Look to Money Flows for Market Direction (by Duuude)

Money Flows rule the stock market today.  You may recall the post I made on April 27 about how money the Fed was printing found its way into various asset classes.  It seems that neither fundamental analysis or technical analysis really matter any more.  It is all about tracking where the money is flowing.  The Wall Street Journal Market Data Center prints money flows daily.  It is as accurate of an indicator of market direction that I know of.  For example, the last time it gave a sell on strength rating, notice what happened.

OK, so the money flow ran dry on the SPY on February 14, 2010, just before QE1 ended.  There is one other indicator which has nailed the S&P spot on since the beginning of the rally back in March of 2009.  That is the Fibonacci Time Series.  Combined with money flows and QE programs, this seems too easy.

If past performance is indicative of future results, August 8 will be when QE3 gets announced, but who really knows.  Just so you know, Thursday's money flow looks bad. Steve

Things That Make You Go Hmmm: „My Name Is Grant Williams And I’m a Precious Metals Bug“

From Things That Make You Go Hmmm, April 30

My name is Grant Williams and I’m a precious metals bug.

There. I’ve said it.

It feels good to get that off my chest.

Of course, those amongst you who have been riding alongside me these past few years probably already had a sneaking suspicion that was the case and, I imagine, several more of you are now tutting, rolling your eyes and muttering “I KNEW it. Where’s that ‘Unsubscribe’ button?” (bottom of the last page – no offence taken). Well today, we’re going to talk about precious metals again I’m afraid, but in a broader sense if that helps at all. For readers who are over the whole precious metals thing, there’s a nice cartoon on the last page and you’ll find several stories about alternate subjects scattered throughout pages 7 to 15). For those of you still reading at this point, join me inside the recesses of my mind. Please keep your hands and arms inside the carriage at all times.

Whenever I look at an idea as either a potential trade or a possible thematic shift, the very first question I ask myself is ‘does this idea make sense?’. Plain old common sense. Nothing to do with the numbers or the likely quantum of any associated move, but would the idea seem reasonable if presented to someone with either zero, or at best a very limited background in finance?

Whilst stories around individual stocks can fulfill this criterion reasonably regularly, they often operate in confined parameters (a particular geography or a particular market segment for example) and so an idea is easier to explain and simple to quantify. It is much harder to find bigger picture, macro ideas that make secular sense because, for the most part, these ideas– but it is these big picture shifts that contain the possibility to make real money.

To illustrate this point, one of my favourite charts of all time demonstrates how, by making a single trade in each decade, it was possible to take $35 in 1970 and turn it into $159,591 in 2008. Of course, had you then made a 5th decision and completed the circle by reinvesting that $159,591 back into precious metals - this time silver - in 2008 (and, to ensure nobody accuses me of picking the low price we’ll take the year high of $21, recorded the day Bear Stearns disappeared), you would, this week, have turned your $35 into a staggering $372,379.

Five simple, considered decisions over a forty year period for a gain of a little over 1,000,000%.

Easy..... Kind of.

The pressure to chase things, to follow momentum or to be ‘involved’ is a considerable influence on the decision-making process of most investors. It’s easy to get caught up in trying to pick interim ‘tops’ in a rising market with the intention of buying back on pullbacks to add a little vig to any gains being made. Get it right and you feel as though you’re a seer - possessed with vision many hope for but few achieve; get it wrong however and the consequences are potentially far, far worse. The chances are you’ll find yourself sitting on the sidelines watching your great idea make other people very rich because you just can’t pull the trigger to buy something 5% higher than you sold it - or 10%, or 20% - and for what? Because you tried to game a quick 5% extra by proving you could time the market?

I have lost count of how many calls I have had from friends of mine who have bought either gold or silver at some point in the bull run (sadly, most were late to the party because they just didn’t believe the story - but we’ll get to that later) and wanted to know whether it was time to take some profit. I’ve lost count of the number of calls, but the questions, in essence, were the same:

“Silver’s run really hard here. Should I sell some? What if it pulls back?”

“Gold’s over $1,500 now and I bought it at $1,200 - should I sell it and look to buy it back when it corrects. It’s gotta correct, right?”

My answer to both questions was the same. “What if it doesn’t?”

Yes, silver is extended. Yes, gold has performed incredibly well. But the point here is to understand WHY you bought them.

