Citi.....Its going DOWN!

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

my point which you are missing is consider the source... gossip is if you or i say it. more than gossip if itulip says it. the opposite is true if the imf says it and they're rumoring about gold. it's a lie if ben stein says it. etc.

metalman, we definitely ain't on the same wave length here I don't think.

FRED made a post, which I took to be a comment of one of the four FRED's. What I take as FRED's comments, I do not take as EJ's comments. FRED's ain't getting interviewed or writing articles for Harper's, so besides his record of running the site, which to me is fabulous, I personally don't put anymore confidence in what FRED posts that comes across to me as their opinions (which ever one posts) than I put in what you post.

My point is that personally I do not take FRED = EJ. And I don't take iTulip as meaning anything as an entity unto itself. iTulip does not equal EJ. EJ=EJ.

[The Outback Oracle]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

I guess it was just coincidence! My son, who works for a major European Bank/Broker in Hong Kong, rang me one night (Aus time) a few weeks ago and said..."CITI is rolling over". The same day the Fed announced the between meeting 0.5% rate cut.
I keep wondering about that...they are desperate to keep the market up to avoid all these Banks going under because of their stupid derivative plays.

[The Outback Oracle]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

I guess it's just gossip and idle speculation!!!!

[jk]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

A friend with a relative in Asia who's worked for Citi for 18 years told us the relative told them recently: "Twenty gamblers ruined a great company and put 100,000 people out of work. What a tragedy."

You can be the judge of what they meant by that.

i'm not sure "gamblers" is the right description, though. they were playing with other people's money, and when the bets stopped paying off - or, in prince's metaphor, the music stopped and they had to stop 'dancing' - they still got plenty. they weren't going to lose either way. the incentives are screwed up- that's why i won't consider investing in hedge funds under current circumstances - the incentives are to lever up and take high risk positions. heads i win, tails you lose.

[EJ]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

i'm not sure "gamblers" is the right description, though. they were playing with other people's money, and when the bets stopped paying off - or, in prince's metaphor, the music stopped and they had to stop 'dancing' - they still got plenty. they weren't going to lose either way. the incentives are screwed up- that's why i won't consider investing in hedge funds under current circumstances - the incentives are to lever up and take high risk positions. heads i win, tails you lose.

JK,

After more than a dozen interviews with hedge fund managers in NYC, Connecticut, Florida, and California I can see that the market is adapting to this by withholding new investment in hedge funds which are, as you say, structured as a can't-lose for management. To attract new investment management of many existing funds has to show that they are taking equal risk as investors. A new fund can't get off the ground unless management defers the carry on their 2/20, that is, the 2% management fee and 20% of gains, and unproven managers now find themselves deferring much of the 20% as well to demonstrate their commitment to the fund.

The golden age of the hedge fund free ride is over. We'll see how many managers want to continue in the business under the conditions of low returns and higher risk. I expect my forecast of an increase in the shut/launch ratio from 1:1 to 1:4 will happen in 2008 versus 2007. I was early with that one.

On a separate note, hedge funds have been major contributors to Democratic candidates; none of us should expect much in the way of new regulation.

Eric

[Mega]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

The Titanic didn't sink in 5 mins.
Mega

[Andreuccio]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

metalman, we definitely ain't on the same wave length here I don't think.

FRED made a post, which I took to be a comment of one of the four FRED's. What I take as FRED's comments, I do not take as EJ's comments. FRED's ain't getting interviewed or writing articles for Harper's, so besides his record of running the site, which to me is fabulous, I personally don't put anymore confidence in what FRED posts that comes across to me as their opinions (which ever one posts) than I put in what you post.

My point is that personally I do not take FRED = EJ. And I don't take iTulip as meaning anything as an entity unto itself. iTulip does not equal EJ. EJ=EJ.

Jim,

I've been meaning to comment on this for a while. I think it's likely you're being too hard on Fred. I know that a few months back Fred said that there were in reality several different Fred's around the world and that you might be communicating with any one of them. But I think that comment was taken out of context.

