|
MrBigglesworth posted:What the hell just happened? I think that this has something to do with the Goldman Sachs testimony today. http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/27/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:16 |
|
|
Ford is going the wrong way! EUROPE!! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 17:04
|
|
|
quote:Are you really questioning a single down day after about 90 straight days of nothing but up days? No, we are just puttering along, Greece shits the bed and then the market goes crazy. I just dont see the logic of Greece having problems to cause someone to go in and say, welp, better sell some of my holdings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 17:05
|
|
|
MrBigglesworth posted:No, we are just puttering along, Greece shits the bed and then the market goes crazy. I just dont see the logic of Greece having problems to cause someone to go in and say, welp, better sell some of my holdings. maybe everyone dumped their stocks and bought the 15% greek bonds 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 17:06
|
|
|
MrBigglesworth posted:No, we are just puttering along, Greece shits the bed and then the market goes crazy. I just dont see the logic of Greece having problems to cause someone to go in and say, welp, better sell some of my holdings. Isn't most of Europe heavily invested in Greek bonds?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 17:13
|
|
|
On the bright side my vacation to Europe in a few months will be cheaper...
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 17:15
|
|
|
Short euros long treasuries  it's about time something worked.Also the Senate witch hunts are really starting to annoy me but yet I can't stop watching. MrBigglesworth posted:No, we are just puttering along, Greece shits the bed and then the market goes crazy. I just dont see the logic of Greece having problems to cause someone to go in and say, welp, better sell some of my holdings. Well Greece getting downgraded to junk and Portugal getting downgraded at essentially the same time is kind of a big deal and impacts eurozone companies/institutional investors that have exposure. Not to mention this was announced while the Euro exchanges are about to close. Hence, everyone (meaning euro and american institutional investors) runs to cover, sells equities, and buys treasuries/gilts/bunds to reduce risk. PsychoAndy fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Apr 27, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 17:18
|
|
|
Well, the euro thing is definitely hurting my Chiquita Brands.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 17:51
|
|
|
The real question is, assuming Portugal/Greece downgrade isn't a catalyst for more to come, what equities would you buy on this pullback? Catch a falling knife with GS? Get into some fruit while it's down 2%? Maybe some CME/ICE once congress pushes thru more derivative reform, which should equal more business for exchanges?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 18:02
|
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I'm looking hard at X, POT, PRU and, yes, GS. Just not during a shakeout the day before Fed Wednesday, regardless of how unsurprising the announcement will surely be. PsychoAndy posted:Short euros long treasuries Wrote May 92 calls against my TLT position. Nice to see it come back but I don't see the yield on the 10-year dropping much past 3.7% without something exploding (and I don't mind being wrong if it does). IV on the May VIX options is loving ridiculous, it's taking all my willpower to not get long the 21 puts. Plastic Jesus fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Apr 27, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 18:04
|
|
|
I WANT TO EAT BABBY posted:Wrote May 92 calls against my TLT position. Nice to see it come back but I don't see the yield on the 10-year dropping much past 3.7% without something exploding (and I don't mind being wrong if it does). First off, good call on the 10 year yield going from 4 to 3.75, as opposed to 4.25. I would agree, in that there's a lot of resistance on the TLT at 92ish, and I don't think people will freak out as extensively regarding Greece, unless they actually default and/or leave the Eurozone. Most of the damage is done/priced in, so I'm more inclined to look into selling treasuries or playing the range of 89-91 on the TLT.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 18:29
|
|
|
PsychoAndy posted:First off, good call on the 10 year yield going from 4 to 3.75, as opposed to 4.25. I would agree, in that there's a lot of resistance on the TLT at 92ish, and I don't think people will freak out as extensively regarding Greece, unless they actually default and/or leave the Eurozone. Most of the damage is done/priced in, so I'm more inclined to look into selling treasuries or playing the range of 89-91 on the TLT. Personally, I think the market just looking for a good reason to have a significant down day. All this rallying is making people (including me) uneasy. However I think there is too much positive pressure on the US economy to really slow it down. I wouldn't be surprised if we closed close to even today to be quite honest.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 18:37
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:Personally, I think the market just looking for a good reason to have a significant down day. All this rallying is making people (including me) uneasy. However I think there is too much positive pressure on the US economy to really slow it down. I don't know, I looking at it, one hour left and I think 1% would be hard to make up unless people who covered their Europe position decided to invest in the US suddenly instead of holding it as liquid...
