Show-me Account Talk

[Show-me]

Well my greedy little play two down day rule eroded my almost 4% first 5 trading days gain into a -1.23% loss. Brilliant!

Now I'm getting concerned, the bounce that ensued was paltry at best and short. Calls for a massive correction are every where.

I'm concerned that the last two trading days were negative. I will hold for the first week of February.

The bankers are seeing the writing on the walls and spoke of it in Davos, Switzerland.

What still remains is the Alt-A loan resets, commercial real estate, jobs, unemployment, etc.

GDP was no surprise as after the huge decline our bounce was just as over exaggerated.

State of the Union was a campaign speech and BHO lost points calling out the Supreme Court. Equally I would like the Court to start commenting on BHO's moves.

 

[Show-me]

Watchdog: Bailouts created more risk in system

Bailout watchdog: Response to financial crisis response leaves US with even more risk

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Watch...html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=

 

[Show-me]

U-6 Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached
workers, plus total employed part time for
economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian
labor force plus all marginally attached workers..

13.5 16.4 17.1 13.7 16.8 17.0 17.4 17.2 17.3

NOTE: Marginally attached workers are persons who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and
are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the recent past. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached,
have given a job-market related reason for not looking currently for a job. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those
who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. For more information, see "BLS intro-
duces new range of alternative unemployment measures," in the October 1995 issue of the Monthly Labor Review. Updated population con-
trols are introduced annually with the release of January data.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm

 

[Uptrend]

Show-me:
On the subject of unemployment and the BLS, here is a reason to be cautious next Friday, February 5th. The have a fairly complex birth-death model for business starts and failures and may be underestimating business bankruptcy filings. As I understand it, BLS adjustmenst on the net new business starts vs failures for total jobs lost are only revised once a year, as prior data is added to their model. Many claim for 2009 that this will show up in an annual revision due out next Friday of -800,000 to -1,000,000 jobs lost as an adjustment to the prior 2009 year. What will this do to the market?

Here are links. The information is very detailed from BLS.

"Let’s put some numbers to this: In 2008, 43,546 businesses filed for bankruptcy; Even more are filing in 2009 — Q2 of 2009, the most recent data available, saw 16,014 bankruptcy filings — on pace to run 33% more than the prior year.
BLS simply does not catch all of these failures in the monthly NFP reports.
The next BLS B/D adjustment will be in February 2010, when they qill like add another 800,000 to a million lost jobs to the prior years . . ."
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/11/birth-death-model-fails-to-keep-up-with-business-failures/

http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm

 

[350zCommTech]

Show-me:
On the subject of unemployment and the BLS, here is a reason to be cautious next Friday, February 5th. The have a fairly complex birth-death model for business starts and failures and may be underestimating business bankruptcy filings. As I understand it, BLS adjustmenst on the net new business starts vs failures for total jobs lost are only revised once a year, as prior data is added to their model. Many claim for 2009 that this will show up in an annual revision due out next Friday of -800,000 to -1,000,000 jobs lost as an adjustment to the prior 2009 year. What will this do to the market?

Here are links. The information is very detailed from BLS.

"Let’s put some numbers to this: In 2008, 43,546 businesses filed for bankruptcy; Even more are filing in 2009 — Q2 of 2009, the most recent data available, saw 16,014 bankruptcy filings — on pace to run 33% more than the prior year.
BLS simply does not catch all of these failures in the monthly NFP reports.
The next BLS B/D adjustment will be in February 2010, when they qill like add another 800,000 to a million lost jobs to the prior years . . ."
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/11/birth-death-model-fails-to-keep-up-with-business-failures/

http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm

Thank you very much for posting this. The F fund will be the place to be for Friday, unless it gets leaked on Thursday.

 

[Bullitt]

Many claim for 2009 that this will show up in an annual revision due out next Friday of -800,000 to -1,000,000 jobs lost as an adjustment to the prior 2009 year. What will this do to the market?