If you bought silver for a trade then go ahead and sell it - depending on your entry point it has been a hell of a trade. If you bought gold as a trade then the same thing applies. If it DOES pull back and you want to play again you can. If it doesn’t, then you still made some money. But if you bought either of the precious metals as an INVESTMENT, then you need to ask yourself a whole lot more questions before you call your broker, visit your bullion dealer or place an order to sell electronically.

The reasons for buying precious metals are myriad, and their intrinsic worth will continue to be debated - probably for centuries - but, like it or not, based upon 5,000 years of history, gold IS money. Silver IS money. You can argue it. You can flat out denounce it, but there will always be somebody happy to take your gold and silver off you at whatever market price you may deem ridiculous. You can’t win. Nobody can unilaterally declare the idea of gold and silver as stores of value err..... well, valueless.

Last year Mark Dice went to the beach in California and tried to sell a one-ounce solid gold Canadian Maple Leaf coin (worth, at the time, $1,100) to passers-by for $50 cash.

No takers.

This was one of my favourite exchanges:

Dice: “Wanna buy it?”

Dude: “No thank you”

Dice: “Twenty bucks?”

Dude: “Not for me.”

Dice: “It’s Canadian.”

Dude: “Oh, definitely not”

But the best part of the video is when Dice tries to sell the coin to a passer-by who has a live parrot casually sitting on his shoulder. When you see a man in the street wearing a tropical bird as a fashion accessory look at someone trying to sell him a 1-oz gold coin worth $1,100 as though HE’S crazy - you’ve pretty much hit rock bottom. (If you want to watch the video, it’s HERE but PLEASE... no emails about Dice’s views on anything else - to me it’s just an interesting video)

But enough about parrots and passers-by - they are mere distractions from the point I am trying to make here.

In a big picture sense, as you can clearly see from the chart, left, owning precious metals (in this case gold) has been the right trade for the last ten years - it has been one of those once-in-a-decade decisions that, if you had made and stuck with, would have made you real returns. However, the volatility that has been evident during periods of those ten years is such that many people were, to use Richard Russell’s analogy, ‘shaken from the bull’. Many people saw 10% corrections or even the big shakeout after 2008 and, with very few believing gold was anything but the next bubble, they dumped their holdings - convinced either a ‘major correction’ was under way or just around the corner or that the bull run in gold had ended and the bubble had burst. Many were selling with a view to buying back and many were selling fearing a return to $300 gold was not only possible, but probable. The ‘big trade’ was all-but forgotten in the panic of deleveraging.

Many who sold have yet to buy their gold back and have missed out as gold has more than doubled from its late-2008 lows.

In Bud Conrad’s chart, he shows how a switch from one asset class to another once every ten years would have been all that was required and it just so happened that, at each crucial juncture, another asset presented itself as the next ‘big trade’. The danger is that, in following Bud’s example to the letter, especially now precious metals have run for ten years, it would be easy to switch out of them and into the next ‘big trade’. But what is the next big trade?

It could be a short trade in US Treasuries, as many believe (certainly when something is at zero and can’t, in absolute terms at least, go below that level - in this case the discount rate - it is a pretty safe assumption which way it will ultimately be headed). It could be a long position in crude oil or a basket of commodities if you believe in all or part of the ‘Peak Everything’ theory laid out beautifully in the great Jeremy Grantham’s latest letter - which you will find HERE. (As an aside, if you HAVEN’T read it yet - I recommend you take the time to do so as it is a truly marvellous piece of work - even by Jeremy’s lofty standards - and one you will doubtless want to read again at some point.)

But here’s the thing. What if the big trade is buying precious metals - again?

At no point does Bud Conrad say you can’t have your money in the same asset class for consecutive decades - in fact, Bud doesn’t lay out the rules at all because there aren’t any. It’s about finding the ‘big trade’, making sure the logic of it is sound to you and then sitting with it until it has either run its course, or you feel that a better opportunity for long-term gain has presented itself.

Has the precious metals trade run its course? Well, I guess it’s possible - but let’s look at the factors that are affecting the price of what, for the specific purposes of this part of our program, we will refer to as ‘monetary metals’.

Until 1971, gold backed every dollar in circulation. Period.

Behind every $35 in paper money, in a vault in the United States, sat an ounce of gold. Quiet, immutable, stoic. The gold couldn’t be printed at will or created out of thin air. The idea of dropping gold from helicopters would have seemed downright dangerous or overtly stupid. Of course, as it turns out, dropping paper money from helicopters has proven equally dangerous - particularly to the value of the dollar itself which broke through 73 this week and has now lost roughly 90% of its purchasing power since the decision was taken by Nixon to shut the gold window.

