As long as we keep printing money to bail out failing industries the value of our dollar and our purchasing power will continue to decrease while inflation ticks higher.
thevoice@voicedup.com
Please note this blog is moving to http://voicedup.com/
Voicedup.com is offering a platform to the online community to share stories and ideas that encompass all topics. We are seeking articles for the site that are highly opinionated and controversial . If you feel your article fits this description please submit to thevoice@voicedup.com. All submissions will be reviewed by our editors and you will be notified before we decide to publish.
Please note this blog is moving to http://voicedup.com/
Please note this blog is moving to http://voicedup.com/
Apple (APPL) sees no recession as Iphone and Ipods sales had another impressive quarter. Figures released this morning reveal that Germany and the US now lag China as the worlds largest producer of automobiles. McDonald's reports a stronger than expected Q1 and raises 2009 estimates. Capital needs for banks is scheduled for May 4, regulators are looking fr at least 3% tangible common equity or TCE. This measure shows what an owner of common shares would receive if the bank was liquidated. Keep in mind this measure does not differentiate between safe assets and toxic assets. Seems as accounting shenanigans but lets see what regulators come up with next. On a more worrisome note GM has all but confirmed that they will not be paying a $1Billion debt due June 1. Why is GM still on life support? Let them go! Then again if I can tell my credit card company I’m not paying my debt each month and the government injects me with cash I would not have a problem either. Obama will meet today with 13 credit card industry executives to discuss legislation that would prohibit credit card companies from imposing penalties and rate increases arbitrarily. Qualcomm (QCOM) was due to release earnings on 4/27/09 but has delayed this as they are inching closer to a settlement with Broadcom. Any settlement is a positive for QCOM.
Approximately two-thirds of the institutional investors indicated that they are looking to add equity positions to their portfolios, this number is 10% higher than the number from December. The favored sector is Tech and this sector has held the top position over the last 12 months. Growth stocks are also a hot item of late, the market sees the economy in a more positive view for the second half of the year and this should bode well for growth stocks. An additional upside of 6% is expected from current market levels to the end of the year. The majority of this optimism is due to the market rally since March, investors believe the market has bottomed. Regardless of the expected drop (approximately 20%) in earnings this year, a common consensus is the rebound in 2010 will be in the double digits.
thevoice@voicedup.com
Please note this blog is moving to http://www.voicedup.com/
While I have great pride in my country and its people at this time my sense of pride cannot extend toward my government and the current path on which it has embarked. This nation was founded on a very powerful and important contract, The Constitution. Throughout our existence, as a nation, it has demonstrated incredible genius and flexibility in its base structure, time and time again. When accepting this notion of contractual obligation as a foundation for our America, one can then begin to observe the erosion of this component and its effect on our society.
A free country consists of a free market made up of companies and contracts. Obligations made by sellers to buyers in an intricate chain. It’s also imperative to understand that while Wall-Street absorbs all the blame in this current crisis, WE THE PEOPLE = THE MARKET. By allowing companies that cannot fulfill their “contracted” obligations, to continue to exist, is a crime to the flow and freedom of the market and in turn, a slap in the face to the American people. Companies go out of business and new businesses begin everyday. It is part of the natural cycle of capitalism and the free market. However, capitalism, while allowing greed to manifest, is always tempered with fear. Fear of failure. Fear, that something must be done, BEFORE it’s too late. Fear of having capital to pay employees well before bankruptcy is even uttered. In short, fear that contractual obligations will not be met. By bailing out these failures, we hinder the market from its natural correction. Jobs are at stake during bankruptcies, but we must all understand that while our nation changes, jobs that existed in particular sectors may no longer be needed. Jobs will always be created in new sectors, this concept holds true in any economy. The auto industry is a good illustration. While there are productive and successful aspects of the autos, much of them exist as dead weight, exhausting valuable resources in our economy. Why not liquidate these aspects and resources being misallocated? Again, I understand this will lead to rising unemployment while the transition is made, but unemployment is rising anyway. By not giving up on these sectors, we stifle economic growth.
GM and Chrysler are having trouble because they cannot meet their obligations. This leads to less people (again, the market) willing to “deal” with GM and Chrysler. The buyer has spoken and has deemed much of what these two have to offer as not worthy of their investment. When GM and Chrysler lose a buyer, they go elsewhere, forcing the autos to reevaluate the options they’re giving to their consumer/buyer. This is the natural fear a business faces when dealing in a proper market. To reiterate, if this fear does not exist, why would the autos decide to change its ways now? Why give them more resources to squander on behalf of the American people?
In violation of our Constitution and at the heart of this matter, is a private corporation known as the Federal Reserve. This entity came in power back in 1913. It has become an unseen and unquestioned branch of our government, until recently (HR 1207). After mandating how important it was to shore up the many failing businesses, The Fed has given countless funding with little result. They are currently asking the Congress and Senate for the power to be able to go to any company they deem “unfit” and restructure them according to their own guidelines. While this may seem necessary now (ala AIG), I urge everyone to really absorb the ramifications of this endeavor. More government intervention further skewing the market, is far from what we need. Bailing out prevents necessary market correction, which leads to increased money supply causing inflation and diminishing purchasing power. We will not see this in taxes, as they refrain from directly raising taxes, but we will see it throughout the rest of the market in the form of rising prices as the overall value of our dollar is diminished. By taking the buying power away from the consumer we stray even further from true economic stimulation. In short, money = freedom. Less value on your dollar = less freedom.
baminc@voicedup.com
Please note this blog is moving to http://voicedup.com/
The SEC proposals:
* SEC staff recommends updated uptick rule proposal which would apply to all stocks
* SEC staff recommends bid test, where shorting would only be allowed on 'up-bid'
* SEC staff recommends 3 circuit breakers to curb short selling
* One circuit breaker would temporarily ban short selling of stock for rest of day if stock fell by 10 percent
* Another circuit breaker would trigger the updated uptick rule proposal for the rest of the day for the stock
* Third circuit breaker proposal would trigger the bid test for the rest of the day for the stock
This along with the updated mark-to-market rules should slowly begin to bring back some credibility to this market.