Good thoughts but here's my thing- Is that idea already being factored into the market? If you read it somewhere, somebody has already acted upon it.

The manipulators know that soon enough 250,000 jobs will be created for the 2010 census so they probably plan on that offsetting quite a bit of loss. Again, how much of those 250K jobs have already been factored into the market? Probably all of it.

Liquidity is being drained and wall street is getting the blame for every bit of this mess. China and India got the ball rolling by raising bank reserve requirements last week. Neither of those things are not good for a market.

What a mess. I just hope we start to withdraw liquidity sooner than later to avoid stagflation.

 

[350zCommTech]

Good thoughts but here's my thing- Is that idea already being factored into the market? If you read it somewhere, somebody has already acted upon it.

The manipulators know that soon enough 250,000 jobs will be created for the 2010 census so they probably plan on that offsetting quite a bit of loss. Again, how much of those 250K jobs have already been factored into the market? Probably all of it.

Liquidity is being drained and wall street is getting the blame for every bit of this mess. China and India got the ball rolling by raising bank reserve requirements last week. Neither of those things are not good for a market.

What a mess. I just hope we start to withdraw liquidity sooner than later to avoid stagflation.

I don't know whether it's already priced into the stockmarket. But it doesn't appear to be priced into the bond market. Bond yields will drop big on that news.

 

[Bullitt]

You're right about that. Bond Yields will drop this week.

 

[grandma]

Good thoughts but here's my thing- Is that idea already being factored into the market? If you read it somewhere, somebody has already acted upon it.

The manipulators know that soon enough 250,000 jobs will be created for the 2010 census so they probably plan on that offsetting quite a bit of loss. Again, how much of those 250K jobs have already been factored into the market? Probably all of it.

Okay - everyone hit your pause button - I need a quick refresher on `factoring in.'
Who - name names, or at least the agency- does the factoring in?
We read in the paper the info they obtained from a teletype newservice: that 250,000 jobs are being activated for the census. So who pounces on that? and then does : what ??_
- so that we can say `that issue has been factored in' - ??

 

[Bullitt]

Grandma, it's the reason I've been CNBC free for over 2 years now. When Jimmy Rogers gets on and says, "I'm bullish China. I'd be a buyer of China right now", you should not be buying China. He's looking for someone to sell to.

Another example. Healthcare stocks. Look at any healthcare stock; we'll pick MRK because that's what I used to own. The price was driven up before the Republicans took Massachusetts and then it sold off shortly after. I sold a few days after the news broke. I was hoping it would be a long term buy and hold dividend payer, but this market is broken. Devil take the hindmost.

Every one of us on this MB is dumb money. We don't have access to privy information, even the stuff zero hedge posts is not insider information. Options markets contain buku insiders. You can control large amounts of stock with minimal money in the options markets.

Insiders are everywhere and the whole point of technical analysis is to find the insiders by volume and trendlines, but that's a whole other thread for that subject. Teletype service for us, but word of mouth, text message and email for the insiders and market makers. Why would anyone print something before acting on it? Besides, how much "red tape" does an article have to go through before they print it? The decision makers, CEO's, and Central Planners aren't sequestered when they aren't at work.

You want names? Use your imagination. There's a big case going on right now with Galleon Group and tentacles of their corruption is running deeper than ever imagined. It's a jungle out there. Watch your six.

 

[Show-me]

A storm is coming.

It is generally accepted that the Fed's purchase of $1.25 trillion in mortgage bonds has significantly contributed to 50 year lows for interest rates on 30 year fixed rate mortgages. If the Fed stops purchasing, the assumption is that those rates will rise. But beyond that assumption, the uncertainty factor in all of this is huge. A key uncertainty, as noted above, is how much rates will increase when the purchase program ends. Consider the following:

• William Dudley, President of the New York Fed, and close ally of Chairman Bernanke: "There's a big debate about whether (any interest rate increase) will be small or medium or large. So I think we'll have to wait and see."
• Bill Gross, CEO of PIMCO, the largest U.S. bond fund: "I think it will (put upward pressure on interest rates). I mean, the mortgage market would be your first place to look, in terms of something that's overvalued that would become normalized. Nobody knows what the Fed's buying is worth -- we think about half a percentage point on rates, but we don't know." (Emphasis added)
• The Federal Reserve, in its December minutes, took the unusual step of reporting that there was a dispute among the members about the impact of terminating the MBS purchase program.

