Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
16 minutes ago, Parliament said:

S&P up >1% today.  Meme indexes gonna meme.

 

1 hour ago, tokamak said:

If SPY breaks 500 again, then so help me God I'm going to YOLO all my cash into broad-market equity index funds like the sensible and dutiful middle-aged Gen X'er that I am.

*ahem* you're welcome

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)

 

3 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

W/R/T the second position, you *seem* to have said you are basically long and intend to ride it out, and in the meantime you are trading vol swings for cash flow since there’s money to be made if you can stay on the right side of the boom. 

I am sure not what there is to “seem” about. I’ve been pretty clear. Trade the volatility. I just reduced the sept call position that I was adding to yesterday around lunch. I want a stack of free sept call chips. Maybe they pay maybe they don’t. 

Edited by Anastasis
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Trade the volatility. I just reduced the sept call position that I was adding to yesterday around lunch. I want a stack of free sept call chips. Maybe they pay maybe they don’t. 

Fair enough. I’m not doing either (and this is not advice), but I suppose I’d probably be selling premium if I was going to play. 

These days I am often reminded of  Amarillo Slim Preston, who wrote

there are people who love action and others who love money. The first group is called suckers, and the second is called professional gamblers”

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Fair enough. I’m not doing either (and this is not advice), but I suppose I’d probably be selling premium if I was going to play. 

You should be selling me naked calls. Lol. 

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

You should be selling me naked calls. Lol. 

Wrong side, mate. But really it just depends. If I’m selling premium I’m selling premium where there is a market for it. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Like 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, tokamak said:

Up almost 6% so far today. I guess people are expecting it to not be that bad?

All the negative news should have already been taken into account by the market. It’s already reported deliveries declined 13%. Who really knows?

Posted
4 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 

I don’t think retail investors are in a position to turn this market. Furthermore, and I can‘t emphasize this strongly enough, there is no combination of bilateral “trade deals” can get these BBs back in the box. I‘m not predicting doom or making any directional predictions, but I am saying this is terra incognita.

Yeah, I agree.  The bond weakness is a sign of state actors with Trillions and hundreds of Billions pulling out of the US Dollar.

  • Like 1
Posted
11 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 

I don’t think retail investors are in a position to turn this market. Furthermore, and I can‘t emphasize this strongly enough, there is no combination of bilateral “trade deals” can get these BBs back in the box. I‘m not predicting doom or making any directional predictions, but I am saying this is terra incognita.

If there were even 1/2 or 1/3 of the 70+ countries that were calling to make a trade deal to possibly reduce or cancel the tariffs, don't you think there would have been announcements by now. It has been 3 weeks since it was announced and almost 2 weeks since the pause was given.
And why, at least in my mind, hasn't the media (both financial and political) not been questioning who they are negotiating with (I know Italy was here and she said nice things, but no deal announced) - I am convinced that there are very limited, if any, negotiations going on, and that Trump will reinstate tariffs, maybe somewhat less than across the board, when it becomes clear the other side isn't capitulating to the USA trade oppression.
Unless there are deals, then this thing eventually sends the markets even lower ..... I picked a bad time to stop sniffing glue (and to stop playing with options)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
10 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Wrong side, mate. But really it just depends. If I’m selling premium I’m selling premium where there is a market for it. 

I don’t know what any of that really means but I closed my long options into the bell and sitting out the rest of this week. Traveling and don’t have the time to actively trade. Which means it probably goes donkey shit to the moon this week. 

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)

Will good to know that today the President is not destabilizing the Central Bank!  (today?)  But that is most likely because the deals are not progressing, and what good is insider trading if you cannot hang onto the gains?

I got hammered yesterday and I expect to go deeper red today, as the market is exuberant  of the possibility of sanity from the White House.  I have a different take, a combination on incremental surrender (good for markets), and the knowledge that negotiations are not a easy as predicted.  Sort of like that easy Ukraine war ending negotiation that was promised repeatedly.  So no deals this week?  That's what a month of chaos without any progress?  

So NOT doing something really stupid is now what causes a nice rally?  And a complete reversal of course on Powell in one mention sends us soaring again today.  Today will be a great opportunity to regain losses and bail if you are long.  IMHO.  As I simply do not think the Trump Administration is going to abandon the policy that has sent the market into the meme zone.  Instead you got the news you got yesterday BECAUSE the administration knows the markets are a meme off Trump's words.  