1. Banks say mark-to-market pricing cost them billions.
When the housing bubble burst, the market for all those mortgage-backed securities vanished, leaving bank balance sheets larded with assets that no one wanted. So at the end of each quarter, banks had to write down billions of dollars of "toxic assets"—even though their value might've been artificially, and only temporarily, depressed. But if banks never intended to sell an asset in the current market, they reasoned, why should they be forced to value it as if they did?
2. The key players: five big-shot accountants in Connecticut.
Banks began lobbying Congress last year to do away with mark-to-market, arguing that they couldn't lend because it had bled away so much capital. Congress in turn put the heat on the Financial Accounting Standards Board, a group of five über-accountants based in Connecticut who write all the rules. After months of pressure, including threats to take away its authority, the FASB caved and voted to loosen the rule.
3. The new guidelines, and the fly in the ointment.
Banks can now use "significant judgment" to value assets. Translation: they can stop assigning doomsday values to securities they think will have more value down the road. The hitch: some investors fear the rule change will help banks disguise their garbage, which was part of what got us into this mess in the first place.
4. Bully for the banks, but will this actually work?
It'll help big banks like Citi recoup billions in losses. But it does little to solve the underlying problem: piles of troubled assets no one wants. And it might not help for long, because Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner plans to rebuild a market for the assets by handing private investors cheap credit so they can start buying them up.
UPDATED LINK http://www.wedbush.com/ResearchDisclosure/DisclosureQ408.pdf
From: WEDBUSH MORGAN SECURITIES
Please note this blog is moving to http://voicedup.com/
Action came after Congressional pressure to help banks that have been forced to record billions of dollars in lower values for distressed assets because of frozen markets.
Some investors opposed the change, saying it would let big banks conceal the real value of their toxic assets. How is an asset that a bank will not be selling a toxic asset and why should it be marked down today? These assets are expected to remain on banks balance sheets for the foreseeable future.
KEY POINTS:
* FASB allows banks to apply new mark-to-market guidance in the first quarter of 2009.
* FASB says the objective of mark-to-market accounting is to set a price that would be received by a bank in an "orderly" transaction in the current, inactive market. It says an "orderly" transaction for accounting purposes does not include the forced liquidation or a distressed sale of an asset.
* FASB agrees to drop the presumption in mark-to-market accounting that all transactions in an inactive market are distressed unless proven otherwise.
* FASB clarifies when banks are required to take write downs on impaired assets, letting them record smaller losses on their income statements.
Please note this blog is moving to http://voicedup.com/
| Reactions: |
| Reactions: |
Politicians wasting time on last years bonuses?!
Convening over last years bonuses by the administration should not be the current focal point of the government. "The House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a bill to levy a 90% tax on bonuses at AIG and other firms receiving federal bailouts. The measure passed 328-93 and now heads to the Senate, where lawmakers have suggested a 70% tax paid half by employees and half by the companies." What should be discussed is the negotiation of the new bonus structure for employees and not paying cash bonuses on gains that can be manipulated by mark to market rules. The amendment of mark to market rules is still the cause of this debacle! Lets be clear, AIG should not be paying out bonuses as they are really in receivership and the notion that they need to retain their top talent is laughable. No top talent will remain with AIG once their bonus is in their checking account. In addition there isn't a company in the world that will want to be part of a deal with AIG. Not to mention the US government will not allow them to take on risk, with no risk there can be no excess profits. All lucrative deals require some sort of risk.
Cramer has balls!
I give credit to Cramer for going on the Stewart show even though he knew he would be grilled. What made it worse was Santellis refusal to be interviewed after his comment on CNBC which he placed the blame on only the average American for the current meltdown. Cramer is not alone, financial analysts are just as guilty of being co-conspirators in this mess. Stewarts interview brought to the forefront the deception and indecencies that truly is the face of todays American business. Cramer didn’t put up a fight only because he knew Stewart was correct in everything he said. Stewarts incisive journalism was so captive primarily due to his comedic stature. He is able to inquire and opine on events without disdain. Of course it doesn’t hurt that these were not Stewarts opinions but facts. I am shocked that corporate TV allowed this to air, as we all know the corporations only want to show what is beneficial to their bottom line.
The stock market is an elaborate legalized form of gambling, if you are not in a position to play stay away, its really simple. Cramer was a hedge fund manager, he provides his opinions on the market, that’s it. He is not responsible for adjusting anyones 401K or providing an asset allocation model that fits an individuals specific tolerance level. There are many shows that provide such advice and plenty of firms. Anyone placed in Cramers position didn't stand a chance.
TALF buys toxic assets
The Federal Reserve launched its Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility and received requests for $4.7B of financing. According to the Federal Reserve, investors asked for $1.9B in loans to buy securities backed by auto loans and $2.8B for debt connected to credit card loans. Officials hope that figure will ultimately reach as high as $1T, as they're counting on TALF to unfreeze credit and help bring an end to the recession. Fed and Treasury officials are expanding the program to include leases of business equipment and other types of loans. In simpler terms banks are able to shift the toxic assets off their balance sheets over to investors who believe they can profit from them. In return banks receive cash that they will proceed to lend out, probably to more people that cant pay it back.
thevoice@voicedup.com
www.voicedup.com
| Reactions: |
| Reactions: |