If you do rejoin broken links in Word then you need to postion the 
cursor at the end and enter enter to reactivate the joined text as a 
link.

--- In [email protected], "brian_z111" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Concluding my speculative piece on the state of the markets and 
> the 'short selling ban'.
> 
> 
> Summary:
> 
> The runction on world markets started from the, still influential, 
US 
> market.
> 
> The fundamental causes are:
> 
> - US private and corporate debt is at record levels and going up 
the 
> chart exponentially. Eventually there has to be a day of reckoning.
> Living beyond ones means is a disease of modern culture and the 
> dominant generations.
> 
> - the balance sheets of some of Americas top 500 were/are pretty 
> parlous, especially the financials.
> 
> Institutions are selling them down to re-establish their 
fundamental 
> value (price discovery as they say)... it takes a while and the 
> markets tend to overshoot the mark.... better late than never I 
> suppose.
> 
> The US upsets flowed over to others, especially Europe, because 
they 
> are so financially/mentally/emotionally intertwined.
> 
> Small out of the way economies, like Australia, were only affected 
to 
> a limited extent but their financials took the hit as well.
> 
> The story, bandied around by the coalition of the financially 
> willing, is that the markets were victimised by shortsellers/hedge 
> funds but this is a beat up of WMD proportions ... all for the 
> benefit of the public.
> 
> 'World leaders' are meeting in NewYork even as we speak... I would 
> love to be a fly on the wall to see what ends they have in mind.
> 
> Institutions with healthier balance sheets are now looking for 
> bargains.
> 
> The ban on 'short selling' is a banNOT in the US but looking 
serious 
> elsewhere....perhaps the US doesn't really want a ban OR is it a 
nice 
> idea that is too difficult to implement OR are they softening us 
for 
> draconian restrictions in the future?
> 
> Volatility in the markets continued this week (post ban).
> 
> Volatility is not caused by short selling etc as such - it is an 
> indicator of market sentiment... the markets are spooked and rather 
> like a child who has been woken by the sight of a ghost, they will 
> not go back to sleep, in that bed again, without a good deal of 
> soothing.
> 
> The markets have very short term memories though.
> 
> Gold is a market sentiment indicator and when sentiment settles 
down 
> so will gold.
> 
> 100 seems to be the unofficially agreed new floor for oil????
> If so economies are in for a slow wind-down.
> 
> 
> Random Evidence:
> 
> 1) Australia - market controlled by hedgers/short sellers?
> 
> - Aus shorting is limited to under 500 stocks/etf's
> - only 10% of total shares can be shorted (for approved instruments)
> - foreign money can't just flood in and short Aus (it takes time to 
> move money around/open accounts etc). Regulators can cut off 
foreign 
> capital inflow anyway.
> - here is a link to current Aus shorts (cumulative).
> Post the Sept19 shorts ban the list looks much the same as it did a 
> week earlier... shorts are still in place so they were long term 
> hedging OR a part of normal market activities and NOT the result of 
> short term speculation.
> 
> %'s of shorts relative to shorting limits and total shares are very 
> low.
> 
> http://www.asx.com.au/data/shortsell.txt
> 
> 2) Australia - exposure of Aus banks is limited and factored in 
> already!
> 
> Here is a current article discussing exposure and the fact that Aus 
> banks have already raised capital ratios well above requirements.
> 
> http://business.theage.com.au/business/anz-doubles-capital-raising-
> 20080904-49za.html
> 
> ANZ and NAB are deemed to be the banks with most exposuure and CBA, 
> WBC with the least... their share prices over the last few months 
> reflect this.
> 
> However it is old news.
> 
> Link to official market announcements page > enter ANZ > search and 
> refer to price sensitive PDF's 
> 16/9/2008 Lehman exposure is minor and 28/07/2008 trading update 
> (plus earlier price sensitive releases) that discuss 
> exposure/provisions, cash earnings etc and the fact that forward 
divs 
> will be maintained at a forward yield of around 7-8% relative to 
> current stock price.... the Aus public have already paid for this 
via 
> higher margins and fees etc
> 
> 3) US - volatility continues despite short bans.