Never were the words of Nixon’s Treasury Secretary, John Connally, more apropos than today:

“...[the dollar] is our currency, but your problem”

Since that day, with the restraint of a gold-backed dollar removed, the amount of dollars in cirulation has steadily increased until, as the waves of 2008 crashed upon the world’s shores, it absolutely exploded. The graph below shows the adjusted monetary base, with the near-vertical updrafts representing QE1 and QE2.

My friends Paul Brodsky and Lee Quaintance of QBAMCO recently published parts II & III of their paper entitled ‘Apropos of Everything’ and I would recommend everyone who reads this to email Paul and ask him to send you a copy of all three parts as, together, they comprise one of the single best reads I have seen in years. In fact, if you only have time in your busy day to either finish reading this or dig into Paul and Lee’s exceptional writing then let me help you out: STOP READING THIS AND EMAIL PAUL. NOW. 

In ‘Apropos of Everything’, Paul and Lee revisit their ‘Shadow Gold Price’ which is a measure of what returning to a gold-backed dollar would mean to the price of gold:

In a report distributed to our investors in December 2008 we divided Federal Reserve Bank Liabilities by US official gold holdings and dubbed it “The Shadow Gold Price”. A few months later we began using the more conservative denominator, the Monetary Base, in our calculation. As it turned out, dividing the US Monetary Base by US official gold holdings happened to be the very formula used in the Bretton Woods system to establish the global fixed monetary exchange rate. Our logic was confirmed by long convention...

The “Flat” column in the table above shows our current SGP, which implies the substantial devaluation of purchasing power of the US dollar that has already occurred. Are we nuts? Are we asserting gold should be valued at $10,000/ounce when it is trading around $1,500/ounce in London and New York?

The SGP’s purpose is to provide a sense of magnitude as to how much the US dollar has already been devalued and how much further it may be devalued. (Obviously there can be no guarantees about future pricing.) We believe the Shadow Gold Price provides the intellectual framework for the magnitude of necessary future global currency devaluation. We feel most comfortable with this metric for two practical reasons: 1) there is recent precedent for its use and 2) it actually produces a lower figure than othervaluation metrics that include systemic credit in their calculations...

To put this table in perspective, the Fed already increased the US Monetary Base over 200% since 2008, from about $850 billion ($3,251 implied SGP) to an estimated $2.6 trillion (following the completion of QE2). It is important to note that the Monetary Base only constitutes systemic bank reserves held at the Fed and currency in circulation. It does not include upwards of $70 trillion in US dollar-denominated claims, a significant portion of which conceivably must be ultimately be repaid in money from the Monetary Base that does not yet exist.

And there, in a nutshell, is the ‘big trade’ in gold.

How do the world’s central banks find a way out of the dire straits in which they find themselves? Faltering economic growth (look at this week’s US GDP number), insolvent banking systems in multiple insolvent sovereign countries (you know who you are), plummeting consumer confidence (Japan and Germany the latest examples of this phenomenon), crippling debt levels at both the national and individual levels (higher US deficit ceiling anybody?), spiralling inflation (no matter WHAT ‘core’ numbers may tell you) and their favourite (and some would say ‘only’) tool to fight it, namely interest rates at or close enough to zero to make them almost ineffective.

Fear of all these issues amongst investors has driven them to what they consider ‘safe’ money. Money that can’t be manufactured at will (though it CAN be confiscated - but more of that another day) and that will protect their purchasing power.

Yes, there is definitely some speculative froth in the monetary metal prices (nowhere more obvious than silver at the moment) but, structurally, there are more reasons why monetary metals could well be the next, next ‘big trade’ and that resides in the difference between the futures price and that of the metals themselves.

Historically, the monetary metals futures contracts were used primarily by gold producers to hedge their exposure to fluctuations in the gold price and/or to lock in prices against their forward production. Simple. There have been all sorts of conspiracy theories about central banks leasing their gold holdings in order to keep the price of gold down, thus validating their fiat currencies, and of bullion banks manipulating the futures prices to make profits from the technical funds, but, again, we will leave those aside today.