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 19:22
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:Personally, I think the market just looking for a good reason to have a significant down day. All this rallying is making people (including me) uneasy. However I think there is too much positive pressure on the US economy to really slow it down. Agree, which is why I'm wondering if people are buying on the dip. But the Greek thing is kind of a big deal so I wouldn't just discount it as a dumb reason to cause a pullback. Also, after seeing late 2008-2009, I always enjoyed when the market would drop 1-1.5%, and then pull back to flat between 3-4PM.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 19:34
|
|
|
PsychoAndy posted:Also, after seeing late 2008-2009, I always enjoyed when the market would drop 1-1.5%, and then pull back to flat between 3-4PM. GS has their SPY cannons turned off today.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 19:42
|
|
|
Christobevii3 posted:Aahahah 13% now wtf. Supposedly the exposure to European banks is similar to the size of Lehman brothers blowing up, overnight lending crisis anyone? If euribor and eurodollar front months are to believed, you might be right. Then again, it won't be clear if it's just an overreaction till tomorrow morning. Worth a look at the charts if you can find them - compare the ranges to a normal day. Symbols are I M0 on LIFFE and GE M0 on CME.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 20:37
|
|
|
err, well scratch that idea... edit; How is the Euro not decimated yet? I would think it would be at least at $1.30 by now... Cheesemaster200 fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Apr 27, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 21:13
|
|
|
Best CNBC day...no commentators other than my BFF Rick Santelli and a couple sound bytes from the others.Cheesemaster200 posted:err, well scratch that idea... The Greek thing is a marathon, not a sprint. Today was a ginormous move in fx, and most of the action hasn't been countered by Asia. I'm hoping they sell EURJPY but I'm guessing that there will be some knife-catching overnight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 21:29
|
|
|
I'm looking at possibly getting into BRK-B on Wednesday/Thursday now that it's down 2-3% in the wake of the GS fiasco/Greece Meltdown. However, I am concerned with the "coming Wall Street crackdown" which could further damage BRK-B. I'm a bit of a novice to trading in general and certainly don't completely understand the ramifications of today's events. Would BRK-B be expected to rebound soon, or am I thinking about this all wrong?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 21:35
|
|
|
BRK/B is for holding a long time in my book. I got in at $70.99. Plan on holding it a few yars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 21:46
|
|
|
BRK/A and BRK/B are so dependent on one heartbeat that I just know the day Buffett finally goes, it'll be down a lot. Same with AAPL in a way though less so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 21:58
|
|
|
SNSS holdings up 17% today, going to add on the pullback tomorrow. I imagine the road to ASCO in June should be pretty sweet. FBC boards are going nuts right now, hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 22:26
|
|
|
Duey posted:BRK/A and BRK/B are so dependent on one heartbeat that I just know the day Buffett finally goes, it'll be down a lot. Same with AAPL in a way though less so. I see that flipped. AAPL needs Steve, Buffett could get lost for a decade and BRK/a/b would be fine. though when he goes it will drop, the value will just stay. Not as much with Apple.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 23:01
|
|
|
MrBigglesworth posted:No, we are just puttering along, Greece shits the bed and then the market goes crazy. I just dont see the logic of Greece having problems to cause someone to go in and say, welp, better sell some of my holdings. Lots of leverage out there. When you are in the market with money that doesn't belong to you the the smallest risk, the smallest bad news, an otherwise normal drop in price is catastrophic and results in big time panics. Because a large portion of people try to be like Wall Street bankers they will react to changes in the market as if they are leveraged even when they aren't which results in them taking hilarious losses they otherwise should not have and losing out on the gains because they aren't leveraged.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 23:09
|
|
|
Foma posted:I see that flipped. AAPL needs Steve, Buffett could get lost for a decade and BRK/a/b would be fine. though when he goes it will drop, the value will just stay. Not as much with Apple.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 23:13
|
|
|
Read one of Buffets statements in one of their quarterly releases from some time back. He has his successor(s) picked and the names are in an envelope in his desk. He has no problems with the team in place as they are basically running things already.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 23:52
|
|
|
I'm not suggesting Berkshire won't survive his death, just that it will suffer because of it. At any rate, that's why I don't put any money into it, instead I put it into stocks which promptly plunge! I'm looking at you QCOM.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 00:04
|
|
|
