never ever beat the dealer price spread and you'll never get more than *maybe* 80% of value trying to sell... it's a fool's game unless you are talking about a *large* buy. just play SLV or GLD
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2010 06:10
|
|
|
abagofcheetos posted:What would you do with a piece of paper or bits on a computer saying you own something? Selling commissions on ebay/paypal are ~10%, if you really think you can make a trading platform out of that I'd like to see the results. It's not that holding physical gold is ridiculous, it's that there's a reason you only see WE TRADE GOLD on the front of pawn shops and gun shows, and not at banks. The market for physical metals for retail investors is basically a scam. LorneReams posted:Why does it look like everyone owes France a huge amount of money? Are they like a universal lender or something? It doesn't look like that- it looks like they all owe Germany, France, and the UK huge sums of money and since those are the 3 largest economies of the Eurozone, it makes sense. greasyhands fucked around with this message at 18:41 on May 10, 2010 |
|
#
¿
May 10, 2010 18:35
|
|
|
ayekappy posted:Not to brag, but so far my guess chart is right on the dot. If it's still right, then tomorrow should see an up day in the beginning and then once it gets to 1129 or so, the down-train begins and no ups in sight for the rest of the week, although intraday volatility is a definite probability. I can't stand posts like this, you're like a horse racing junkie- you spend all day thinking about fantasy scenarios and analyzing random data with absolutely no basis other than hopes and dreams.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2010 06:35
|
|
|
Christobevii3 posted:Did you not see the most recent numbers? 9.5% drop in mortgage apps since the housing credit came off. Builders are dumb slow entities that don't react fast enough. They have around 660,000 housing starts set for the year. That is the level of 1991... What did you expect to see happen when the housing credit ended? I'm not going to be the one who says "the housing market is fine" or even "improving" but apps dropping after a $8k credit expires should be expected and doesn't indicate any kind of backslide.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2010 07:10
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:Housing statistics are also measured year over year. As we start to move past the one year mark on the theoretical "bottom", housing is only going to look better. Even if "better" only means that it is not as bad as it once was. Housing statistics are measured both yoy and sequentially, the 9.5% is the drop from just the week before. There have actually been two weeks since the expiration now, the first week was the 9.5% drop, the second week only saw a 1.5% drop. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-19/u-s-mba-mortgage-applications-index-fell-1-5-last-week.html Dr. Eldarion posted:I think the point is that the only reason they were recovering in the first place was because of the credit, and that they didn't necessarily get worse, but they didn't get any better either. Looking at weekly numbers is really a fool's game, they swing wildly. I would argue that the apps only dropping 9.5% right after the expiration is actually kinda bullish if anything. The numbers are, on average, well off the lows and have been for a while now. It appears they will stay well off the lows as well. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0413271120100505 greasyhands fucked around with this message at 23:58 on May 23, 2010 |
|
#
¿
May 23, 2010 23:53
|
|
|
Christobevii3 posted:Is this a sarcastic joke? A penny stock in chinese real estate that has basically been falling for 6 months now? That's the kind of garbage that wins those imaginary money contests though. It's not investing, it's picking lottery numbers.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2010 08:25
|
|
|
Let's list our risky (but not retarded penny stock) plays that we're hoping to hit it big with. I like China plays right now simply because they've all been decimated and while I see a slowdown in China's future I think equities have been way underpriced. I'm playing TSTC, ISSI, LDK, CYCC, CELM, TTWO LDK- vertically integrated Chinese solar that has been beat senseless. There has been a little bit of mismanagement and cash flow is bad, but I like the total package and think with an industry turnaround it could be 2-3x these levels in a year or so. Lots of open questions about various subsidies around the world. Very speculative play but I think it has limited downside risk as it's already been destroyed. In this at $6.10 TSTC - another Chinese tech company that I honestly don't know much about. I'm going solely off the balance sheet and growth rates. They appear to make random components for various tech items as well as offering various wireless coverage "solutions" for large buildings and event centers. in this at $8.59. Tiny company with fast growth and I've never seen anyone else talk about it. Could be a big one ISSI - basically a commodity DRAM/SRAM play that is absurdly cheap and is benefiting greatly from the ongoing shortage. Cash is currently 1/3 of market cap with no debt and if they meet guidance for this Q the P/E will be somewhere around 6. I rode this one from 7 to 12 then got out- now I'm back in at 9.75. CYCC - bio play with some promising stuff in the pipeline.. purely speculative and I don't know much about this sector at all. Basically a MOMO play on my part. Just watching this one for now. Played it a little earlier this year and it was a losing play to the tune of -10% CELM - Chinese electric motor maker that made me a ton of money earlier this year. Rode it from ~5 to ~9 then got out. Currently watching for another entry point. TTWO- Icahn is all over this. MS valued them at $26 about a year and a half ago in a rejected buyout attempt (whoops), Red Dead Redemption appears to be blowing out expectations and management has been lowballing guidance for some reaon. I think this one could be a double. In at 9.35, been holding it a while greasyhands fucked around with this message at 08:51 on May 26, 2010 |