In August 1999, John Hathaway of Tocqueville Gold Fund wrote an essay called The Golden Pyramid (I have linked to it in a previous edition of Things That Make You Go Hmmm..... but in case you didn’t see it, or didn’t have the time to read it, I would urge you, if you have any interest in the monetary metals, to do so. You will find it here)

In his essay, John lays out quite clearly how what he calls the ‘Golden Pyramid’ works:

The old currency gold/pyramid has been replaced by a little understood labyrinth of paper claims against gold. Responsible senior officials of mining companies, central banks, and bullion banks cannot begin to understand the internal mechanics in order to make appropriate judgements of risk. There are few published figures, no reserve requirements, no supervision or regulation, and no accountability. It is the private domain of bullion dealers, central banks, and mining companies. The credit worthiness of the old currency/gold pyramid was quantifiable. The credit worthiness of the new pyramid can only be an educated guess. Our guess is that it is bankrupt.

The gold derivatives pyramid is a vigorous free market creature. It cannot be put down with a simple declaration that the paper is no longer redeemable in gold, as governments did with currency. It is a short selling scheme that has become a trap from which few short sellers will escape. Paper claims in the form of derivatives far exceed the underlying physical metal on which they are based. The trust, which balances this new pyramid, is based on false assumptions and lack of information. Paper gold claims have proliferated at a pace rivaling any government printing press. A surfeit of paper gold has driven down the price of the physical on which it is based.

The structure can survive as long as bullion dealers, the mining community and the financial media subscribe to the bearish case. But the position of short sellers is precarious. This is true whether gold stays at current levels, or drops below $200/oz. The point is, they will be unable to realize their paper profits, and stand to lose money on their positions in the aggregate. The compound miscalculations on which the gold market is based rank with the blowup of the yen carry trade in 1998. The yen carry disaster illustrates how over-investment and near unanimity of market opinion can lead to a vicious squeeze. Compared to the yen, gold’s liquidity is microscopic. The coming squeeze will lead to a several hundred dollar rally and a permanent change in attitudes towards gold.

Read that last sentence again.

The coming squeeze will lead to a several hundred dollar rally and a permanent change in attitudes towards gold.

Many casual readers of John’s work would have found that statement difficult to accept in 1999. They would have, in fact, dismissed his words simply because the outcome he was proposing - a rise in price of several hundred dollars - would have seemed extremely unlikely with Gold trading around $300. And yet, the beauty of reading this essay now, 12 years later, is that you can clearly see a simple idea that, with the benefit of hindsight, makes complete sense.

The trick comes in trying to find these simple, clear ideas WITHOUT the benefit of hindsight.

So, to recap:

Sovereign governments are awash with debt; several are on the verge of inevitable default (you STILL know who you are), Central Banks around the world have printed trillions of units of their respective paper currencies in the past three years in an attempt to stimulate their moribund economies (which are either slowing in the case of the US and the UK, or are tipping back into recession like Japan), politicians are starting to finally understand that Austerity ISN’T Calvin Klein’s new cologne and are about to find out just how hard it will be to apply in the real sense, consumers are pulling in their heads and are more concerned about the future than at any point since the depths of the crisis in 2008, the housing market in the United States - Ground Zero for the debt-driven disasters that tipped the world on its head - has turned down once more and is about to make new lows just as a slew of Option ARM resets are due, inflation is starting to bite in a real way, not only in Asia, but in the West as well and all the REAL money that has ever been mined could STILL only fill a cube 67 feet in each direction (thanks for that, Warren).

Simple? Clear?

Full report:

Hmmm Apr 30 2011

EUR Non-Commercial Spec Positions Surge To Multi-Year High As USD And JPY Prepare To Take Out Lows

Commodity speculators may or may not be the vile criminals the president and his new working group are making them out to be, but they sure have made their view clear on where they think the USD and the EUR (the JPY not so much) are going. Below is the latest update from the CFTC Commitment of traders report on the three key currencies. While there has been some modest short covering in both the USD and JPY, both continue to trade like the carry funding currencies they are. And with bullish spec positions in the EUR at a multi year highs, the only question is whether the yen or the dollar will be the carry currency of choice in the next beatdown. Of course, how the EUR is expected to retain its lofty perch with all of the PIIGS soon to go under is beyond us, but hopefully it makes sense to Trichet, who is stuck between an inflationary rock and a insolvent peripheral hard place.






Arise ye victims of Banksta plunder

Arise ye sufferers of Wall Street greed and want

For simple reason in revolt now thunders

And at last comes the age of the bailed out Banksta bitchez hunt.