A key contributor to this uncertainty is the radical nature of what the Fed has been doing. Before the Great Recession, the Fed did not purchase MBS securities. It is now the dominant purchaser of such securities. No one knows to what extent the private market will step back in and fill the void when the Fed stops purchasing. Thus, according to the Wall Street Journal, the issue has become "one of the hottest debates between economists, investors and analysts."

http://www.safehaven.com/article-15652.htm

 

[Show-me]

Market is still broke, it was good to see the players step back in and buy up a Monday.

Uptrend posted a awesome bit of information about BLS and Fridays jobs report. You better bone up on it.

I'm out on Wed or Thur depending on how things go.

 

[Show-me]

Do we have some room to move? I am holding for now. If you look at past charts the rallies have always been strong off of a low. I do not expect a higher high but I would like to see it run back to the 20 dma.

 

[airlift]

Show-me,
How much weight are you giving to the important information from Uptrend regarding potential scary numbers from the BLS on Friday?

 

[nasa1974]

Show-me,
How much weight are you giving to the important information from Uptrend regarding potential scary numbers from the BLS on Friday?

Airlift, That is the $64,000.00 question. If the market has already built the news into the trading then it might have very little effect. But I have seen good news tank the market. So if this comes out as really bad news the market might not do anything or we see a really low,low. I am anticipating a new low.

 

[WorkFE]

+1 Nasa.
I won't be 100% G but unless we get some ground breaking news today tomorrow 50% or more to safety.

 

[airlift]

Thanks guys!

 

[350zCommTech]

Show-me:
On the subject of unemployment and the BLS, here is a reason to be cautious next Friday, February 5th. The have a fairly complex birth-death model for business starts and failures and may be underestimating business bankruptcy filings. As I understand it, BLS adjustmenst on the net new business starts vs failures for total jobs lost are only revised once a year, as prior data is added to their model. Many claim for 2009 that this will show up in an annual revision due out next Friday of -800,000 to -1,000,000 jobs lost as an adjustment to the prior 2009 year. What will this do to the market?

Here are links. The information is very detailed from BLS.

"Let’s put some numbers to this: In 2008, 43,546 businesses filed for bankruptcy; Even more are filing in 2009 — Q2 of 2009, the most recent data available, saw 16,014 bankruptcy filings — on pace to run 33% more than the prior year.
BLS simply does not catch all of these failures in the monthly NFP reports.
The next BLS B/D adjustment will be in February 2010, when they qill like add another 800,000 to a million lost jobs to the prior years . . ."
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/11/birth-death-model-fails-to-keep-up-with-business-failures/

http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm

Thank you very much for posting this. The F fund will be the place to be for Friday, unless it gets leaked on Thursday.

I'm having second thoughts about my comment above. The 10 year bond yield looks like it wants to go up. I have a feeling the .gov will pull a magical number out of it's ass and it will be an upside surprise(what's new?). Revisions will probably be ignored.

View attachment 8167

 

[Minnow]

Wow Z! I just got through looking at the TNX and was gonna ask if you wished to retract that statement about Friday ... you are always on top of things.... when you're not out on the links .


BTW, Show-me, I noticed you haven't posted about the bees in a while... they handling this winter weather alright?

 

[350zCommTech]

Wow Z! I just got through looking at the TNX and was gonna ask if you wished to retract that statement about Friday ... you are always on top of things.... when you're not out on the links .

2 more months to.......