|
WDC or STX?
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2010 05:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 06:36 |
|
|
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
|
|
|
quote:Anyway, The stock price went from about $11 to >$7 after the outbreak, then rebounded to ~$11 (then the recession happened and wiped out all of that goodwill and honesty). At the time, I saw that as a smart approach by a CEO - to immediately acknowledge a blatant gently caress up. This is why google is a great company. They took full responsiblity for the wifi snafu thats in the news right now. A counter example of a company who tried to cover poo poo up: Toyota. The basic story is, if you gently caress up, own up to it and the fallout will be much less long lasting, although still as severe. Good life advice too!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2010 17:42
|
|
|
fougera posted:WDC or STX? I love WDC, but look at an intraday chart of it over the past two or three weeks and tell me that isn't totally hosed. So much volatility...
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2010 08:02
|
|
|
WDC and STX both are taking it hard since Greece poo poo the bed. I dont get it either. I work for Seagate even and in our last quarterly report inventory was reported to be tight until the end of the year, sales are good. But analysts have hated HDD stocks for a while now and it puzzles me. You dont buy a computer/laptop without storage. You can get server without storage, but you eventually put something into that fucker. Looking at finviz.com shows both companies have extremely large institutional holdings, both right at 90%. I dont know if that has anything to do with it or what, but just look at the charts. Greece hits, then both start to tank. It's crazy that both companies were at 52 week highs just over a month ago.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 01:05
|
|
|
MrBigglesworth posted:WDC and STX both are taking it hard since Greece poo poo the bed. I dont get it either. I work for Seagate even and in our last quarterly report inventory was reported to be tight until the end of the year, sales are good. But analysts have hated HDD stocks for a while now and it puzzles me. You dont buy a computer/laptop without storage. You can get server without storage, but you eventually put something into that fucker. Lots of stocks have lost 25% since the Greece thing, it's just not as dramatically shown in the indexes. Plus do Seagate and WDC make a lot of the flash type drives or the components of or have a big market share in the SSD department?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 03:19
|
|
|
I asked because I thought STX is a better value play. But I wanted to know who has better earnings prospects.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 03:31
|
|
|
ayekappy posted:Plus do Seagate and WDC make a lot of the flash type drives or the components of or have a big market share in the SSD department?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 03:33
|
|
|
Well, we have that hybrid 4GB flash Momentus XT drive in various HD sizes for the platter.. Personally I think the flash cache should be much bigger, at least 16GB. 4 just screams of being too small for my opinion. Its a good start though. Pure SSD drives are too expensive right now still. I have an Intel 80GB drive, and love the poo poo out of it. But hybrids a good start. And HDD stuff isnt going anywhere its just too cheap for such massive amounts of storage. Nothing wrong with hybrid system, or smallish app/boot drive and using spinners for all your videos and mp3s.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 03:35
|
|
|
Is anyone holding IRE? I was paid a dividend of ~$1 dollar a share, the stock is valued at ~$4, I believe this is an error by the company I bought the stock through (Fidelity), but they are claiming that is in fact legitimate... how is that possible? I see no record of the dividend anywhere, cannot find any information from googling it, and two of their reps have told me "I am sorry, all I can tell you is that according to our information IRE paid a dividend and the transfer agent for the ADR deposited it into our depository."
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 14:18
|
|
|
Fuckin Euro, go back into the hole in whence you came...
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 14:22
|
|
|
Sold TSL for a miniscule profit - I wasn't liking the extreme volatility of solar stocks and wanted out. I want to sit in cash and save up for a large cap with a decent dividend.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 16:40
|
|
|
i am not zach posted:Is anyone holding IRE? I was paid a dividend of ~$1 dollar a share, the stock is valued at ~$4, I believe this is an error by the company I bought the stock through (Fidelity), but they are claiming that is in fact legitimate... how is that possible? I see no record of the dividend anywhere, cannot find any information from googling it, and two of their reps have told me "I am sorry, all I can tell you is that according to our information IRE paid a dividend and the transfer agent for the ADR deposited it into our depository." My Schwab platform doesn't list any dividend for IRE. Does their history show that they always pay out their dividend? Even if it does, there's always the chance that the stock has been hammered so much they won't be able to pay it, which will then drive the price down even further. I'd be very careful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 23:26
|
|
|
dethkon posted:My Schwab platform doesn't list any dividend for IRE. Does their history show that they always pay out their dividend? Even if it does, there's always the chance that the stock has been hammered so much they won't be able to pay it, which will then drive the price down even further. I'd be very careful. Well, I called a third time and I guess they owed me money and it just read Dividend payout for IRE by mistake... weird I guess
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 04:29
|
|
|
Hey I got this free money (weird), does anyone know how I can get rid of it. (cause I don't want to steal or n e thing ^.^)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 08:41
|
|
|
i am not zach posted:Well, I called a third time and I guess they owed me money and it just read Dividend payout for IRE by mistake... weird I guess thinkorswim has a dividend of $1.04 listed for IRE on June 7.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 12:34
|
|
|
I WANT TO EAT BABBY posted:thinkorswim has a dividend of $1.04 listed for IRE on June 7. How can that be possible? I'm new to the whole stock market thing, but isn't that incredibly high considering the price IRE trades at?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 15:41
|
|
|
Tesla's going public: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-0616-tesla-20100616,0,5877243.story What do you have to do to get into an IPO like that? Any chance of a smaller investor being able to buy in at the offering price or would I have to wait a couple days?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 17:55
