What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

[Supercilious]

I was trying to post a reply in this tread and suddenly I can't because it was moved in the select area (together with a message containing a further explanation of the one of my posts on page 2).

Since the discussion has started in the free area, can Fred be so kind to leave here a copy of the original discussion 2 pages (+ 2 posts on page 3) so the "peanut gallery" can continue the babble at the usual low level?

I would like to continue my explanations based on the ways which (IMHO) are the best to trade long oil in the current deleverage conditions. Making references to the discussion through google cash or extracting the discussion from the cache of my computer woul dbe very cumbersome.

Thanks in advance.

[metalman]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

I was trying to post a reply in this tread and suddenly I can't because it was moved in the select area (together with a message containing a further explanation of the one of my posts on page 2).

Since the discussion has started in the free area, can Fred be so kind to leave here a copy of the original discussion 2 pages (+ 2 posts on page 3) so the "peanut gallery" can continue the babble at the usual low level?

I would like to continue my explanations based on the ways which (IMHO) are the best to trade long oil in the current deleverage conditions. Making references to the discussion through google cash or extracting the discussion from the cache of my computer woul dbe very cumbersome.

Thanks in advance.

there's a redirect on 'news' that reads...'Moved: Oil (iTulip Thesis Topic: Moved to Select News)'

new policy? if so, helps to have a list of 'itulip thesis topics' in advance. makes sense, tho... as a subscriber i pay for is the quality of pros that itulip has attracted over the years and the discussion among them. it can't be cheap to run a site that collects such a group.

[Guest]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

Dude - what about springing a couple hundred bucks for a one year subscription? Then if you don't find it worth the expense you can cancel any renewal and just call it a foolish expense of money? And after all, you ought to be able to make that measly $200 back on a lazy saturday afternoon with just one of your masterful trades, no? Every time I read you I get the impression you have the markets all sewn up. There must be a gold mine of actionable trades in all the astute market intelligence you summon. What's the big deal with a lousy couple hundred bucks then?

So here I am, reading these many brilliant sounding analyses of yours, and Phirang was pointing out how you were "making bank" all through this bear market - but one little thing stands out incongruously from all this - that you just can't screw up the "daring" to shell out $200 for a subscription to iTulip. Who knows, maybe it's the "Howard Hughes" syndrome, and you are actually rolling in wads of cash won from your speculations, but have a phobia about spending any of it? :p

Or maybe the big wad of money from all the hot trades is pinned into your vest pocket with a bobby-pin?

I was trying to post a reply in this tread and suddenly I can't because it was moved in the select area (together with a message containing a further explanation of the one of my posts on page 2).

Since the discussion has started in the free area, can Fred be so kind to leave here a copy of the original discussion 2 pages (+ 2 posts on page 3) so the "peanut gallery" can continue the babble at the usual low level?

I would like to continue my explanations based on the ways which (IMHO) are the best to trade long oil in the current deleverage conditions. Making references to the discussion through google cash or extracting the discussion from the cache of my computer woul dbe very cumbersome.

Thanks in advance.

[Supercilious]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

there's a redirect on 'news' that reads...'Moved: Oil (iTulip Thesis Topic: Moved to Select News)'

new policy? if so, helps to have a list of 'itulip thesis topics' in advance. makes sense, tho... as a subscriber i pay for is the quality of pros that itulip has attracted over the years and the discussion among them. it can't be cheap to run a site that collects such a group.

So I have to pay to see my own post and to reply to another nonsubscriber? :eek:

[metalman]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

So I have to pay to see my own post and to reply to another nonsubscriber? :eek:

looks that way... sometimes. can't expect freddie to move threads in real time.

itulip's not gov't funded, now is it? not financed by fire econ firms. not'charity media' financed by elites. else... itulip will read like the fed's web site, or the wsj... and sound like npr

out of fairness we need a list of 'itulip thesis topics' before non-subscribers get too deep into a discussion so you don't waste time, tho.

[Supercilious]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

looks that way... sometimes. can't expect freddie to move threads in real time.

itulip's not gov't funded, now is it? not financed by fire econ firms. not'charity media' financed by elites. else... itulip will read like the fed's web site, or the wsj... and sound like npr

out of fairness we need a list of 'itulip thesis topics' before non-subscribers get too deep into a discussion so you don't waste time, tho.

Metalman, so if I repost here again the discussion from google cache (available to anybody) it will be deleted?

If I repost my own message it will be deleted?:eek:

This is a very Goldman/Geithner mentality ... Does EJ agrees with this style of doing business?

