Reply With Quote
smeagol, what you have done in this thread is like getting into an argument with a couple of sixth-graders. Even if you were to win, you were arguing with sixth-graders, so you lose.
Nah, I just keep baiting people into being the idiots they truly are. It has worked once more. Too bad -- I once had a higher opinion of you.
You're the one who feels oppressed and bullied. I am completely fine with my past comments. You obviously are not.Oh, it looks like your Hedo > Manu comment still haunts you . . .
smeagol, what you have done in this thread is like getting into an argument with a couple of sixth-graders. Even if you were to win, you were arguing with sixth-graders, so you lose.
As always, ES gets it.
ES calls Chump a troll and Chump approves. lol
don't break your neck trying to see what went by you.
Unfortunately, it is difficult to tell what kind of arguing mode CD is in.
He can be serious at times, such as when he wips galileo and Dan's asses in the 9/11 threads, or he can be a stubborn jackass when he does not admit he is wrong, and turns discussions into , such as what he did in this threrad.
In this case, he was being serious, although now he is playing dumb.
I still think he is wrong on both counts regarding Citi ((i) you cannot judge Citi's gold analyst prediction skills using Ci bank's (as a whole) past performance as your parameter, and (ii) when share go up, that is a positive thing).
what made the shares go up?
Whatever it was, it caused a positive event related to Citibank.
you don't know what it was?
I do.
Do you?
definitely.
do you think it is somehow noble in it's result?
What do you mean?
you don't like that question, do you.
your entire position on citibank shares is wrapped up in this question: "do you think it is somehow noble in it's result?"
I don't fully understand your question, although I have an idea where you are coming from. I just need you to expand. I can't figure out why you used the word "noble" regarding a government guarantee and the price of a particular stock.
your entire position on citibank shares is wrapped up in this question: "do you think it is somehow noble in it's result?"
My entire position on Citibank's shares is that they almost tripled in value since they hit rock bottom. And that in itself, is a good thing, despite the fact most of the pop in price (if not all) may have been caused by an exogenous event.
My position has nothing to do with what you or me or anybody else would deem to be "noble".
do you think their newfound wealth was a noble act?
may have been caused?My entire position on Citibank's shares is that they almost tripled in value since they hit rock bottom. And that in itself, is a good thing, despite the fact most of the pop in price (if not all) may have been caused by an exogenous event.
the value was based on piracy. you've spent 4 pages applauding this development as being somehow noble in it's result.My position has nothing to do with what you or me or anybody else would deem to be "noble".
i find that to be a strange position to adopt.
"Their newfound wealth"? Do you mean investors who bought Citi at $3 and made a profit?
Do you mean Citibank as a corporation, whose market cap tripled since Nov 21st?
I'm not trying to be an ass but sometimes it is difficult for me to follow what you're saying.
may have been caused?
Well, the stock went from less than 3$ to more than $8 in 4 days. Then in droped to less than $6.5, it proceeded to go back to $8 again, then down to $7.5 and now it is close to $9. All this in the span of two weeks.
Were the fluctuations in price solely caused by the government guarantee announced on Novemebr 17? I'm not sure neither you or me can say yes with 100% certainty. We can both have our opinions about it.
the value was based on piracy.
What value? WTF are you talking about?
you've spent 4 pages applauding this development as being somehow noble in it's result.
So if you made money with GM stock, which went from $2.5 to $5 since the rumours of a bailout started sometime around mid Novemeber, that would also be the result of piracy?
i find that to be a strange position to adopt.
Well, allow me to clue you in about what goes on in the market. My position is very common and there is nothing immoral (un-noble) about it. The market moves these kinds of events. Ther is no mystery here.
the market always moves on these kinds of events?
where, again, would citibank be without this event?
oh, and could you tell me the stock market history on these kinds of events?
oh, and also, do you know the difference between earned and bailed out?
Yes
Who knows.where, again, would citibank be without this event?
I can't tell you a complete history but I do remember the government bailing out banks in the 80s under the "too big to fail" motto. Continental Illinois was one. Google it yourself and learn about the matter.oh, and could you tell me the stock market history on these kinds of events?
I do.oh, and also, do you know the difference between earned and bailed out?
So, do you think the people who profited from the increase in Citi and GMs stock due to bailouts are inmoral? (or rather, their profits are inmoral?)
If people don’t have cash for cars, insurance or even food…How do they come up with $2000.00 for an ounce of gold?
Besides if gold goes to $2000.00 per ounce the GOP mantra will be dig baby dig…Which will bring the price back down to $200.00 per ounce…
shareholders should not profit until debts are restored.
all the profits made from this disaster are corrupt.
You have no idea how the stock market works.
I guess for what you are suggesting to happen, the US government should've bought 100% of Citi after it lent them money, so any pop on Citi's price would benefit the one en y lending/guaranteeing them money (the US Government and therefore, the US taxpayers).
While they are it it, they should buy 100% of JPMorgan, Bank of America, Wells fargo, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Bank of NY and State Street Bank, given that they have lent them a combined $125 billion.
interesting read. thanks.
there is still a much more corrupt flavor to the current dish. the poison was within our own borders.
as heavily invested as i am, i should watch my ass, huh?
words in my mouth? could you quote my statement where i said anything remotely similar?I guess for what you are suggesting to happen, the US government should've bought 100% of Citi after it lent them money, so any pop on Citi's price would benefit the one en y lending/guaranteeing them money (the US Government and therefore, the US taxpayers).
is that your suggestion?While they are it it, they should buy 100% of JPMorgan, Bank of America, Wells fargo, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Bank of NY and State Street Bank, given that they have lent them a combined $125 billion.
Everybody took part in the so called "corruption".interesting read. thanks.
there is still a much more corrupt flavor to the current dish. the poison was within our own borders.
Many people unrelated to Wall Street benefited from the causes of taday's problems: ever-increasing real estate prices, extremely low credit card interest rates, lax lending requirements, cero down payment mortgage loans, no money down car loans, credit-galore form appliance and computer retailers, etc, etc, etc . . .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
