Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › DJIA INDEX -294
- This topic has 125 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 6 months ago by
stockstradr.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 15, 2008 at 8:49 PM #271036September 15, 2008 at 9:00 PM #270730
davelj
Participant[quote=TheBreeze]Holy cow! MER finished at $17.06. One cent higher than it closed on Friday despite the BAC bid at $29/shared. Effin’ amazing.[/quote]
That’s what happens when you use stock in a transaction instead of cash. If the resulting combination looks like a shit sandwich, then both companies’ stocks trade like toilet paper.
September 15, 2008 at 9:00 PM #270966davelj
Participant[quote=TheBreeze]Holy cow! MER finished at $17.06. One cent higher than it closed on Friday despite the BAC bid at $29/shared. Effin’ amazing.[/quote]
That’s what happens when you use stock in a transaction instead of cash. If the resulting combination looks like a shit sandwich, then both companies’ stocks trade like toilet paper.
September 15, 2008 at 9:00 PM #270978davelj
Participant[quote=TheBreeze]Holy cow! MER finished at $17.06. One cent higher than it closed on Friday despite the BAC bid at $29/shared. Effin’ amazing.[/quote]
That’s what happens when you use stock in a transaction instead of cash. If the resulting combination looks like a shit sandwich, then both companies’ stocks trade like toilet paper.
September 15, 2008 at 9:00 PM #271020davelj
Participant[quote=TheBreeze]Holy cow! MER finished at $17.06. One cent higher than it closed on Friday despite the BAC bid at $29/shared. Effin’ amazing.[/quote]
That’s what happens when you use stock in a transaction instead of cash. If the resulting combination looks like a shit sandwich, then both companies’ stocks trade like toilet paper.
September 15, 2008 at 9:00 PM #271046davelj
Participant[quote=TheBreeze]Holy cow! MER finished at $17.06. One cent higher than it closed on Friday despite the BAC bid at $29/shared. Effin’ amazing.[/quote]
That’s what happens when you use stock in a transaction instead of cash. If the resulting combination looks like a shit sandwich, then both companies’ stocks trade like toilet paper.
September 15, 2008 at 10:11 PM #270757equalizer
ParticipantIt appeared to be capitulation, but I fear it wasn’t the bottom as usual. The VIX is only at 31. It was 37 on 1/22/08, and at previous bottoms the VIX went over 40.
Sure enough, Hulbert has same conclusion looking at market letter sentiment indicators which imply that many observers are not as bearish as they were in July.
September 15, 2008 at 10:11 PM #270993equalizer
ParticipantIt appeared to be capitulation, but I fear it wasn’t the bottom as usual. The VIX is only at 31. It was 37 on 1/22/08, and at previous bottoms the VIX went over 40.
Sure enough, Hulbert has same conclusion looking at market letter sentiment indicators which imply that many observers are not as bearish as they were in July.
September 15, 2008 at 10:11 PM #271006equalizer
ParticipantIt appeared to be capitulation, but I fear it wasn’t the bottom as usual. The VIX is only at 31. It was 37 on 1/22/08, and at previous bottoms the VIX went over 40.
Sure enough, Hulbert has same conclusion looking at market letter sentiment indicators which imply that many observers are not as bearish as they were in July.
September 15, 2008 at 10:11 PM #271047equalizer
ParticipantIt appeared to be capitulation, but I fear it wasn’t the bottom as usual. The VIX is only at 31. It was 37 on 1/22/08, and at previous bottoms the VIX went over 40.
Sure enough, Hulbert has same conclusion looking at market letter sentiment indicators which imply that many observers are not as bearish as they were in July.
September 15, 2008 at 10:11 PM #271073equalizer
ParticipantIt appeared to be capitulation, but I fear it wasn’t the bottom as usual. The VIX is only at 31. It was 37 on 1/22/08, and at previous bottoms the VIX went over 40.
Sure enough, Hulbert has same conclusion looking at market letter sentiment indicators which imply that many observers are not as bearish as they were in July.
September 15, 2008 at 11:25 PM #270802tucker…
Participantcramers rant should have been 2008 sep
instead of 2007September 15, 2008 at 11:25 PM #271040tucker…
Participantcramers rant should have been 2008 sep
instead of 2007September 15, 2008 at 11:25 PM #271054tucker…
Participantcramers rant should have been 2008 sep
instead of 2007September 15, 2008 at 11:25 PM #271092tucker…
Participantcramers rant should have been 2008 sep
instead of 2007 -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.