Good lord, this senate hearing is painful. You have people who don't even know what a cdo or cds is asking a loving CEO advanced stuff then using horrible analogies. They compared GS structuring of cdo's as a sports player betting on a game then throwing it. Then he explains how the buyer was the one picking most of them, Abaca. Also giving disclosure to a hedge fund about your position on their account is retarded. If they ask sure, but its not a mom and pop edward jones client who doesn't know poo poo about anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 00:17
|
|
|
Christobevii3 posted:Good lord, this senate hearing is painful. You have people who don't even know what a cdo or cds is asking a loving CEO advanced stuff then using horrible analogies. They compared GS structuring of cdo's as a sports player betting on a game then throwing it. Then he explains how the buyer was the one picking most of them, Abaca. 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. If Congress wanted to have a useful hearing, they could get the people who bought subprime mortgage CDOs and grill them on their decision making processes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 02:26
|
|
|
Am I the only one who thinks that the majority of this senate hearing has absolutely nothing to do with the actual SEC fraud case and its just a witch hunt/showboating opportunity? Am I wrong in that analysis?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 03:18
|
|
|
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.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 03:47
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
greasyhands posted: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? I didn't tell them that. I paid a third party to assess how much gold was in my garbage. If the third party gave a stupid answer, it's not my fault.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 04:48
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:Am I the only one who thinks that the majority of this senate hearing has absolutely nothing to do with the actual SEC fraud case and its just a witch hunt/showboating opportunity? Not wrong, that's how most congressional hearings are. This will have no effect on the outcome of the SEC case.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 04:59
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:Am I the only one who thinks that the majority of this senate hearing has absolutely nothing to do with the actual SEC fraud case and its just a witch hunt/showboating opportunity? Also, uncensored profanity on CNBC always makes my day the rare cases it happens!
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 05:11
|
|
|
Hobologist posted:I didn't tell them that. I paid a third party to assess how much gold was in my garbage. If the third party gave a stupid answer, it's not my fault. ABACUS was a bunch of CDSs, not CDOs. I have no idea who structured the underlying CDOs- maybe Goldman maybe not. But it doesn't matter because they just created the CDS products. So credit ratings don't enter into the GS case, they're only relevant in the underlying. I'm not trying to defend Goldman, they don't enter into an agreement if they don't think they're the smart money. But with ABACUS they were just building a product to collect fees and the prop desk (probably) didn't have anything to do with that. The issue is whether or not they marketed that product with fair disclosure. If Pauslen was not only the short but the selector of the underlying securities that seems difficult to believe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 05:40
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:Am I the only one who thinks that the majority of this senate hearing has absolutely nothing to do with the actual SEC fraud case and its just a witch hunt/showboating opportunity? Dumbass (Levin): "You're taking these things out of your inventory, selling them, all the while going short against the positions you're selling, and you don't have a problem with that?" Blankfein: "Our intention to bet up or down on the security is irrelevant given our position as a market-maker on these deals. Our clients come to us, asking to be exposed to real estate risk, and we give them that. We make hundreds of thousands, if not millions of bets, long and short, in and out of nearly all global markets on a daily basis. " Dumbass: "But you're betting against the thing you're trying to sell. You don't think your client deserved to know that you were going short on the very security you were selling to them?" Blankfein: "No. Nor would they want to! When two parties bet against each other, it is the market maker's responsibility to protect each party's information regarding this type of deal." Dumbass: "But you're selling these things from your inventory while going short on the same products!" Blankfein: "Our position at the time was as an outlier, and if more people had been shorting the mortgage market, that would have helped prices from spiraling up in the fashion they did. Our clients didn't want to know our position, they wanted us to honestly give them exposure to a certain market, which we did." Dumbass: "But you're shorting the very securities you're selling. Answer my question. You don't have a problem with that? You know what, you clearly aren't going to answer any of my questions, and we're running out of time, so we'll move on to senator McCain's questions..." ?!?! I love all the analogies to car sales and sports betting. Levin is a bed-wetter of the worst variety, and as far as I can tell, he doesn't even know what the gently caress the difference is between a derivative and a stock. All this talk of "inventories" and "hanging these things out for your customers to buy" makes me sick. I mean, its not as if this was a deal done by professionals for other professionals who not only knew what they were getting into, they specified the exact synthetic slices of this derivative pie Mr. Levin and cohort seems to think Goldman was selling. (Did you guys catch the bit about specifying synthetic mortgage debt according to peoples' mortgage lengths and their credit scores? 