As I see it, Fred performs 4 functions here.

1. He maintains the mechanics of the site.
2. He moderates the discourse on the site.
3. He makes posts for guest commentators and for EJ.
4. He makes his own posts.

My understanding of Fred's post about there being multiple Freds was that it referred to #1, and maybe #2. I doubt anybody would object to this. The website runs 24/7, with contributors from around the world. The real Fred can't be expected to stay up all night, every night, so they contract out the graveyard shift maintanance work.

#3 isn't really an issue, either, since it's clear Fred is just acting as a conduit for some other contributors, and it's clear who they are.

#4 is where the objections come in. I don't know, but I doubt Fred's comment about multiple Freds applied to the opinion and informational posts under the name "Fred".

This Fred clearly has been given editorial license by EJ, or he wouldn't be making those posts for long. I seriously doubt EJ would tolerate a loose cannon. So while it's true that Fred is not EJ , I think whatever this Fred posts has EJ's approval, either explicit or implicit, and can be taken as a representation of iTulip's editorial position.

My guess is this Fred is the guy listed as "Webmaster" here: http://www.itulip.com/company.htm. If you Google him you'll find he's been webmaster to other similarly themed websites in the past. Perhaps he and EJ had a meeting of the minds. It doesn't really matter who this Fred is, though. I mean, my real name isn't Andreuccio, and for all I know your real name isn't Jim Nickerson, either.

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

Jim,

I've been meaning to comment on this for a while. I think it's likely you're being too hard on Fred. I know that a few months back Fred said that there were in reality several different Fred's around the world and that you might be communicating with any one of them. But I think that comment was taken out of context.

As I see it, Fred performs 4 functions here.

1. He maintains the mechanics of the site.
2. He moderates the discourse on the site.
3. He makes posts for guest commentators and for EJ.
4. He makes his own posts.

My understanding of Fred's post about there being multiple Freds was that it referred to #1, and maybe #2. I doubt anybody would object to this. The website runs 24/7, with contributors from around the world. The real Fred can't be expected to stay up all night, every night, so they contract out the graveyard shift maintanance work.

#3 isn't really an issue, either, since it's clear Fred is just acting as a conduit for some other contributors, and it's clear who they are.

#4 is where the objections come in. I don't know, but I doubt Fred's comment about multiple Freds applied to the opinion and informational posts under the name "Fred".

This Fred clearly has been given editorial license by EJ, or he wouldn't be making those posts for long. I seriously doubt EJ would tolerate a loose cannon. So while it's true that Fred is not EJ , I think whatever this Fred posts has EJ's approval, either explicit or implicit, and can be taken as a representation of iTulip's editorial position.

My guess is this Fred is the guy listed as "Webmaster" here: http://www.itulip.com/company.htm. If you Google him you'll find he's been webmaster to other similarly themed websites in the past. Perhaps he and EJ had a meeting of the minds. It doesn't really matter who this Fred is, though. I mean, my real name isn't Andreuccio, and for all I know your real name isn't Jim Nickerson, either.

Andreuccio, whoever you are, I am Jim Nickerson.

Thanks for your attempt, perhaps 100% correcto, to explain FRED. I have reached my own conclusions about whoever or whatever is FRED. This little bantering began with my simply calling to the attention of any readers who may be less objective than I (and god help them if they are) that what whichever FRED put up was surely an example of gossip. I think I am correct in having identified that as gossip--which probably is worth two hoots to have done so.

Also following that OutbackOracle put up his example of gossip. In my opinion gossip is useless, though it is possible for it to be 100% correct.

Regarding FRED, whoever he is, I must compliment him on however he achieves bringing back certain facts from the past here to recall them to the attention of the readers. He has either an excellent memory, an excellent system of finding stuff, or some helpers with either or both of the the attributes just mentioned. Good job, FRED, just don't get carried away with putting gossip on the hallowed pages of iTulip, there is already enough BS in the world.

