insider trading before 9/11

[Parker2112]

http://ithp.org/articles/septemberinsidertrading.html

[4>0rings]

http://cheezcomixed.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/koma-comic-strip-lol-tldr.jpg

[Wild Cobra]

Parker...

We don't need all this conspiracy BS brought up again.

Seen it all before.

[Nbadan]

See ' Was 9/11 state sponsored' for answers about who was shorting airline stocks

[DarrinS]

Stocks were being traded on any given day? What are the odds? Two French film makers happened to be shooting a documentary about firemen that day. That was obviously a false flag operation.

[RandomGuy]

Extraordinary claims require extra-ordinary proof.

I see a lot of technical mumbo-jumbo that glosses over the weaknesses in the analysis, and a decided lack of an attempt to find alternative explanations.

Let's take the blinders off for a second and look around at the economic environment of August 2001.



In a relatively volatile environment, stock
prices in the euro area, the United States
and Japan, as measured by the Dow Jones
EURO STOXX, the Standard & Poor’s 500
and the Nikkei 225 indices, all decreased
between the end of June and 1 August (see
Chart 10). Hence, there was a continuation
of the decline which started in global stock
markets towards the end of May 2001. The
declines seemed to be largely attributable
to reports of weak corporate earnings in
the second quarter of 2001. Implied stock
market volatility increased in all of the
aforementioned stock market indices in July,
reflecting increased uncertainty about the
global economic outlook. The most marked
increase in volatility took place in the euro
area.
In the United States, the Standard & Poor’s
500 index declined by 1% between the end
of June and 1 August. Although, overall,
corporate earnings reported for the second
quarter of 2001 seemed to exceed market
expectations, they were still very weak by
historical standards. [B]Moreover, a number of
firms lowered their forecasts for earnings in
the third quarter while uncertainty about the
economic outlook seemed to increase.[/B
]Developments in implied volatility derived from options on the Standard & Poor’s 500 index increased slightly, bringing this measure
www.ecb.int/pub/pdf/mobu/mb200108en.pdf

The Fed Chairman's testimony before Congress in July 2001 referenced in the above report also was widely taken as expressing some doubts as to economic growth later in the year.

Since oil is one of the larger variable components of airline expenses, one should look at what was happening in oil.

Table 2 of that report then goes on to note a pretty marked uptick in the cost of oil.

For reference it should be noted that the price of a barrel of oil jumped about 60% from 1999-2000, and although it remained fairly flat, there was some grumbling about the continued run-up, coupled with some economic uncertainty.
http://www.ioga.com/Special/crudeoil_Hist.htm

Basically all the economic data indicated a likely slowdown. OPEC, well aware of this was getting ready to cut supply.
www.opec.org/opec_web/static_files_project/.../MOMR_082001.pdf


Putting in an option on an airline, betting on it going down, in such an environment seems to be a pretty damn good play.

If the economy doesn't tank, then oil continues going up, putting pressure on airline expenses.

If the economy does tank, OPEC acts to keep the price of oil stable, so the airlines get hit with a slowdown in revenues, but no breaks in their biggest variable cost.

[RandomGuy]

http://ithp.org/articles/septemberinsidertrading.html


Concluding Recommendations

•United and American ought not be recognized as direct insider trading. Nevertheless, by themselves, they convey little of the larger question.
•Ken Breen, Department of Justice, reported to the Commission in another interview released in 2009 that, for put-options on indexes, “the volume is so great that analysis proved impossible”. Therefore, Wong’s result regarding the S&P 500 is not contested in the background reports to the 9/11 Commission, despite what the Commission asserted. This fact needs to be asserted.
•To the best of my knowledge, none of the three econometric methodologies and results has been contested in the professional literature. Typically, controversial results generate opposition. We have attempted to convey enough of three separate methodologies to be convincing that they are solid scientific works. Therefore, accept the econometric research results as meritorious.
•Demand that the SEC publicly report the details of its findings on Boeing, Merrill Lynch, J.P. Morgan, Citigroup, Bank of America, Delta, and S&P 500 index put-option trading before September 11th. This reporting should be at least as detailed as that already released for American and United.
•Add to that demand of the SEC any additional corporations exhibiting evidence of insider trading before September 11th, e.g., in the expanded material Chesney, et al., plan to release shortly.
In addition:

•Promote an independent investigation into the events of September 11th, inclusive of subpoena powers, that includes investigations of put-option purchasing.
•Incorporate into that independent investigation the financial issues we have cited, but not examined, in our introduction, most of them having billions of dollars at stake.

So... some studies were done that no one bothered to refute, so that means they are good?

And

Neither the trading in American or United show direct insider trading.

That is what the whole article says!?

"We need everybody to spend tens of millions of dollars to refute/prove our conspiracy theories".

Jusus H. Jumped-up Christ, can we give it a fucking rest?

You didn't get the smoking gun you just *know* is there, because you know they did it, so you are going to throw temper tantrums for the rest of your lives because no one thinks enough of your evidence to merit spending time/money on it?

Boo-fucking hoo, life sucks, get a helmet. This shit is weak, and I am tired of the whining about it.

[lefty]

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread751514/pg1

[RandomGuy]

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread751514/pg1

Oh boy. Another thread about controlled demolition.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=57&pictureid=1298

[Nbadan]

Since oil is one of the larger variable components of airline expenses, one should look at what was happening in oil.

Over reach much? You bash parker for posting an article with hypotheticals that has not been peer reveiwed and then you do the same thing to promote your theory

:lol

[Nbadan]

Oh boy. Another thread about controlled demolition.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=57&pictureid=1298

Yes, nothing but what's detailed in the 9/11 Commission report can ever be true

:rolleyes

(group think)

[ChumpDumper]

Can conspiracy theorists also be prone to groupthink, dan?

[RandomGuy]

Over reach much? You bash parker for posting an article with hypotheticals that has not been peer reveiwed and then you do the same thing to promote your theory

:lol

You talking about overreach? That's rich.

Oddly enough one of my assignments for a class was to analyze three different major airline annual reports and explain the variance in their overall performances, i.e. one was profitable, one broke even, and one lost a ton of money.

I read through the companies' balance sheets, presentations to the stock holders and news/interviews with the CEO's and whatever else I could find.

At the end of it I wrote a fairly long paper.

The primary difference between the carriers at a time of rising fuel prices, was... how much they hedged against rising fuel prices by locking in a price.

The one that did the most hedging made the most money, the one that didn't hedge, lost the most.

When one reads industry analysis for airlines and other transportation stocks, it comes down to fuel, fuel, fuel.

It is only a theory though, to explain the uptick on options.

That theory competes against your "big evil conspiracy", so you instantly dislike it despite the fact that it is probably a better fit than the statistical paper you dimly understand, and probably didn't bother reading.

[RandomGuy]

Yes, nothing but what's detailed in the 9/11 Commission report can ever be true

:rolleyes

(group think)

Strawman much?

[Nbadan]

It is only a theory though, to explain the uptick on options.

That theory competes against your "big evil conspiracy", so you instantly dislike it despite the fact that it is probably a better fit than the statistical paper you dimly understand, and probably didn't bother reading.

A theory must have some basis on facts, what you have is a hypothesis....all you have are hypothesis...all Parker has are hypothesis...why do you have to try and demean everyone who does not believe exactly like you do? ....control issues much?