|
Corn posted:I have a hypothetical question for those of you in this thread who know what their doing, What? It didn't go below $140 in April.
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 20:34 |
|
DuckConference posted:What? It didn't go below $140 in April. Oh yeah, it was actually citigroup. The question still stands.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 01:04
|
|
|
Corn posted:Oh yeah, it was actually citigroup. The question still stands. yes, you could make a profit, but lets visit our neighborhood Lehmans. but again, it is a casino.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 01:11
|
|
|
so many of these banks are playing all kinds of games with their balance sheets that it is hard to know exactly how deep in the poo poo they are. So there was a pretty good chance, at least to us relatively uninformed investors, that citibank might go all the way to zero.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 01:18
|
|
|
Corn posted:Oh yeah, it was actually citigroup. The question still stands. Er, Neither did Citi. If you believe the price is going to go up then that's pretty much the best you can do for forecasting, you can have further degrees of confidence in the likelihood of a stock will appreciate or depreciate in value but say you determine C is going to go up, the market or the financial sector could go down. Ultimately, if the overall consensus is that a stock is going to appreciate, then it's probably already priced in and the point is moot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 01:36
|
|
|
they can always just do a reverse split like aig did, 1 for 20, to get their stock back from micro land.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 01:49
|
|
|
Baddog posted:they can always just do a reverse split like aig did, 1 for 20, to get their stock back from micro land. Their market cap didn't go anywhere though...
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 07:13
|
|
|
Foma posted:I wouldn't touch BP for any price right now, RIG is a bit safer. Tom Rakewell posted:So glad I dumped NOV for a small gain, that stock has been crap over the past two years or so. I may buy back in below 30, though I'd probably go bottom feeding on BP and RIG first. Thoogsby posted:If you're trying to get bargains as a result of the oil spill catastrophe I would take a look at RIG. Thoogsby posted:I think if you buy BP you're going to be sitting around twiddling your thumbs for a while at best, or just watching the stock drop while the details still come out at worst. It's pretty clear that the general public and media have decided that BP is the villain in this and it's not a secret there was negligence involved. If I was going to take a long position as a result of this I would pick up something tangentially related to the spill (RIG/HAL) or like Christo said and just buy stock in their competitors. Why are you guys optimistic about RIG? I understand that the public has chosen BP as the main villian, but the rig which exploded and released so much crude was owned and ran by RIG, shouldn't RIG be the responsible party instead? Also, pr0k posted:
I understand that hosed up oil wells means more business(lol relief wells), but doesn't that spell trouble for the Offshore drilling companies in the long run? More regulations? Less profits?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 15:44
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:Their market cap didn't go anywhere though... I know, this guy just thinks that because the stock is down at .05 or something, he cant lose that much more on it because it can only drop a few more pennies (and presuming it doesn't go busto). But they can 1-20 it, and then it has a lot of room to keep dropping.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 15:54
|
|
|
I think the support for RIG comes from the amount of business they have on the docket. Their future looks a little more certain than that of BP etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 16:01
|
|
|
Thoogsby posted:I think the support for RIG comes from the amount of business they have on the docket. Their future looks a little more certain than that of BP etc. also BP is going to be prevented from getting new contracts in/around the US for drilling but other oil companies wont and RIG would still be able to sell platform space. It also helps RIG is a B2B company less like BP and is likely to have less whiplash after they finish the investigation. Unless the investigation finds RIG's equipment/management exacerbated the problem while BP tried to prevent...