What if all the reasonableness was simply trying to not have the gains of insider trading wiped out so quickly?  Anyone find this assertion completely out of the realm of possibility?  Also think about if no announcement and unemployment numbers moving upwards tomorrow?  I assume no deal is sight, and that is why we got what we got yesterday.  

 

 

Edited by horn4life
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Coelenterate Fuccboi said:

This is a good take, regardless of which side of the fence you are on.

https://x.com/KimIversenShow/status/1912165122786701816

I don't disagree with any of what she said, but the bigger question is why isnt this painfully obvious to everyone that steps in the voting booth. We are, as a populace, much too fucking stupid to ever pull out of this tailspin. Sure politicians can try and make those arguments, but he/she will be drowned out by the dipshits worried about trans-immigrants getting a leg up on their daughters in a 6th grade kickball league. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Coelenterate Fuccboi said:

"If you spend 14 minutes a year thinking about economics, you have just wasted 12 minutes."

Peter Lynch

SO I should not be listening to Bessent at the IMF?

Dow down  200 points of peak as he explains the trump policies... 

 

Edited by horn4life
Posted

Bessent is the one smart guy in the administration.  I actually agreed with a lot of what he said at the IMF, his calmness in the interview erases that blip downward.

The sad thing is ALL of this could have been done in a thoughtful manner.  Or course he has not been asked about an actual signed deal.  Will be interesting to see if that comes up? Thank God he is around, or the markets would have crashed...

Posted
4 minutes ago, horn4life said:

Bessent is the one smart guy in the administration.  I actually agreed with a lot of what he said at the IMF, his calmness in the interview erases that blip downward.

The sad thing is ALL of this could have been done in a thoughtful manner.  Or course he has not been asked about an actual signed deal.  Will be interesting to see if that comes up? Thank God he is around, or the markets would have crashed...

Bessent is a fucking tool. He was arguing a couple of weeks ago that tariffs weren't inflationary. Now he may or may not actually believe that, but anyone that puts their reputation on the line to defend any of Trump's economic bullshit can eat a big dick. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Bessent is a fucking tool. He was arguing a couple of weeks ago that tariffs weren't inflationary. Now he may or may not actually believe that, but anyone that puts their reputation on the line to defend any of Trump's economic bullshit can eat a big dick. 

There are no adults in the room.  There may be a precocious 12 your old or two who occasionally can whisper a bit of sense into that fat fool, but he's surrounded himself with yes men.  Ultimately, it's all Trump. People need to stop acting like there is any big brain going on here. There isn't. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, horn4life said:

Will good to know that today the President is not destabilizing the Central Bank!  (today?)  But that is most likely because the deals are not progressing, and what good is insider trading if you cannot hang onto the gains?

I got hammered yesterday and I expect to go deeper red today, as the market is exuberant  of the possibility of sanity from the White House.  I have a different take, a combination on incremental surrender (good for markets), and the knowledge that negotiations are not a easy as predicted.  Sort of like that easy Ukraine war ending negotiation that was promised repeatedly.  So no deals this week?  That's what a month of chaos without any progress?  

So NOT doing something really stupid is now what causes a nice rally?  And a complete reversal of course on Powell in one mention sends us soaring again today.  Today will be a great opportunity to regain losses and bail if you are long.  IMHO.  As I simply do not think the Trump Administration is going to abandon the policy that has sent the market into the meme zone.  Instead you got the news you got yesterday BECAUSE the administration knows the markets are a meme off Trump's words.  

What if all the reasonableness was simply trying to not have the gains of insider trading wiped out so quickly?  Anyone find this assertion completely out of the realm of possibility?  Also think about if no announcement and unemployment numbers moving upwards tomorrow?  I assume no deal is sight, and that is why we got what we got yesterday.  

d52c1fa2-6534-4143-9086-d91be1901fd6.thumb.png.09682c25d2519ae6d59ea6cfebd72d52.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

I guess to me, the question I keep asking myself is... Will past fundamentals like unemployment rising and inflation rising cause a reassessment of high valuations?  With so much computer trading I am trying to think if that fundamental aspect of past markets with rising unemployment and inflation is baked into the big boys models?  