It is perfectly understandable that ITulip would copy a public thread and put that copy in the subscriber section so discussion can continue in between experts, while leaving the original posts in the public so that the discussion can continue at the "peanut gallery"/non-expert level.

Taking a public discusion and putting in the subscriber are (monetizing the volunteered contributions of non-subcribers) crosses a big moral threshold. I thought iTulip was better than that.

[ASH]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

So I have to pay to see my own post and to reply to another nonsubscriber? :eek:

I'm with you on this one. Unless EJ or FRED is adding value, I don't understand the rationale for moving non-subscriber threads into the subscriber area.

[Sharky]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

My older thread with that title is still visible in the public area:

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7125

[Supercilious]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

Yes sharky but your first post (as retreived from Google cache):

Sharky
12-27-08, 03:58 PM

No one?

To get the ball rolling, here are a few possibilities:

Futures, standard contract (1000 bbls, 35% margin, 3:1 leverage)
Futures, e-miNY contract (500 bbls, 35% margin, 3:1 leverage)
Futures options (ATM calls appx $6.50 for Apr 2008 @ 43.87)
USO, oil commodity fund ETF (designed to track WTIC), 0.45% management fee
OIL, iPath ETN
OLO, PowerShares ETN
DXO, PowerShares ETN, 2:1 leveraged
UCO, ProShares ETF, 2:1 leveraged
UOY, MacroShares $100 oil trust
DBE, PowerShares Energy Fund (mixed with other energy sources)
DBO, PowerShares Oil Fund

There are also the oil majors, service companies, pipelines, etc. Here are a few of those:

XOM, Exxon Mobil
SLB, Schlumberger
BHI, Baker Hughes
RIG, Transocean
CHK, Chesapeake (nat gas)

One issue with the commodity-based investments at the moment is the large contango from the current month to the next month out -- it makes rolling over fairly painful.

Is not? Actually this is a question a little bit deeper. It is an unfair way of doing business for both subscribers ad non-subscribers:
- non subscribers are censored and unfairly pushed into paying for subscription in order to debate an issue with other non sub-subscribers
- subscribers will have to pay for a content that will otherwise would be free (not generated by the expertize they have payed for)

My question stands. Does EJ agrees with this questionable style of doing business?

[metalman]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

Metalman, so if I repost here again the discussion from google cache (available to anybody) it will be deleted?

If I repost my own message it will be deleted?:eek:

This is a very Goldman/Geithner mentality ... Does EJ agrees with this style of doing business?

It is perfectly understandable that ITulip would copy a public thread and put that copy in the subscriber section so discussion can continue in between experts, while leaving the original posts in the public so that the discussion can continue at the "peanut gallery"/non-expert level.

Taking a public discusion and putting in the subscriber are (monetizing the volunteered contributions of non-subcribers) crosses a big moral threshold. I thought iTulip was better than that.

first, Favorite ways of trading long oil was started by sharky and is still there. who knows why it wasn't moved and the 'oil' thread was.

second, due_diligence started the oil thread that was moved... if anyone oughta get pissy about it it's him.

third, demanding the right to free-load off the costs of developing a subscriber base crosses a big moral threshold.

try this analogy. you're in the front room of a private club with a bunch of guys, some have paid a cover and others not. some of them start to talk about topics that they paid to join the club to discuss... with non asshats, moderated, and so on. management adjourns them to the back room where the discussion can be managed without the intrusion of asshats and silly comments that make everyone go 'ugh! i paid for this?' yeh, some non subscribers get left behind. so what.

that said, it'd be more elegant to copy the thread to the subscriber area then close the original but leave it up.

[cjppjc]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

first, Favorite ways of trading long oil was started by sharky and is still there. who knows why it wasn't moved and the 'oil' thread was.

second, due_diligence started the oil thread that was moved... if anyone oughta get pissy about it it's him.

third, demanding the right to free-load off the costs of developing a subscriber base crosses a big moral threshold.

try this analogy. you're in the front room of a private club with a bunch of guys, some have paid a cover and others not. some of them start to talk about topics that they paid to join the club to discuss... with non asshats, moderated, and so on. management adjourns them to the back room where the discussion can be managed without the intrusion of asshats and silly comments that make everyone go 'ugh! i paid for this?' yeh, some non subscribers get left behind. so what.

that said, it'd be more elegant to copy the thread to the subscriber area then close the original but leave it up.

No. It would be more elegant to not move someone elses thread. Previously Fred had moved one of my threads. It does hurt a little.

[jtabeb]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

Taking a public discusion and putting in the subscriber are (monetizing the volunteered contributions of non-subcribers) crosses a big moral threshold. I thought iTulip was better than that.