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 19:50
|
|
|
Corn posted:... Can someone explain this to me, and why wouldn't everyone do something like this? ... Everybody did. That is why the big bank stocks shot right back up even though their fundamentals all hosed up. If banks like citi and bac were forced to "write down" their holdings it would be a massacre.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 20:00
|
|
|
Thoogsby posted:I think the support for RIG comes from the amount of business they have on the docket. Their future looks a little more certain than that of BP etc. Rig rented to BP too and had a 0 liability contract with BP. BP had a head guy running the operations and calling the shots. Rig also still has a huge backlog of renting that Brazil and PBR want, so if they aren't allowed to drill another well in US waters who cares.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 20:43
|
|
|
Been reading Ben Graham's book. How applicable is that general portfolio policy between stocks and bonds to today's market? Are there better alternatives to bonds? I ask because I thought the bond market is crowded now or does it not make a difference?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2010 23:31
|
|
|
fougera posted:Been reading Ben Graham's book. How applicable is that general portfolio policy between stocks and bonds to today's market? Are there better alternatives to bonds? I ask because I thought the bond market is crowded now or does it not make a difference? Bond market isn't really crowded, but the yields were too low. Wait for that to shake out. We've seen Romania and Brazil have 0 accepted bid auctions already. People got use to 5% interest rates as the norm, which is crazy. People have finally stopped chasing yields and ignoring risk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 03:10
|
|
|
Christobevii3 posted:Rig rented to BP too and had a 0 liability contract with BP. BP had a head guy running the operations and calling the shots. rebound on BP, RIG & HAL on Monday with people who backed out last week coming back in with the hopes of the mile long tube helping with the problem?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 04:02
|
|
|
Dr. Jackal posted:rebound on BP, RIG & HAL on Monday with people who backed out last week coming back in with the hopes of the mile long tube helping with the problem? I don't see a rebound on anything tomorrow unless some massive piece of good news somehow comes out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 04:32
|
|
|
I think the trade of short us exporters, long strong eu exporters is a good bet with the euro free falling. Not really a daytrade idea but a quarter to quarter thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 14:44
|
|
|
Any Goons have a TradeKing account? I like Scottrade as they are simple and fast, but $7 trades are $7 trades. Tradeking is showing $4.95 and they offer free reinvestment of dividends. Scottrade doesnt. Fidelity also offers free reinvestment but require a retarded $2500 to start.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 17:11
|
|
|
What are all you options guys doing in this market? I've been reading about how it's best to sell options and spreads in a high-volatility environment like this, however it seems that one needs ridiculous levels of shares and/or cash for margin in order to get in on that action. Any ideas for a smaller-time trader looking to play high volatility?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 20:21
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
I have a few stocks Id like to buy from time to time but dont have multiple thousands of dollars to do so each and every time. I apologize that I am not as rich as you. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 20:46
|
|
|
MrBigglesworth posted:I have a few stocks Id like to buy from time to time but dont have multiple thousands of dollars to do so each and every time. I apologize that I am not as rich as you. It has been said here again and again, but commenting on undercapitalization is not making fun of you for not being super rich or whatever. Yes, not being able to meet a $2500 balance means you're severely undercapitalized (add a 0 and most people would still call you undercapitalized), but don't take it personally. Trading commissions operated on a fixed cost basis and not a percentage basis, so trading with a smaller sum of money means commissions eat up a much bigger percentage of your return. This makes trading for a profit, which is difficult enough, significantly more difficult, because you have to make a greater percentage on each trade in order to get some returns. Trading isn't like poker, where you can start with next to nothing and slowly grind out a large bankroll. The odds are stacked against you if you try to trade undercapitalized, and it's more likely than not your bankroll will be eaten up by commissions. It's better to save up and build a roll through your day job or whatever source of income you have and leave the trading alone until you have enough money to play around. That's what your average individual investor does; it's not like everyone here just got handed a few hundred grand to piss around in the market.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 21:07
|
|
|
Thats why I do save up to get multiple shares in order to minimize the amount of commission paid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 22:52
|
|
|
Wait, you mean you don't have to buy shares one at a time?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 23:15
|
|
|
What the hell happened to solar stocks?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2010 23:42
|
|
|
synapse posted:What the hell happened to solar stocks? euro weakness where the assumption of global demand ( Deutchland & China ) would be falling and hence would poo poo on earning for the foreseeable future. I think it was also overbought and crashed with the rest of the overbought market. I remember someone mentioning that the market has been overbought since February and that the pace of the stock market's recover didn't make any economic sense or something or something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 00:28
|
|
|
Dr. Jackal posted:euro weakness where the assumption of global demand ( Deutchland & China ) would be falling and hence would poo poo on earning for the foreseeable future. I think it was also overbought and crashed with the rest of the overbought market. Stick with SOLF, they actually managed to make more money on their euro hedging.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 01:14
|
|
|
Pretty much all my only big position left (GE) completely murdered me this week. But that's a longish-term investment, not a trade, and I don't mind buying into a sell off (within reason). China Pharm (CPHI) is a micro-cap around $3 dollars a share that actually makes money and has more cash than debt, as well as decent PEG. Really, that along with my Euro short has been the only thing keeping me too far into the red these last 2 weeks. So thanks to you goons for giving good advice and being smart.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 01:28