Away with all those neo-Keynesian superstitions

Arise ye masses arise, arise

We'll end henceforth the old Wall Street swindler tradition

And spurn the toxic shit to win the precious silver prize.


So silver comrades, come rally

And the bailed out Wall Street scum let us now face

The Silver Internationale unites the anti-banksta human race

So silver comrades, come rally Don't let that banksta scum disappear without a trace

The Silver Internationale unites the anti-banksta human race


No more deluded by conniving quantitative distraction

On bailout pimps we'll make systemic war

The 401k holders too will take evasive action

They'll break ranks and tell those thieving money changing whores: “Up Yours!”

And if those swindling Bankstas keep on trying

To sacrifice our dwindling wealth for their greedy Wall Street hides

They soon shall hear the silver-anti banksta bullets flying

We'll kick thos scheming bitchez where the Ponzi sun don’t shine


So silver comrades, come rally

And the bailed out Wall Street scum let us now face

The Silver Internationale unites the anti-banksta human race

So silver comrades, come rally

Don't let that bailout scum disappear without a trace

The Silver Internationale unites the anti-banksta human race


No market saviour from on high delivers

No faith have we in captive regulatory fear

On their thieving crony hands the silver chains must shiver

Chains to punish selfish greed and foolish pride

E'er those low down banksta thieves will disappear with all their pilfered booty

And keep it all for their scrappy lot.

Each at the anti-banksta silver forge must do their duty

And we'll strike while the precious metal iron is still hot.


So silver comrades, come rally

And the bailed out Wall Street scum let us now face

The Silver Internationale unites the anti-banksta human race.

So silver comrades, come rally

Don't let that bailout scum disappear without a trace

The Silver Internationale unites the anti-banksta human race









Just think about it poeple, we have shipped our jobs to China, we are getting raped on oil by OPEC and the Russians and we have sacrificed our precious Freedoms at the alter of Banksterism.

What now Amerika?










Happy Berkshire Hathaway Day as Well!






Calling All Ants




It’s 2008 All Over Again… Only Worse

Bernanke and pals wanted to recreate the same booming leverage and fiscal insanity of the bubble years. And they’ve done that in a big way. Among their various successes:


§  Commodities are at levels not seen since 2008.

§  Gas prices are at levels not seen since 2008.

§  The US Dollar has fallen to levels not seen since 2008.

§  Bank leverage is at levels not seen since 2008.

§  Microcap stocks are at levels not seen since 2007.

§  Wall Street bonuses are at levels not seen since 2007.


It’s really striking the similarities. And all the Fed and US Government had to do was:


1)   Make itself insolvent

2)   Bankrupt the US

3)   Spend Trillions in Bailouts and Stimulus

4)   Trash the US Dollar


So what’s the difference this time around?


Well, first off, the US consumer is in far worse shape than in 2008. The US has lost some 7.5 million jobs since 2007. The U-6 unemployment rate (which accounts for unemployed and underemployed) stands at 16.2%. These folks are in far worse positions to stomach higher fuel and food prices this time around.


Speaking of which, the number of people on food stamps is also up 58% since 2007. However, even this safety net is proving less and less helpful as food prices skyrocket. Indeed, Wal-Mart’s CEO recently commented that the firm’s customers are “running out of money” due to higher fuel prices.


As for those who have been receiving unemployment checks, the situation is getting grim. Some 2.3 million of them have lost their coverage since last year. The Feds claim that the US economy created 1.3 million jobs so only 1 million of the 2.3 are people who lost coverage and have no income. However, everyone on the planet knows the “jobs created” myth is as full of BS as the “recovery” myth.


My point with all of this is the following: we have entered a period quite similar to 2008 all over again. Energy and food prices are soaring. And the US Dollar is collapsing.


The only difference is that this time around, the US economy is FAR more fragile than it was in 2008. The average American has far less to fall back on than in 2008. And there are far fewer people with jobs than then.


On top of this, the US debt load and balance sheet is far FAR worse than it was in 2008. We’re running deficits and debt-to-GDP levels comparable to Greece.


In other words, when this mess comes unhinged it’s going to be much, much worse than in 2008. And believe me, it WILL come unhinged.


And this time, when it does, the Fed will have NOTHING to stop it. The Fed’s already grown its balance sheet to roughly $3 trillion AND used every weapon it has to combat Round One of the Financial Crisis. So when the next round hits this time around, the Fed will be powerless to do anything about it.