Yeah, that's why I didn't re-up my subscription. (unless we start getting pro-rated subscritption rates based on quantity and value of user posts, a dividend if you will). It didn't make sense to me that joe-blow who never posts pays the same fee as a guy who (hopefully) adds to the value of the discourse.

[Supercilious]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

first, Favorite ways of trading long oil was started by sharky and is still there. who knows why it wasn't moved and the 'oil' thread was.

second, due_diligence started the oil thread that was moved... if anyone oughta get pissy about it it's him.

Ok I copied from google cache the sharky's message from the other thread, but that doesn't change anything.

third, demanding the right to free-load off the costs of developing a subscriber base crosses a big moral threshold.

What free loading???? If iTulip offers a free non subscriber space it cannot monetize non subscribing material. IMHO that is a breach of trust for both subscribers and non-subscribers. If ITulip beleives the non-subscribers bring no value and are free loading, then it should do the right thing by getting rid of all non subscribers (or at least make writing priviledges available only ot premium members)

try this analogy. you're in the front room of a private club with a bunch of guys, some have paid a cover and others not. some of them start to talk about topics that they paid to join the club to discuss... with non asshats, moderated, and so on.

This is non sense. I have nothing against iTulip copying a non-subscriber thread in the paying area, to let the discussion continue there on a higher level without interference from 'the asshats' who don't pay for subscription

management adjourns them to the back room where the discussion can be managed without the intrusion of asshats and silly comments that make everyone go 'ugh! i paid for this?' yeh, some non subscribers get left behind. so what.

Exactly, and when the two discussions go in parallel (especially if they started from the same thread) the paying premium members, by comparing the free and non-free discussion, would be able to say: " Yep. My subscription is worth paying. It is so much better in the subscription area, without all those 'asshats' talking nonsense."

that said, it'd be more elegant to copy the thread to the subscriber area then close the original but leave it up.

I agree 100%. This is exactly what I was saying, but instead of 'elegant' I would use 'fair and honest business practice'. And why close it? The subscribers will be sure they pay for real value, if on the paying area they get much better information that what is provided by the 'asshats'

[Guest]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

Sorry $#* - this stuff all sounds incredibly pompous, verging on the comical. "Big moral threshold" eh? Wow you must wrestle daily with all kinds of deep moral issues. Just walking out the door every morning, you must encounter profound moral issues at the newstand, parking your car, consenting to pay your taxes, etc. etc. The thing about pomposity, is that it is stealthy. One can take terribly serious sounding moral positions on issues and only realise afterwards how comical they sound in the smallness of their concerns. Here's a good yardstick to take a reading on the "pomposity factor". You've siezed on a tiny percieved infraction of your "civil public poster's rights", and aggrandized it into a big moral threshold. :rolleyes:

I've had entire (long) threads here, where I challenged EJ to clarify some positions too insistently, summarily deleted in their entirety - including maybe a hundred other poster's involved, interesting and revealing comments - all just summarily deleted - entire thread gone! Poof! Just because the editor got tired and cranky of having to deal with the polemics. Boo hoo! So what? Water under the bridge, and whoever goes into a sulk about it afterwards does not apparently have enough other serious matters in their day to occupy their time. Don't you have a day job dude? Maybe that's more important than the "egregious infringement of one's sovereign rights" on these pages. Yeesh.

And also, I just naturally assumed you were one of the more affluent ones here, as you post such dazzlingly astute commentary on what's really underpinning the markets. That must be translating into a veritable cornucopia of profits streaming in, such that $200 is mere chump change. What is up with that?

Taking a public discusion and putting it in the subscriber area (monetizing the volunteered contributions of non-subcribers) crosses a big moral threshold. I thought iTulip was better than that.

- non subscribers are censored and unfairly pushed into paying for subscription in order to debate an issue ... Does EJ agrees with this questionable style of doing business?

... Actually this is a question a little bit deeper.

[cjppjc]

Re: What happened to "Favorite ways of trading long oil"?

I've had entire (long) threads here, where I challenged EJ to clarify some positions too insistently, summarily deleted in their entirety - including maybe a hundred other poster's involved, interesting and revealing comments - all just summarily deleted - entire thread gone! Poof! Just because the editor got tired and cranky of having to deal with the polemics. Boo hoo! So what? Water under the bridge, and whoever goes into a sulk about it afterwards does not apparently have enough other serious matters in their day to occupy their time. Don't you have a day job dude? Maybe that's more important than the "egregious infringement of one's sovereign rights" on these pages. Yeesh.

Huh. So becuase you claim not to be offended (How did you feel at that moment?) No one else should be.