|
#
¿
May 26, 2010 08:41
|
|
|
Dr. Jackal posted:wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee What? Those are all real companies with real revenue and real growth, many of them having been around for over a decade. I said they were the "risky" plays in my portfolio right now, nowhere near my entire holdings. They certainly aren't "penny stock poo poo" in any traditional sense of the word, though they are high beta. What, do you only play blue chips and indices? greasyhands fucked around with this message at 15:25 on May 26, 2010 |
|
#
¿
May 26, 2010 15:18
|
|
|
Got out of TSTC at 10.95 for +2.36 in 3 days. Put a buy in at $10.00, may bump that up to 10.25 later today. still holding everything else. Adding a few more names to watch list (target buy price) - TSL ($15.00) TINY ($4.00) ENER ($4.50) edit: back in TSTC @ 10.25 greasyhands fucked around with this message at 00:10 on May 29, 2010 |
|
#
¿
May 28, 2010 17:21
|
|
|
goddinpotty posted:So a friend of mine has shares of common stock that he owns outright in a company that just filed their IPO pricing expectations and should start trading on the nasdaq in a couple of weeks. How does he get these shares liquid? If he has actual paper shares, he can just mail them to whoever his broker is
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2010 01:15
|
|
|
LactoseO.D.'d posted:How are people feeling about solar plays? I know the tax credit is expiring but the sector has grown every year for the past 10 years. The story is that Eurozone pressures are beating down the whole sector since that is a huge solar market. But a lot of companies have hedged their exposure pretty well, FSLR hedged 50% of their net income @1.39 EUR/USD and stocks like STRI and JASO have limited exposure as well. Valuations are low. I really like LDK at its current price as a long term hold... in the next year or two I think there's going to be some shakeouts though. I also think the oil spill is going to be a big positive for US subsidies over the next few years with this administration. ESLR and ENER are both very risky plays with huge potential upside, but they could both go to 0 also. One thing very interesting about ENER that is completely ignored by the market is their phase change memory business. I honestly don't want to type out the entire story, but basically they have a thin film solar technology that doesn't use Tellurium (considered the Achilles' heel of FSLR's technology if it ever were to become a truly huge business due to it being one of the rarest elements on earth) and their phase change memory *does* use Tellurium. Phase change memory appears to be a serious up and coming flash competitor and has been licensed by many tech heavyweights and products are starting to come to market - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-change_memory#Timeline Note that Ovonyx is the company ENER exclusively licensed all Phase change memory technology and patents to and ENER is Ovonyx's largest shareholder. So they stand to not only make money from a potential technology, but also increase a solar competitor's cost basis significantly if phase change memory starts sucking up Tellurium on any significant scale. As I said, very risky but potentially huge. edit: and I forgot to mention, Cramer loved ENER at $80 :P edit2: Here is a really good breakdown of what happened with LDK and why they are one of the most promising turnaround plays - http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/207726-investinghobo/74712-a-controversial-company-in-a-controversial-sector greasyhands fucked around with this message at 07:39 on Jun 4, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2010 04:37
|
|
|
dethkon posted:Careful, my Dad told me that Cramer recommended it on his shot today, so it might get a Cramer bump tomorrow at open (assuming his viewers don't know how to make pre-market orders). In case that doesn't happen, I'm shorting it tomorrow morning, with a tight stop. It hit %D: 80.8 today, which usually means overbought (but not always). We'll see what happens. "Cramer bumps" only happen with tiny market cap stocks and it's why, for the most part, he stopped talking about small caps because the SEC was getting on his rear end. His CNBC viewers dont wake up and materially affect the share price of a 12billion company
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2010 08:40
|
|
|
Christobevii3 posted:BP is going to come out of this paying out a ton of money and being locked out of a ton of the US's reserves. They're gonna be wrecked just like XOM after Valdez, right? XOM had a drunk captain and a broken sonar system and their entire crew wasn't given legally required rest periods, if you think the negligence in BP's case is more clearcut than that then by all means short away. It's pretty easy to see why people are trying to pick a bottom on BP greasyhands fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Jun 5, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2010 22:27
|
|
|
MrBigglesworth posted:Any Goons have a TradeKing account? If you're trading with less than 2500, you're the retarded one.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2010 20:22