On that note, if you’re getting worried about the future of the stock market and have yet to take steps to prepare for the Second Round of the Financial Crisis… I highly suggest you download my FREE Special Report specifying exactly how to prepare for what’s to come.


I call it The Financial Crisis “Round Two” Survival Kit. And its 17 pages contain a wealth of information about portfolio protection, which investments to own and how to take out Catastrophe Insurance on the stock market (this “insurance” paid out triple digit gains in the Autumn of 2008).


Again, this is all 100% FREE. To pick up your copy today, go to http://www.gainspainscapital.com and click on FREE REPORTS.


PPS. We ALSO publish a FREE Special Report on Inflation detailing three investments that have all already SOARED as a result of the Fed’s monetary policy.


You can access this Report at the link above.


Best Regards,


Graham Summers




How QE2 could cause low investment

This is pure speculation (also called theory). I have no respect for economic theory definitely including my own efforts, so the post will all be after the jump.

I will write about, sketch and definitely not write out a model in which Fed purchases of 7 year Treasury notes causes low investment. It happens to be a fact that following the Fed's purchases of 7 year Treasury notes investment has been lower than forecast when the purchases began. I don't consider this anything along the lines of evidence, not even weak evidence, and am theorizing for the fun of it.

7 year notes are not completely safe assets. Real returns over the full 7 years depend on inflation. Returns over briefer periods depend on inflation and future shorter term rates. This means that QE2 might have an effect on the economy by removing risky assets changing the risk born by private agents. This is a plausible explanation for the apparent effectiveness of QE1 (the Fed bought mortgage backed securities, commerical paper and made loans to banks). It is one rational for quantitative easing in general.

The problem is that removal of a stochastic asset does not necessarily reduce risk. Insurance makes stochastic payments. It generally reduces risk (except for CDSs it turns out). It seems plausible to me that medium and long term Treasury securities provide a useful hedge for firms considering whether to invest in fixed capital.

If I wrote a model (which I won't) uncertainty would be uncertainty about future real GDP growth. It is possible that GDP will grow robustly so that returns on fixed capital are high or that it will grow slowly (or there will be a second dip) so returns are low. Firms are assumed to be risk averse. Partly this is due to the administrative costs of bankruptcy. Partly it reflects a principal agent model as the CEO of a firm can't hedge his or her exposure to the risk of bankruptcy by being CEO of a diversified portfolio of firms.

This means that uncertainty about the returns on fixed capital causes lower investment. Fortunately, managers can hedge this risk by buying medium and long term Treasury securities. It is clear (here assumptions about monetary policy and Taylor rules and such) that poor GDP growth will cause low short term interest rates in the future. Also the non model would have an expectations augmented Phillips curve if I bothered to write it down. Poor GDP growth causes low inflation.

For both reasons a firm with a huge pile of cash might prefer to invest some in fixed capital and the rest in medium and long term Treasuries in order to avoid risk and possible bankruptcy.

If the Fed removes long term Treasuries, this becomes less attractive. It becomes more attractive to keep the financial wealth of the firm in cash or t-bills. This reduces the hedge on the risk in the returns on fixed capital and reduces the optimum investment in fixed capital.

For this argument to work, it is necessary that firms be sitting on huge amounts of financial assets. As they are.

I am quite sure that a model along the lines sketched here could be written and would give the desired result that QE2 is contractionary. Importantly, the model relies on the assumption that quantitative easing consists of purchases of medium or long term Treasury securities and not, say, high yielding corporate bonds.

My personal sincere view is that QE2 was a total flop and that it was a total flop because of problems with quality not quantity. I really think that, for quantitative easing to work, the Fed must purchase a large quantity of low quality assets. I think that the FOMC had a heated debate and compromised agreeing to buy assets which they don't normally buy, but agreeing on assets which were as similar to their usual T-bills as possible. This makes sense if it was required by law or if their aim was to minimize the bang for the buck. Otherwise it is incomprehensible.

Crown Holdings (by facesincabs)

I shorted this stock Friday (CCK), which I both tweeted and posted on my blog.


http://tinyurl.com/5seatpr (live chart)

Notice the developing price ledge at $37.00. I want acknowledge Ryan Mallory (www.shareplanner.com) for the original trading idea earlier this week.  My stop is near this week's high.  A price move back above 13 EMA would cause me to begin to question the trade.

1 2 3 344