> 
> GM was heavily sold down yesterday 23/9/2008 by institutions??? and 
> because of the auto balance sheets ... nothing to do with 
> speculators???.... price was volatile but volume was half 3 month 
ave 
> vol == lack of buyers rather than an excess of naked sellers????
> 
> Chrysler proits tumble
> 
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122217870530867245.html?
> mod=yahoo_hs&ru=yahoo
> 
> 4) speculators move to other shorting mechanisms to work around 
> financial short bans 
> 
> link to current CBOE put/call ratio and vols page >> take the top 
link
> 
> http://www.cboe.com/data/PutCallRatio.aspx
> 
> put/call ratio late last week was extremely high.
> vols on 16-19th inclusive were top 4/5 vols ever.
> 
> 5) the big boys (or girls) are looking for bargains
> 
> examples:
> 
> buffet buys financial survivors
> 
> http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/23/buffett-goldman-banks-markets-
> cx_mm_0923buffett.html?partner=yahootix
> 
> Euro banks cash up to buy financials
> 
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122220793000968729.html?
> mod=yahoo_hs&ru=yahoo
> 
> Once again - copy broken links to Word - use backspace to put them 
> back together and they are good to go.
> 
> Good trading.
> 
> brian_z
> 
> --- In [email protected], "brian_z111" <brian_z111@> wrote:
> >
> > Link to a summary of international short selling regs:
> > 
> > 
> 
http://www.asx.com.au/about/pdf/20080923_update_on_asic_response_to_sh
> > ort_selling.pdf
> > 
> > Articles laying out OneChicago's position are worth a look:
> > 
> > http://www.onechicago.com/
> > 
> > Interesting that the US started it all and UK/Australia ended up 
> with 
> > the most restrictive regs.
> > 
> > UK is talking very tough.
> > Aus is writing new permanent legislation (to be announced).
> > USA is prevaricating?
> > 
> > (to put broken link back together copy to Notepad and use 
backspace)
> > 
> > brian_z
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In [email protected], "brian_z111" <brian_z111@> 
wrote:
> > >
> > > May you live in interesting times (old Chinese curse?)
> > > 
> > > If we haven't learnt something about trading, from the Freddie, 
> > > Fannie and Friends affair, we never will.
> > > 
> > > Depending which color shades you wear (I'm speaking as a 
> freelance 
> > > trader) -  some early speculation:
> > > 
> > > - meetings, between politicians and institutional king makers, 
> will 
> > > continue behind closed doors (making or breaking fortunes while 
> we 
> > > sleep or take the kids to weekend activities)
> > > 
> > > -  short selling bans are not all created equal, of equal 
length, 
> > or 
> > > equally distributed (Aus == total ban justified because of the 
> > > possibility that a flood of short money looking for a home will 
> > sink 
> > > the ship) ... they vary from country to country.
> > > 
> > > - hedge funds are the bad guys (always reassuring to find the 
man 
> > in 
> > > the black hat)
> > > 
> > > - will politicians ever get it right?
> > > 
> > > - agree with Tomasz that backtested systems, in some cases, 
might 
> > end 
> > > up being fit only for the rubbish bin (only if the 'ban' sticks)
> > > 
> > > - they are beating the grass to drive out the snakes (the drums 
> > will 
> > > die down soon) .... are they in the right patch?
> > > 
> > > - let's not over react. Get the facts first. What opportunities 
> > still 
> > > exist for short selling and how can we play them (paper/TV talk 
> on 
> > > this subject is about as entertaining/real as BigBrother)?
> > > 
> > > - IMO the markets have changed in recent times (globalism and 
the 
> > > power of speculators) - look out for Global market regulations.
> > > 
> > > - speculators took control of the markets in the dotcom bubble 
> (for 
> > > the first time in history?).... once we have tasted forbidden 
> fruit 
> > > there is no turning back.