'Yeah, I'll take $1B of the 20-year, 600 credit score mortgage contracts.') These derivatives are actually pretty cool in how they allow an investor to manage his risk. If the underlying entities weren't based on fraudulent information, maybe we would have had something there. These guys were the last to participate in recession-causing funny business, they performed better than most at it, and their continued ability to provide liquidity and unbelievable banking supply all over the world remains essential. I'm looking at LEAPs on the stock. So yes, it is one of the more shameless and ignorant witch hunts I've seen in a while. Fortunately, it seems like Goldman kept their cool and did a pretty good job of making our (bipartisan) rear end in a top hat senators look like fools. But like anyone else, I'm mainly concerned with myself. How do we, the little retail investors, fit into this picture? I love derivatives! Should I be afraid of Uncle Sam somehow interfering with my ability to trade options and futures, assuming I cover my bets?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 05:53
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:Am I the only one who thinks that the majority of this senate hearing has absolutely nothing to do with the actual SEC fraud case and its just a witch hunt/showboating opportunity? Pretty much everyone asking the questions is up for reelection this year if you didn't take note. Its basically the finger pointing that fits popular with the people who think they are bailing out the banks. In reality, Goldman didn't swindle ma and pa into a balloon loan. I literally watched for twenty minutes as they kept trying to force "small position" for a $50 million net short position against a long position was argued. Anytime he tried to explain it depends on whether the good long or the bad short made more money to the actual valuation they would cut him out and just say "answer was it short." Also, using a bunch of analogies for this poo poo really is annoying. "It's like you're a sports star and betting against your team and throwing the game." No its loving not you dumb loving oval office.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 06:02
|
|
|
I watched this from 11 to at least 7 or 8, and the biggest concept I thought the Senators discussed, other than the sports book analogy, was the ethics of market-making while having a directional position on the market, as well as "full disclosure" in selling synthetic products. I don't think the senators quite understand how institutional investing works (idiots in charge of money may sometimes may want to speculate in things they don't know anything about), or that at the time there were plenty of people still bullish on housing, or hell, even the concept of caveat emptor. I am glad that Tom Colburn at least tried to call out GS for martyring the Fabulous Fab with irrelevant romantic email interludes. Clearly, all of this testimony wasn't to prove GS right or wrong (altho they tried), but to put them on the record on certain points in order to use as evidence for constructing financial regulation legislation. Anyone who's read Liar's Poker knows that all of these things occurred 20 years ago; the funny thing is, after reading it over and over again, the themes are essentially the same. Creating synthetic derivatives (the advent of MBS), creating lots of debt (then junk bonds, now mortgages), greed, how investment banks screw clients, etc. BABBY where do you get that ABACUS was a bunch of CDS? Isn't ABACUS a structured CDO that GS/Paulson and Co bought CDS protection on? As far as I know, a CDO is based on an asset backed security (mortgages), thus creating a synthetic derivative. Then, you obtain CDS protection/risk on that. The question of fraud directly relating to ABACUS relates to the picking of the underlying assets to create ABACUS, not CDS on ABACUS...although the CDS part is part of why everyone is up in arms.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 06:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:16 |
|
|
PsychoAndy posted:Anyone who's read Liar's Poker knows that all of these things occurred 20 years ago; the funny thing is, after reading it over and over again, the themes are essentially the same. Creating synthetic derivatives (the advent of MBS), creating lots of debt (then junk bonds, now mortgages), greed, how investment banks screw clients, etc. I think Partnoy's FIASCO would be more appropriate. He worked on a derivatives desk and worked to make all kinds of derivative linked notes. He said it was more or less accepted among the note sellers that you would eventually blow up your clients, so the goal was just to collect fees until then. His clients received their rude awakening that AAA refers to default risk, not risk of actually losing money (he did a lot of currency-linked structured notes). His conclusion was that every time you buy something more complicated that Treasury debt, someone on Wall Street is laughing at you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2010 06:19
|
|