[EJ]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

Andreuccio, whoever you are, I am Jim Nickerson.

Thanks for your attempt, perhaps 100% correcto, to explain FRED. I have reached my own conclusions about whoever or whatever is FRED. This little bantering began with my simply calling to the attention of any readers who may be less objective than I (and god help them if they are) that what whichever FRED put up was surely an example of gossip. I think I am correct in having identified that as gossip--which probably is worth two hoots to have done so.

Also following that OutbackOracle put up his example of gossip. In my opinion gossip is useless, though it is possible for it to be 100% correct.

Regarding FRED, whoever he is, I must compliment him on however he achieves bringing back certain facts from the past here to recall them to the attention of the readers. He has either an excellent memory, an excellent system of finding stuff, or some helpers with either or both of the the attributes just mentioned. Good job, FRED, just don't get carried away with putting gossip on the hallowed pages of iTulip, there is already enough BS in the world.

Jim,

All major moves in markets result from gossip, thus the trader's truism: buy on rumor, sell on fact.

A lot of market analysis that is shared with outsiders is done after the fact to justify buy/sell decisions by insiders that were based on gossip.

Insiders make money off of outsiders via the closed circulation of gossip.

The timing of my Dec. 27 call of the start of the Debt Deflation Bear Market was based on gossip. It is the most reliable source of information to confirm the timing of a long analysis if your sources are good.

Whatever gossip insiders collectively believe is truth whether fact or not.

Respect gossip but consider the source.

Eric

p.s. "I'd be a bum on the street with a tin cup if the markets were efficient."
- Warren Buffett

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

Jim,

All major moves in markets result from gossip, thus the trader's truism: buy on rumor, sell on fact.

A lot of market analysis that is shared with outsiders is done after the fact to justify buy/sell decisions by insiders that were based on gossip.

Insiders make money off of outsiders via the closed circulation of gossip.

The timing of my Dec. 27 call of the start of the Debt Deflation Bear Market was based on gossip. It is the most reliable source of information to confirm the timing of a long analysis if your sources are good.

Whatever gossip insiders collectively believe is truth whether fact or not.

Respect gossip but consider the source.

Eric

p.s. "I'd be a bum on the street with a tin cup if the markets were efficient."
- Warren Buffett

Eric,

There is nothing about gossip that I respect, but that is just me, there is so much potential for misinformation on the web, surely when on the web one must be wary of whatever has the underpinnings of gossip.

I must remain cautious in the future about offering compliments to FRED, whoever he is, as upon doing so today it seems someone there must have hit the reset button and iTilip was unreachable for 20 or so minutes--seemingly forever--as I had a question pop up which thankfully for the grace of the computer-gods I can now pose.

What snatched defeat (for those of us long) from the jaws of victory (those who are short) today. What was the "gossip" if you insist?

I really think it detracts from anyone's credibility to defend gossip, but that may be a short-coming of my own due to the connotation I assign to the word. If one wishes to defend insider information with regard to possible validity, that probably would be something different--if one thinks it's fair, honest to trade off insider information.

Main Entry:1gos£sip Merriam-Webster
Pronunciation:*g*-s*p
Function:noun
Etymology:Middle English gossib, from Old English godsibb, from god god + sibb kinsman, from sibb related — more at SIB
Date:before 12th century
1 a dialect British : GODPARENT b : COMPANION, CRONY c : a person who habitually reveals personal or sensational facts about others
2 a : rumor or report of an intimate nature b : a chatty talk c : the subject matter of gossip
–gos£sip£ry \-s*-pr*\ noun

If an insider, whoever that is because I know none, were to tell me something having to do with markets's directions, if I knew the guy well-enough I might act upon the information if I were feeling poor, greedy, or just perhaps asinine. But if I told the report to my neighbor who passes it on down the street--as things certainly happen around where I live--at some point of furtherance, it would become useless information because of likely distortion or passage of time. It may have been a reliable report at its beginning, but odds are great it deteriorates into an unreliable rumor.