> > > 
> > > - speculators (some of us?) are still around, cashed up and 
> > > knowledgeable and ready to play (they didn't lose money in the 
> last 
> > 6 
> > > months they piled it on)... they are not going to go away and 
> hide 
> > > under the bed.
> > > 
> > > - speculators will move to new playgrounds (already the first 
day 
> > of 
> > > trade this week showed high volatility in stocks continue, 
record 
> > > breaking moves in oil and gold)
> > > 
> > > - a trader can still leverage a lot of stock, buy and then sell.
> > > When they sell is the volatility produced any different cf to 
> > holding 
> > > the stock and shorting OR just straight out shorting?..... so 
> > market 
> > > mechanisms still exist for speculators to 'move the markets' to 
> > some 
> > > extent.
> > > 
> > > - will the institutions that play on the short side take this 
> lying 
> > > down (exchanges, brokers, funds) e.g. will the options industry 
> OR  
> > > the SSF exchange fold up their tents (if all shorting is 
banned)?
> > > 
> > > - already, in Australia, the monopolistic ASX suffered a > 1% 
> fall 
> > in 
> > > the first day of new trading, (ex the short sell ban) - punters 
> > > believe the profits of listed exchanges, without the turnover 
> > created 
> > > by short selling, will be slashed.
> > > 
> > > - fair playing field? Aus regulators decided to ban all short 
> > selling 
> > > in Aus indefinitely, following a weekend ring around with their 
> > > international mates ..... come Monday morning they had to 
hastily 
> > > cancel the first hour of trade (no headline announcements 
there) 
> > > after the instutionals quickly got on the phone to the Aus 
> > regulators 
> > > to add a few quick patches to suit their needs etc etc 
> > > 
> > > - speculators might move over to pounding other non-financial 
> > targets 
> > > (GM)
> > > 
> > > - outside the US punters can do naughty  things like spread 
> > > betting ... so far some of the big players are 'regulated' and 
> > > compliant e.g. IG Markets .... is it possible 'dealers' like 
this 
> > > will move outside of regulation and develop exotic shorting 
> > > alternative (businesses always develop products to meet demand)?
> > > 
> > > Watch this space?
> > > 
> > > Those who made a killing on Gold in the last 6 months - was it 
> good 
> > > luck or good management? ... remember what goes up fast 
> (possessing 
> > > the quality of momentum) can also come down fast.
> > > 
> > > Did anyone using mechanical/AT systems take a haircut based 
> > > on 'unprogrammable contextual moves'?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > brian_z  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In [email protected], "Tomasz Janeczko" <groups@> 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Yuki,
> > > > 
> > > > On a more positive note - I am sure that list members would
> > > > love to hear your opinion about the similarities (if any)
> > > > between Japan in the early nineties, and the US now.
> > > > 
> > > > In Bernanke famous speech (2002) that Patrick mentioned 
earlier 
> > in 
> > > this thread
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021121/default
> > > .htm
> > > > we can find this:
> > > > "The Japanese situation is a complex one [...] 
> > > > Japan's economy faces some significant barriers to growth 
> besides 
> > > deflation, 
> > > > including massive financial problems in the banking and 
> corporate 
> > > sectors and a large overhang of government debt.
> > > > private-sector financial problems have muted the effects of 
the 
> > > monetary policies that have been tried in Japan,
> > > > even as the heavy overhang of government debt has made 
Japanese 
> > > policymakers more reluctant to use aggressive fiscal policies
> > > > [...] Fortunately, the U.S. economy does not share these 
> > problems, 
> > > at least not to anything like the same degree"
> > > > 
> > > > Unfortunatelly the last sentence does not seem to be valid in 
> > 2008.
> > > > 
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Tomasz Janeczko
> > > > amibroker.com
> > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > > From: "Tomasz Janeczko" <groups@>
> > > > To: <[email protected]>
> > > > Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 12:43 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: How did everyone do last week?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > > 
> > > > > In his post Patrick just added single sentence to
> > > > > make sure I notice his private e-mail in my inbox.