IF so, does that not also indicate that if these fundamentals head in the wrong direction the computer trading models will begin to trim?

Or is the modeling so current that the new AI based models have already used more current market actions and reactions to a greater degree in their trading models?

I guess I am sort of asking is the AI modeling so good now that it is already discounting past trends?  Or are the past trends so fundamental (like bounce backs after 20% losses rebounding sharply) in the programing that the recent data is given no more, or less weight,  because of more recent timliness?

If that makes sense?

Posted

This is a fascinating video that's doing good journalism on the actual real impact of the tariffs on margins, down to logistics officers, CEO's, and business owners opening their books and sharing the real impact of the unpredictable tariffs to their landed cost.

The whole thing is like 3 hours long, but even just the first five minutes are a really good TLDR

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, Coelenterate Fuccboi said:

This is a good take, regardless of which side of the fence you are on.

https://x.com/KimIversenShow/status/1912165122786701816

I mean, she's getting close.  This is just my opinion, and everyone is free to call me a dumbass, but this is how I see it.

Over decades, business leadership outsourced or automated away huge swaths of opportunity that working class Americans had to make a living.  They did that to lower business costs and increase profits.  The savings were in effect pocketed by business leadership and their investors.  No meaningful reinvestment was made in the American workers that were left behind.  We had become post-industrial as far as the business leadership was concerned, but a side effect of that was that a growing number of the American working class found themselves in a void of dwindling opportunity.  Income gaps started widening.  Economic pressures on them started growing towards unsustainable levels.  Something had to give.  In the past and elsewhere, this is when capitalism had started to give way to communism.  This is when tipping points on a path towards revolution were reached.

But this time would be different.  Business leadership coopted a political party with one of their own through a populist platform.  They convinced those working class Americans that everyone but business leadership was the culprit.  Others in the same socioeconomic class but of a different ethnicity, race, sexuality, religion or gender were stealing from them.  The government was oppressing them.  China was robbing their country blind.  Given some attention and targets for their woe, those working class Americans elected business leadership to fix it.  The same business leadership that sold them out in the first place.

Then business leadership assumed control of the Presidency and started operating as if they had a blank check of power to do whatever they wanted.  Eliminating voices of dissent from positions of authority, making radical changes to eliminate the monitoring that would allow us to know the effects of radical change.  Capriciously shaking up the world economy for some unknowable aim as the voiced justifications made little sense.  The institutions that existed to check the power of the Presidency, institutions controlled by members of the same political party coopted by business leadership, seemed largely content to allow the president to have that blank check of power to do as they please.

360_F_86164079_fTaLmm35F4vRt22LDsoaZBLCw

I'll leave the discussion of the specific business leadership figurehead sitting in the Oval Office for the cloak room.  But for this thread, who can blame any investors of any measure if they decide they don't want to bank on the long-term future of such a country?  Yes, the market is rebounding, and that's a great thing for my portfolio where most was still in US equities.  But everyone tied to the American economy -- which is everyone -- has no choice right now.  If the US market/dollar goes kaput, we all go kaput.

But I fear we are nearing if not past a different tipping point, a tipping point at which the rest of the world decides that a schizoid US, its markets and dollar are unsuitable as the foundation for a stable world economy.  That they will play ball with us until their is another option, but when that option is realized, we'll just be left standing there in an empty field holding a ball that has no value any more.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, horn4life said:

Bessent is the one smart guy in the administration.  I actually agreed with a lot of what he said at the IMF, his calmness in the interview erases that blip downward.

The sad thing is ALL of this could have been done in a thoughtful manner.  Or course he has not been asked about an actual signed deal.  Will be interesting to see if that comes up? Thank God he is around, or the markets would have crashed...


That’s like saying he’s the tallest midget. He lost assets every single year starting in year 2 of running his hedge fund (during one of the biggest bull markets ever). 90% drop in AUM in 6 years. Woof. 
 

IMG_7936.thumb.jpeg.178c17792d10d34d5de026f037e88999.jpeg

Posted
14 minutes ago, Firemans4Horn said:


That’s like saying he’s the tallest midget. He lost assets every single year starting in year 2 of running his hedge fund (during one of the biggest bull markets ever). 90% drop in AUM in 6 years. Woof. 
 