|
|
|
lazybrain posted:What are all you options guys doing in this market? I've been reading about how it's best to sell options and spreads in a high-volatility environment like this, however it seems that one needs ridiculous levels of shares and/or cash for margin in order to get in on that action. Any ideas for a smaller-time trader looking to play high volatility? When you say that you want to "sell options in a high-volatility environment" what do you mean and specifically in which issues do you want to sell vol? You can't really sell volatility without owning the underlying, or at least you can't properly manage the position.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 02:11
|
|
|
bought, AFK, vig, VPU, IRM,VT. This morning. Should have waited. I am interested in seeing how AFK looks in a couple years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 02:12
|
|
|
beginning paper trader here... How long do you typically hold a position? Reading through the thread it seems like some people are buying and holding for years, some for days, weeks, etc. Is this different for everyone? Do most traders have a variety of set timeframes in mind or is it random? Like, oh hey I'm happy with this profit now?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 04:38
|
|
|
fougera posted:Been reading Ben Graham's book. How applicable is that general portfolio policy between stocks and bonds to today's market? Are there better alternatives to bonds? I ask because I thought the bond market is crowded now or does it not make a difference? I don't think you really understood the main message of the book, assuming you're talking about the Intelligent Investor. You may want to check out the long-term investment thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 04:57
|
|
|
As a value investor, rather than a trader, my only set time frame is until price converges on my calculated value, or future events have forced me to change my valuation. That has taken only a few weeks in the past while coming off of last March's lows, but it in theory could take months or years, but typically I think one would run out of patience at around the length of a business cycle. For an actual trader, though, it seems to me that the correct time to end a trade depends on the time scale of the indicators used. A pattern that takes minutes or hours to develop should probably finish by the end of the day, and a pattern that develops over days should finish off over days too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 04:58
|
|
|
zacd posted:beginning paper trader here... I generally hold positions for a couple of days to weeks. In terms of targets/goals, I would say that's what separates the boys from the men if you know what I mean. Many times I've held positions that have reached my goal, and instead of kicking it to the curb and taking profit, I'll irrationally hold on hoping for more profit, only to fail. If you can set realistic goals, like I'm gonna sell EURUSD and my goal is 1.15 by July due to x,y,and z reasons, then that would be good. It would be great if you can actually stick to it and cover, because I think most people would be like "it dropped to 1.15, it'll clearly go to 1.10"...and that's when you run into trouble due to short covering/breaking news/oversold conditions/etc. Obviously depending on market condition it could drop lower, but my main point is you can be totally right about direction and price target, but if you don't have the discipline it's not gonna work. But those are just my thots on the matter and I'd like to hear what others have to say.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 05:10
|
|
|
DuckConference posted:I don't think you really understood the main message of the book, assuming you're talking about the Intelligent Investor. You may want to check out the long-term investment thread. To be fair, in that book Graham advocated a bond/stock ratio that varied between 3/1 and 1/3, depending on an investor's risk tolerance, and, God-help-us, subjective views on the relative attractiveness of stocks and bonds. For the "defensive" investor he advocated against going above 50% stock unless stocks were a definite bargain. However, there seems to be the impression that bonds are risky because of rising interest rates. There are ways of dealing with that short of avoiding bonds, though. If you go with bonds of a shorter maturity, despite the lower yields, then their value will change considerably less than longer bonds in response to interest rate movements.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 05:13
|
|
|
zacd posted:beginning paper trader here... It depends on the person. Traders are usually aiming to make money by exploiting behavior of the stock market itself ("technical analysis"). They'll hold stocks for anywhere from a few minutes to a week or so, and exit when they've attained a sufficient profit. The goal of a trader is to eke profits out of temporary fluctuations in the market. Investors think of stocks as portions of a company, and look at the company's overall financial health and prospects ("fundamentals analysis"). A short-term investment period might be a few months, while long-term is forever. The goal of an investor is to find healthy companies, buy stock, and wait 30 years for them to become healthy *huge* companies. There's usually some mixing of the two -- for example, traders generally don't pay attention to fundamentally hosed companies, and investors will use technical analysis to avoid buying into a temporary high fluctuation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 05:26
|
|
|
DancingMachine posted:2) take a long-term short position on gold. I have no idea how or if this is even possible. Obviously traditional shorting or buying put options on a gold fund doesn't work if the bet is intended to be long-ish term. Just buy an inverse gold ETF like DGZ. You can buy DZZ if you're extra-sure about gold going down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 15:53
|
|
|
Tom Rakewell posted:It has been said here again and again, but commenting on undercapitalization is not making fun of you for not being super rich or whatever. Yes, not being able to meet a $2500 balance means you're severely undercapitalized (add a 0 and most people would still call you undercapitalized), but don't take it personally. Trading commissions operated on a fixed cost basis and not a percentage basis, so trading with a smaller sum of money means commissions eat up a much bigger percentage of your return. This makes trading for a profit, which is difficult enough, significantly more difficult, because you have to make a greater percentage on each trade in order to get some returns. Just curious what people feel is a reasonable percent to spend on commission?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
Just bought a bunch of RIG on the dip -- I don't understand why everybody's hating harder on them than on BP, but here's hoping they recover in a few years
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2010 18:30
|
|