> > > > > I can not see anything wrong with that.
> > > > > I have seen hundreds of posts on this list mentioning
> > > > > that somebody posted something via private channel,
> > > > > and nobody complained. 
> > > > > Could we continue in a (more) friendly atmosphere?
> > > > > Thank you in advance and have a good day.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Tomasz Janeczko
> > > > > amibroker.com
> > > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > > > From: "Yuki Taga" <yukitaga@>
> > > > > To: "vlanschot" <[email protected]>
> > > > > Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 12:18 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: How did everyone do last week?
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >> Hi vlanschot,
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> You overrate your ability to engender panic by several 
> orders 
> > of
> > > > >> magnitude.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> And yes, you cannot possibly imagine how I coped last 
week, 
> > nor 
> > > this
> > > > >> week, nor during any week, unless you take the other side 
of 
> my
> > > > >> trades.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> I just find it strange that you had to announce that you 
> sent a
> > > > >> private email -- on a public list.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> Also, FWIW, I think I was part of this community before 
you 
> > > were, and
> > > > >> I don't think it has changed that much.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> You can go back to trying to look clever now; I won't 
> attempt 
> > to 
> > > get
> > > > >> into your way.  But frankly, the bulk of the membership 
here 
> is
> > > > >> probably not the least bit interested to know that you 
sent 
> an 
> > > email
> > > > >> to anyone who is a member of this list (or the list 
owner), 
> the
> > > > >> contents of which they will probably never share.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> And personally, I could not be less interested.  But I 
find 
> it
> > > > >> strange nonetheless.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> Yuki
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> Monday, September 22, 2008, 6:43:26 PM, you wrote:
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> v> Hi Yuki,
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> v> You seem quite emotional about emails. I can only 
imagine 
> > how 
> > > you 
> > > > >> v> coped last week. Anyway, you just confirmed why I 
> > > increasingly feel 
> > > > >> v> this community has changed over the years in terms of 
its 
> > way 
> > > of 
> > > > >> v> communicating and sensitivities to rules. I believe 
there 
> > > have been 
> > > > >> v> plenty of other references in this group to private 
> emails, 
> > > and 
> > > > >> v> personally I never realized my email would cause such a 
> > > reaction. 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> v> In other words, I won't bother again forwarding 
> references 
> > > which I 
> > > > >> v> thought other readers might find interesting. You can 
> calm 
> > > down now. 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> v> PS
> > > > >> 
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> v> I've send you a private e-mail re my own opinion.
> > > > >>>> 
> > > > >>>> That would be "I've sent" of course, and highly 
> illuminative 
> > > for the
> > > > >>>> list members, at that.  Why would you mention on list 
that 
> > you 
> > > sent
> > > > >>>> someone a message off list?  Would you suspect they are 
> not 
> > in
> > > > >>>> receipt of such message?  Would you like to get 
> subscribers 
> > to 
> > > your
> > > > >>>> off list messages?
> > > > >>>> 
> > > > >>>> I've sent a number of people private emails.  And I'm 
> > beating 
> > > my
> > > > >>>> benchmark by more than 30 percent.
> > > > >>>> 
> > > > >>>> Phooey.
> > > > >>>> 
> > > > >>>> Yuki
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> ------------------------------------
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> Please note that this group is for discussion between 
users 
> > only.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail 
directly 
> > to 
> > > > >> SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check 
> > DEVLOG:
> > > > >> http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> For other support material please check also:
> > > > >> http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
> > > > >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> 
> > > > > 
> > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > > 
> > > > > Please note that this group is for discussion between users 
> > only.
> > > > > 
> > > > > To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail 
directly 
> to 
> > > > > SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
> > > > > 
> > > > > For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check 
> > DEVLOG:
> > > > > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
> > > > > 
> > > > > For other support material please check also:
> > > > > http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


Reply via email to