IMG_7936.thumb.jpeg.178c17792d10d34d5de026f037e88999.jpeg

Will Ferrell Comedy GIF by filmeditor

  • Like 1
Posted
21 minutes ago, Goredho said:

I mean, she's getting close.  This is just my opinion, and everyone is free to call me a dumbass, but this is how I see it.

Over decades, business leadership outsourced or automated away huge swaths of opportunity that working class Americans had to make a living.  They did that to lower business costs and increase profits.  The savings were in effect pocketed by business leadership and their investors.  No meaningful reinvestment was made in the American workers that were left behind.  We had become post-industrial as far as the business leadership was concerned, but a side effect of that was that a growing number of the American working class found themselves in a void of dwindling opportunity.  Income gaps started widening.  Economic pressures on them started growing towards unsustainable levels.  Something had to give.  In the past and elsewhere, this is when capitalism had started to give way to communism.  This is when tipping points on a path towards revolution were reached.

But this time would be different.  Business leadership coopted a political party with one of their own through a populist platform.  They convinced those working class Americans that everyone but business leadership was the culprit.  Others in the same socioeconomic class but of a different ethnicity, race, sexuality, religion or gender were stealing from them.  The government was oppressing them.  China was robbing their country blind.  Given some attention and targets for their woe, those working class Americans elected business leadership to fix it.  The same business leadership that sold them out in the first place.

Then business leadership assumed control of the Presidency and started operating as if they had a blank check of power to do whatever they wanted.  Eliminating voices of dissent from positions of authority, making radical changes to eliminate the monitoring that would allow us to know the effects of radical change.  Capriciously shaking up the world economy for some unknowable aim as the voiced justifications made little sense.  The institutions that existed to check the power of the Presidency, institutions controlled by members of the same political party coopted by business leadership, seemed largely content to allow the president to have that blank check of power to do as they please.

360_F_86164079_fTaLmm35F4vRt22LDsoaZBLCw

I'll leave the discussion of the specific business leadership figurehead sitting in the Oval Office for the cloak room.  But for this thread, who can blame any investors of any measure if they decide they don't want to bank on the long-term future of such a country?  Yes, the market is rebounding, and that's a great thing for my portfolio where most was still in US equities.  But everyone tied to the American economy -- which is everyone -- has no choice right now.  If the US market/dollar goes kaput, we all go kaput.

But I fear we are nearing if not past a different tipping point, a tipping point at which the rest of the world decides that a schizoid US, its markets and dollar are unsuitable as the foundation for a stable world economy.  That they will play ball with us until their is another option, but when that option is realized, we'll just be left standing there in an empty field holding a ball that has no value any more.

We should run the government like a business!

Posted

Man PLTR is closing in on where I sold the last of mine.  Should honestly been buying it as a hedge vs my UVIX.  The opposite of my initial play.  But fuck I love the company very long term, but up $8 to $102 pre- May 5 earnings seems a little rich.  

Posted
2 hours ago, Goredho said:

I mean, she's getting close.  This is just my opinion, and everyone is free to call me a dumbass, but this is how I see it.

Over decades, business leadership outsourced or automated away huge swaths of opportunity that working class Americans had to make a living.  They did that to lower business costs and increase profits.  The savings were in effect pocketed by business leadership and their investors.  No meaningful reinvestment was made in the American workers that were left behind.  We had become post-industrial as far as the business leadership was concerned, but a side effect of that was that a growing number of the American working class found themselves in a void of dwindling opportunity.  Income gaps started widening.  Economic pressures on them started growing towards unsustainable levels.  Something had to give.  In the past and elsewhere, this is when capitalism had started to give way to communism.  This is when tipping points on a path towards revolution were reached.

But this time would be different.  Business leadership coopted a political party with one of their own through a populist platform.  They convinced those working class Americans that everyone but business leadership was the culprit.  Others in the same socioeconomic class but of a different ethnicity, race, sexuality, religion or gender were stealing from them.  The government was oppressing them.  China was robbing their country blind.  Given some attention and targets for their woe, those working class Americans elected business leadership to fix it.  The same business leadership that sold them out in the first place.