|
|
|
Dr. Luau posted:They've spent great heaping gobs of money trying to fix it, but they haven't made any money trying to make it look good for the press. As shallow as this will sound, that counts for a lot in a scenario like this where the damage is removed from most people, so the media has free reign on their feelings to this. Frankly, BP's public relations team should be dragged out behind the building and shot for how poorly they handled this. It would've probably cost even more money to outfit shrimping boats with oil-collecting skimmers or whatever, but you don't do it for the efficiency, you do it for the camera footage that plays at 6 and 11 that shows a thousand little shrimping boats combating the big oil splotch, so it doesn't look like BP's asleep at the wheel. BP is well past the point of trying to spin this as "not so bad", it's an outright calamity. They are trying to obscure things as much as possible now to keep everyone confused and keep the entire situation murky at best- they are doing a fantastic job of that and it's exactly what their PR team wants. You have a rather naive idea of what PRs function is for something like this- it's to cover the company's and shareholders' asses, not make the company look good. This is BPs PR effort - http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/Are-Journalists-Being-Kept-From-the-Oil-Spill-3934 greasyhands fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Jun 11, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2010 19:05
|
|
|
St00ert posted:
I think comparing the largest accidental oil spill in history to the contamination of some equipment in a meat factory, and expecting to be able to "fix" the problem as easily or in the same way, is a little hard to swallow. They have no choice but to obscure everything. Look at how they stuck to their 5k barrels per day estimate until they started sucking up 15k a day (with a huge visible gusher still emptying into the gulf). Putting a bunch of shrimp boats out with booms or whatever doesn't do anything except up the profile of just how messy the gulf is- they would be sending thousands of people (who have just had their livelihood yanked out from underneath them, and who will talk to the press) out to the worst parts of the gulf to sludge around in oil- that would be an unmitigated PR disaster. A little temporary work cleaning up BP's mess isn't going to satiate the anger of these guys who have just had their generational family business ruined.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2010 07:42
|
|
|
Bigntasty posted:Wow BP caved without even putting up a fight, they apparently have zero respect for their shareholders. I pulled out half of what I had in and put it in RIG, who I don't think will cave to political pressure so easily and aren't liable etc. Maybe they do have the shareholders interest in mind and this was their best option, they did create the largest oil spill in history right in the middle of the GOM,a vital part of the US Economy, and shut a huge swath of it down.... And it's part of a rather shocking history of safety and regulatory violations. Where was the shareholder anger when they weren't following the rules and were repeatedly being violated? Oh that's right, no one cares about gross negligence until it costs them money, then they ignore that the culture of negligence BP was clearly fostering, and which they played passive party to, is what ended up costing them money and start looking for scapegoats like the government or lazy management.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2010 02:19
|
|
|
Bigntasty posted:Don't see this being in the shareholders interest. They could have said send us an itemized bill everyday and we will pay it, not just hand over 20 billion. You're pretty short-sighted if you can't see how cooperating with the government and conceding some of the things they want is definitely in their best long-term interest right now. The Government could do much worse than have them set up a fund to pay restitution, and BP knows that... why don't you? If BP starts stonewalling and making a bunch of demands it's going to get ugly for them real quick.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2010 02:35
|
|
|
Bigntasty posted:Everyone was pissed off at the banks a year ago, I didn't see them setting up unemployment funds. I'm sorry that you're losing money and you're mad about it. You chose to be a shareholder in the company that made one of the biggest corporate fuckups in history and there is a very clear party at fault, unlike the financial crisis.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2010 02:40
|
|
|
GET MONEY posted:What I really don't understand is why BP gaining afterhours on news of cutting dividends and giving up $20B? Because it could have been a lot worse and now the market is getting a picture of where the punitive actions are heading, instead of it all being up in the air. Markets hate uncertainty more than bad news.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2010 06:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:27 |
|
|
Bigntasty posted:The 90% number I pulled out of my rear end just trying to qualitatively describe how I feel about it. I see it as unlikely because I more or less agree with you on RIG, but someone else pretty much nailed it the other day in here - why are you in such a hurry to invest in RIG or BP? there are literally a million other companies that you can invest in that don't have a potentially company ending liability hanging over their head.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2010 06:48
|
|