|
|
|
Do you have lots of money? I just checked the IPO offering area on my Fidelity account and got the following after seeing Tesla in the selection: quote:IPO Message
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 18:57
|
|
|
MrBigglesworth posted:Do you have lots of money? Heh, that's a little out of the budget. Guess I'll just wait to see how much the price is when it's actually listed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 19:03
|
|
|
Anyone watch CNBC today? What is going on with Erin Burnett's makeup? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 19:14
|
|
|
For those people who look at charts this looks almost exactly like what happened before the large drop in Q4 2008. Same absurd market caps too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 19:31
|
|
|
Jack posted:For those people who look at charts this looks almost exactly like what happened before the large drop in Q4 2008. Same absurd market caps too. What? In that the major market indexes went down, then up, then down and now up again?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 21:58
|
|
|
Jack posted:For those people who look at charts this looks almost exactly like what happened before the large drop in Q4 2008. Same absurd market caps too. Well if my holdings never recovered I have nothing to fear. Right? RIGHT?! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 23:59
|
|
|
Technical analysis goons, any thoughts on triple moving averages?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2010 00:48
|
|
|
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. BPs moves are so out of touch with shareholders interests its ridiculous. WHY would you GIVE 20 billion dollars to a government run fund and suspend dividends, the court system is the corporation's best friend. Obama must have been speaking some harsh terms. BTW BP's revocation of their 5/5 dividend is completely illegal. Did they even have any lawyers at this meeting? I am shocked that they would gently caress over their shareholders like this but overall good for them cause they did gently caress up the gulf big time, however, I will not own a company that doesn't have the interests of the shareholders in mind, overall though it's still undervalued hell they'll "make" an extra 10 billion this year because of tax savings. Bigntasty fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Jun 17, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 02:07
|
|
|
They have to generate some type of good will or press at this point. Right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 02:10
|
|
|
For some crazy reads you should hit the Yahoo Finance forums for BP, people calling for Obama to be, um......yah and people screaming about the illegality of pulling an already declared dividend to those saying they had everything tied up in BP, now they have 50% decreased value and no forseeable dividend payouts starting now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 02:12
|
|
|
No one is gonna start looking at BP as the good guy regardless of how big that number is. They wouldn't look all that much worse if they refused to let the gov distribute, they are going to have to go to court over this anyway, paying 20 billion gives the courts/jury an absolute low point that they will surely go above.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 02:17
|
|
|
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:BPs moves are so out of touch with shareholders interests its ridiculous. WHY would you GIVE 20 billion dollars to a government run fund and suspend dividends, the court system is the corporation's best friend. Obama must have been speaking some harsh terms. He was, in fact he did in his speech last night by explicitly saying "reckless." As a lawyer he wouldn't have used that term unless there was a large amount of evidence that BP was indeed criminally reckless. And if that's the case pissed-off shareholders have moved pretty far down the list of things for BP to worry about. And don't be obtuse, they aren't GIVING anybody poo poo. They've set up a fund to pay restitution because they hosed up in spectacular style. Your interests as a shareholder should right now should be focused on BP (1) not going into bankruptcy and (2) trying to salvage anything from their brand. On the plus side you've got a 50/50 chance of being an owner of XOM by year's end.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 02:26
|
|
|
greasyhands posted: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. 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. I'm speaking from an investment point of view, I'm not mad about them paying because they should, but from an investment standpoint it doesn't speak well for the stock. I'm still holding some of it as its in everyones interest to keep them generating cash tho, like the tobacco companies. I would expect Obama to use reckless and negligent, but what he says in his speech and what the courts find are very different. Overall I'm glad they are paying tho being from Florida. Bigntasty fucked around with this message at 02:35 on Jun 17, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 02:30
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Everyone was pissed off at the banks a year ago, I didn't see them setting up unemployment funds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 02:39
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
I'm not mad just very surprised, hell the stock is up since the announcement. Overall my BP position is rather small
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 02:54
|
|
|
If you don't think BP was paying that money anyway you're being foolish. It's better for them that they get the "BP TO PUT 20 MIL IN ESCROW FOR GULF RELIEF" headlines now than some page 7 story in 2 years that says "today BP settled in court to pay $xx to such and such".
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 03:11
|
|
|
Bigntasty posted:I'm speaking from an investment point of view, I'm not mad about them paying because they should, but from an investment standpoint it doesn't speak well for the stock. I'm still holding some of it as its in everyones interest to keep them generating cash tho, like the tobacco companies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 04:13
|
|
|
I am not sure how anyone who wasn't in the White House meetings is saying the 20 billion dollar escrow was or wasn't in BPs best interest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 04:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 06:36 |
|
|
Newbie investor here, in the process of reading some of the books discussed in the first page. I have a finance degree however most of my time has been spent in IT so I'm not well-versed in the workings of the stock-market. At the moment I am reading The Neatest Little Guide to Stock Market Investing, and his proposed Maximum Midcap strategy seems too good to be true? Can anyone bring me back down to earth in terms of the flaws this strategy has and why everyone isnt doing this already?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2010 04:30
|
|