Then business leadership assumed control of the Presidency and started operating as if they had a blank check of power to do whatever they wanted.  Eliminating voices of dissent from positions of authority, making radical changes to eliminate the monitoring that would allow us to know the effects of radical change.  Capriciously shaking up the world economy for some unknowable aim as the voiced justifications made little sense.  The institutions that existed to check the power of the Presidency, institutions controlled by members of the same political party coopted by business leadership, seemed largely content to allow the president to have that blank check of power to do as they please.

360_F_86164079_fTaLmm35F4vRt22LDsoaZBLCw

I'll leave the discussion of the specific business leadership figurehead sitting in the Oval Office for the cloak room.  But for this thread, who can blame any investors of any measure if they decide they don't want to bank on the long-term future of such a country?  Yes, the market is rebounding, and that's a great thing for my portfolio where most was still in US equities.  But everyone tied to the American economy -- which is everyone -- has no choice right now.  If the US market/dollar goes kaput, we all go kaput.

But I fear we are nearing if not past a different tipping point, a tipping point at which the rest of the world decides that a schizoid US, its markets and dollar are unsuitable as the foundation for a stable world economy.  That they will play ball with us until their is another option, but when that option is realized, we'll just be left standing there in an empty field holding a ball that has no value any more.

No country is entitled to global leadership. At all times, there will be others willing to inherit that role.  This administration is doing everything in its power to ensure that other nations, traditional allies, got the message loud and clear. Fuck you, Pay us. 

Its a bold marketing strategy, lets see how it works out. Its the definition of FAFO.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
On 4/17/2025 at 11:51 AM, 52-80 said:

Don’t think their tone will change. Their job is to express business forecast, not personal political opinions. So their responses will be “measured”, and not publicly spiteful of the Admin, no matter which Admin is in.

The guide will have larger range of uncertainty, and they’ll say shit like they’re exploring all options and derisking them. At worst, they’ll pull the guidance. 

The earning call isn’t the CR board… unless maybe if the CEO is lourenco goncalves

-Southwest Airlines yanked targets for FY25 & 26

-Texas Instruments broadened its range of spending schedule. Did not “guide” for FY26 revenue, but affirms long term growth expectation. Specifically expects to be unaffected by tariffs — they have operations in China to serve that market. But also their outputs goes into both industrial and consumer products, and hence tied to general economic activity. 

-Discover Financial released earnings today, but call is scheduled for tomorrow. Stock was up in normal sessions and also now in afterhours. 

-Capital One said they’re vigilant of tariff related uncertainty and monitoring their downside risk scenarios. So far, all internal metrics and models of consumer spending and credit profiles are all positive/optimistic. 

So…nobody going CR yet. 

Visa, UPS, Qualcomm, and Apple are the notable ones on calendar for next week. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Goredho said:

I mean, she's getting close.  This is just my opinion, and everyone is free to call me a dumbass, but this is how I see it.

Over decades, business leadership outsourced or automated away huge swaths of opportunity that working class Americans had to make a living.  They did that to lower business costs and increase profits.  The savings were in effect pocketed by business leadership and their investors.  No meaningful reinvestment was made in the American workers that were left behind.  We had become post-industrial as far as the business leadership was concerned, but a side effect of that was that a growing number of the American working class found themselves in a void of dwindling opportunity.  Income gaps started widening.  Economic pressures on them started growing towards unsustainable levels.  Something had to give.  In the past and elsewhere, this is when capitalism had started to give way to communism.  This is when tipping points on a path towards revolution were reached.

But this time would be different.  Business leadership coopted a political party with one of their own through a populist platform.  They convinced those working class Americans that everyone but business leadership was the culprit.  Others in the same socioeconomic class but of a different ethnicity, race, sexuality, religion or gender were stealing from them.  The government was oppressing them.  China was robbing their country blind.  Given some attention and targets for their woe, those working class Americans elected business leadership to fix it.  The same business leadership that sold them out in the first place.

Then business leadership assumed control of the Presidency and started operating as if they had a blank check of power to do whatever they wanted.  Eliminating voices of dissent from positions of authority, making radical changes to eliminate the monitoring that would allow us to know the effects of radical change.  Capriciously shaking up the world economy for some unknowable aim as the voiced justifications made little sense.  The institutions that existed to check the power of the Presidency, institutions controlled by members of the same political party coopted by business leadership, seemed largely content to allow the president to have that blank check of power to do as they please.