Main Entry:1ru£mor
Pronunciation:*r*-m*r
Function:noun
Etymology:Middle English rumour, from Anglo-French, from Latin rumor clamor, gossip; akin to Old English r*on to lament, Sanskrit rauti he roars
Date:14th century
1 : talk or opinion widely disseminated with no discernible source
2 : a statement or report current without known authority for its truth
3 archaic : talk or report of a notable person or event
4 : a soft low indistinct sound : MURMUR


Anybody, I would like your observation on my question.

[Rajiv]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

One other thing will burn people who trade -- not understanding the true dynamics of the trade they are making -- in particular, I am talking of short selling and selling or buying futures and options -- also of people who are "momentum traders"

The other thing that will burn people is the psychology of not being willing to take a loss - even when necessary -- and not cashing out gains.

[Andreuccio]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

I must remain cautious in the future about offering compliments to FRED, whoever he is, as upon doing so today it seems someone there must have hit the reset button and iTilip was unreachable for 20 or so minutes--seemingly forever--

I assumed the busy server was because I had revealed Fred's true identity and he needed time to cover his tracks.

[FRED]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

I assumed the busy server was because I had revealed Fred's true identity and he needed time to cover his tracks.

Our email servers went off line, too, so it was not a server but a connection problem.

We though for a while there maybe Bluehost had kicked the bucket. Turns out it only turned a little pail. :rolleyes:

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

To answer my own question, http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080222/wall_street.html?.v=49

AP
Stocks Turn Positive on Ambac Report
Friday February 22, 4:38 pm ET
By Tim Paradis, AP Business Writer

Stocks Reverse Steep Losses After Report Deal to Shore Up Troubled Bond Insurer Is Near

NEW YORK (AP) -- Wall Street staged a dramatic turnaround Friday, shooting higher in the last half-hour of trading after word that a bailout plan for troubled bond insurer Ambac Financial could be announced next week.

To support Eric's contention, sort of, notice "rumor" rather than "gossip" in this dude's comment.

"There's probably some validity to the rumors," said Jim Herrick, manager of equity trading at Baird & Co., referring to traders' speculation about Ambac. "With the overall financial crunch we've experienced, this brings new confidence in the sector."

Looking at ABK and MBI today, and I didn't follow them all day, there must have be some semblance of truth to the "rumor" or "gossip" that turned the market up Friday. I try not to look for news while the markets are open, but I expect there will be some stories about some entities stepping into aid, or band-aid, the monolines.

[EJ]

Re: Citi.....Its going DOWN!

To answer my own question, http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080222/wall_street.html?.v=49



To support Eric's contention, sort of, notice "rumor" rather than "gossip" in this dude's comment.

Jim,

From the home page: "There is the dangerous cliché in the financial world that everything depends on confidence. One could better argue the importance of unremitting suspicion.” - J. K. Galbraith

How's this for a finance and economics web site analogy: it is like a restaurant. Every time you go the food has to be fresh and unique. You may go for years then one day you go and the food is not good. You think, "That's too bad. Well maybe the chef is sick. I'll try again." You go back and the food is up to snuff and you forget the bad visit. But if you go back and the food is bad again, twice in a row, will you go back? Probably not, at least not for a while even if you've been going for years.

If iTulip out of 100 articles writes two that give questionable advice we lose a lot of readers. That's why if we, on rare occasion, share one of out 100 rumors we hear it is because we believe that risk is low.

Yet this is not nearly as hard as running your average high end restaurant. I have friends who do and it's wildly difficult. The product is every single plate of food. A near infinite variability of inputs – source of ingredients, dishes, method, labor, etc. – yet with a customer expectation of near perfect output consistency, both product and service. The trick is to make each unique plate of food as good as the last that each customer ever had, the uniqueness of a hand crafted product with the consistency of a mass produced product. The more complex the preparation, the harder this is to do.

This is why most people who run good high end restaurants are often quite odd: perfectionistic, exacting, obsessive.

Eric