360_F_86164079_fTaLmm35F4vRt22LDsoaZBLCw

I'll leave the discussion of the specific business leadership figurehead sitting in the Oval Office for the cloak room.  But for this thread, who can blame any investors of any measure if they decide they don't want to bank on the long-term future of such a country?  Yes, the market is rebounding, and that's a great thing for my portfolio where most was still in US equities.  But everyone tied to the American economy -- which is everyone -- has no choice right now.  If the US market/dollar goes kaput, we all go kaput.

But I fear we are nearing if not past a different tipping point, a tipping point at which the rest of the world decides that a schizoid US, its markets and dollar are unsuitable as the foundation for a stable world economy.  That they will play ball with us until their is another option, but when that option is realized, we'll just be left standing there in an empty field holding a ball that has no value any more.

Basically all of this, but Ive often thought the whole game is zero sum, and although business class was able to buy more political power and more time, eventually that widening wealth gap has to answer to itself. There's only so far it can go, its not infinite. Imo.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, BurdineBandit said:

Basically all of this, but Ive often thought the whole game is zero sum, and although business class was able to buy more political power and more time, eventually that widening wealth gap has to answer to itself. There's only so far it can go, its not infinite. Imo.

"let them eat cake Big Macs"

Edited by Blotto
Posted
10 hours ago, Goredho said:

I mean, she's getting close.  This is just my opinion, and everyone is free to call me a dumbass, but this is how I see it.

Over decades, business leadership outsourced or automated away huge swaths of opportunity that working class Americans had to make a living.  They did that to lower business costs and increase profits.  The savings were in effect pocketed by business leadership and their investors.  No meaningful reinvestment was made in the American workers that were left behind.  We had become post-industrial as far as the business leadership was concerned, but a side effect of that was that a growing number of the American working class found themselves in a void of dwindling opportunity.  Income gaps started widening.  Economic pressures on them started growing towards unsustainable levels.  Something had to give.  In the past and elsewhere, this is when capitalism had started to give way to communism.  This is when tipping points on a path towards revolution were reached.

But this time would be different.  Business leadership coopted a political party with one of their own through a populist platform.  They convinced those working class Americans that everyone but business leadership was the culprit.  Others in the same socioeconomic class but of a different ethnicity, race, sexuality, religion or gender were stealing from them.  The government was oppressing them.  China was robbing their country blind.  Given some attention and targets for their woe, those working class Americans elected business leadership to fix it.  The same business leadership that sold them out in the first place.

Then business leadership assumed control of the Presidency and started operating as if they had a blank check of power to do whatever they wanted.  Eliminating voices of dissent from positions of authority, making radical changes to eliminate the monitoring that would allow us to know the effects of radical change.  Capriciously shaking up the world economy for some unknowable aim as the voiced justifications made little sense.  The institutions that existed to check the power of the Presidency, institutions controlled by members of the same political party coopted by business leadership, seemed largely content to allow the president to have that blank check of power to do as they please.

360_F_86164079_fTaLmm35F4vRt22LDsoaZBLCw

I'll leave the discussion of the specific business leadership figurehead sitting in the Oval Office for the cloak room.  But for this thread, who can blame any investors of any measure if they decide they don't want to bank on the long-term future of such a country?  Yes, the market is rebounding, and that's a great thing for my portfolio where most was still in US equities.  But everyone tied to the American economy -- which is everyone -- has no choice right now.  If the US market/dollar goes kaput, we all go kaput.

But I fear we are nearing if not past a different tipping point, a tipping point at which the rest of the world decides that a schizoid US, its markets and dollar are unsuitable as the foundation for a stable world economy.  That they will play ball with us until their is another option, but when that option is realized, we'll just be left standing there in an empty field holding a ball that has no value any more.

Of course businesses are going do what’s best for their stockholders and private investors, it’s business. That’s how they are structured.

It’s the government’s responsibility to look out for the citizens and future of the nation. They could have controlled the outsourcing of business components, but instead used their positions to get wealthy themselves.

When money buys your seat, you are owned by those who paid the money. You’ll be particularly loyal when the money then begins filling your personal investment account. For decades they all said what people wanted to hear, but did nothing to put America first. 

We the sheeple get caught up in the petty arguments over shit that doesn’t actually impact us 90% of the time. 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

Unemployment came in steady and downward on continuing.  Which is a bit of a surprise to me, as I expected a small creep upward on continuing.  Good report.  

But sort of interesting that there has been no dialog between the USA government and China. 

A good chunk of my wife's inheritance will be in PepsiCo Stock, so interesting to see a bedrock dividend/growth company in such a rough patch.  But the fat drugs, tariff pressures on supply chains, and the bonus of needing to potentially adjust across that chain with dye removal. Earnings miss and guidance cuts due to tariff uncertainty.

SWA - No guidance on macroeconomic uncertainty, cutting flights 

P&G - price hikes likely, cuts outlook due to uncertainty

Basically we need a tweet to give the market some guidance today... 😉

And PLTR heading to the moon!

Edited by horn4life
Posted
3 minutes ago, horn4life said:

 

A good chunk of my wife's inheritance will be in PepsiCo Stock, so interesting to see a bedrock dividend/growth company in such a rough patch.  But the fat drugs, tariff pressures on supply chains, and the bonus of needing to potentially adjust across that chain with dye removal. Earnings miss and guidance cuts do to tariff uncertainty.

Your post had me check PEP vs KO. Over the past year, KO is up 20% and PEP down 18%. Why the discrepancy when they had tracked closely for the previous 4 years? Has Pepsi made some missteps along the way?

Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Your post had me check PEP vs KO. Over the past year, KO is up 20% and PEP down 18%. Why the discrepancy when they had tracked closely for the previous 4 years? Has Pepsi made some missteps along the way?

Snack food exposure mostly. They overplayed their hand on price increases as well IMHO.  The weight loss drugs weigh on the snack end as well.  Just more exposure to more headwinds.  And I think the profits from the cheap high calorie junk food in small packages is eroding with overall less fat people due to GLP1 drugs. And more potential exposure to tariffs on raw materials for snacks.

KO - main exposure is aluminum cost.  And I believe (from memory) that their solution there would be to shift to bottles if necessary. So not the investor concern from the fat /tariff perspective for Coke than with Pepsi.  

Edited by horn4life
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, 52-80 said:

Capital One said they’re vigilant of tariff related uncertainty and monitoring their downside risk scenarios. So far, all internal metrics and models of consumer spending and credit profiles are all positive/optimistic. 

I watched some kid from MorningStar on Bloomberg last night discussing the call with Elmo in Tesla’s economic future.  He repeatedly said that everything was fine, that Elon often has several balls in the air at one time so he is spending time in the government’s not a big deal, and it doesn’t look like any downside to being in politics in Germany and America.

WTF? Tesla’s brand recognition is so unfavorable that people are showing their hatred of Tesla in Elmo by attacking cars and showrooms.   I think German sales were down about 50%.     My God, while those among Trump supporters who can afford one will buy one, the progressive and Democrats will largely refuse to buy a Tesla chest based on DOGE.

To have someone on TV who is supposed to be an economic sophisticate tell you that Elmo’s work on DOGE and his support of far right candidates in Germany is a nothing burger makes me seriously doubt everything that’s coming out of economic journalism today.

Edited by Gatorubet
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
30 minutes ago, horn4life said:

Snack food exposure mostly. They overplayed their hand on price increases as well IMHO.  The weight loss drugs weigh on the snack end as well.  Just more exposure to more headwinds.  And I think the profits from the cheap high calorie junk food in small packages is eroding with overall less fat people due to GLP1 drugs. And more potential exposure to tariffs on raw materials for snacks.

KO - main exposure is aluminum cost.  And I believe (from memory) that their solution there would be to shift to bottles if necessary. So not the investor concern from the fat /tariff perspective for Coke than with Pepsi.  

I sold the Pepsi I've had forever this year for this reason.  My wife went on a GLP-1 and watching her make a face when I offered to pick up snacks during a road trip, when in past years she'd be like an 8 year old in a 7-11 with a $20 bill, was an eye opening moment. 

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...