[4plexowner]

I used to get frustrated with John Mauldin because he wasn’t bearish enough for my tastes – his continual talk of the ‘muddle through’ economy made me think he was more interested in keeping his clients than in discussing economic realities – his tone has shifted in recent weeks – perhaps he is acknowledging that the chances of muddling through are becoming slimmer and slimmer

here is John’s latest:
The Hole in FDIC
http://news.goldseek.com/MillenniumWaveAdvisors/1253513460.php

as Arraya points out, John rips the FDIC a new one in this article (by pointing out the facts in a straightforward, logical manner supported by charts) – check out his comments on artificial deflation if you still place any validity in govt provided economic numbers – he also briefly mentions flash trading and some volume oddities in the equities markets – if you have money in stocks you should educate yourself on how they actually work (and not how you think they work)

snippets from John’s letter:

“Yes, we are seeing statistical growth in the economy this quarter and probably the next. But unemployment is rising and wages and incomes are falling. We will go into that next week.

We are in for a very poor, jobless recovery, and the risk of falling into a double-dip recession is quite high. The stock market is pricing in a steep V-shaped recovery in both GDP and corporate profits. I am not convinced.”

“How Can Just Four Stocks Be 40% of the NYSE Volume?

Before I hit the send button, a brief comment on a very odd market happening. It appears that recently up to 40% of the volume in the NYSE is in just four low-priced financial stocks. “According to Reuters, four beaten-up financial companies – Bank of America (BAC), Citigroup (C), Fannie Mae (FNM), and Freddie Mac (FRE) – have accounted for upwards of 40 percent of the trading volume on the New York Stock Exchange to begin this week.”

The stocks are basically churning in price. Why is this? There are a lot of theories, so let me offer one of my own. I think it has a lot to do with flash trading. As I wrote in a previous letter, with high-frequency program trading hedge funds and sophisticated brokers can make as much as 0.5 cents buying and selling a share of stock at breakeven. Supposedly, the exchanges pay these premiums for adding liquidity. But we are seeing liquidity in stocks where none is needed.”

[4plex: John is implying that the volume oddity is an unintended consequence of flash trading – other analysts have suggested that the 4 stocks in question are being manipulated, pointing to the fact that 3 of them have been bailed out by the govt in one way or another and the 4th one is on life-support – who knows what the truth is]

[4plexowner]

I used to get frustrated with John Mauldin because he wasn’t bearish enough for my tastes – his continual talk of the ‘muddle through’ economy made me think he was more interested in keeping his clients than in discussing economic realities – his tone has shifted in recent weeks – perhaps he is acknowledging that the chances of muddling through are becoming slimmer and slimmer

here is John’s latest:
The Hole in FDIC
http://news.goldseek.com/MillenniumWaveAdvisors/1253513460.php

as Arraya points out, John rips the FDIC a new one in this article (by pointing out the facts in a straightforward, logical manner supported by charts) – check out his comments on artificial deflation if you still place any validity in govt provided economic numbers – he also briefly mentions flash trading and some volume oddities in the equities markets – if you have money in stocks you should educate yourself on how they actually work (and not how you think they work)

snippets from John’s letter:

“Yes, we are seeing statistical growth in the economy this quarter and probably the next. But unemployment is rising and wages and incomes are falling. We will go into that next week.

We are in for a very poor, jobless recovery, and the risk of falling into a double-dip recession is quite high. The stock market is pricing in a steep V-shaped recovery in both GDP and corporate profits. I am not convinced.”

“How Can Just Four Stocks Be 40% of the NYSE Volume?

Before I hit the send button, a brief comment on a very odd market happening. It appears that recently up to 40% of the volume in the NYSE is in just four low-priced financial stocks. “According to Reuters, four beaten-up financial companies – Bank of America (BAC), Citigroup (C), Fannie Mae (FNM), and Freddie Mac (FRE) – have accounted for upwards of 40 percent of the trading volume on the New York Stock Exchange to begin this week.”

The stocks are basically churning in price. Why is this? There are a lot of theories, so let me offer one of my own. I think it has a lot to do with flash trading. As I wrote in a previous letter, with high-frequency program trading hedge funds and sophisticated brokers can make as much as 0.5 cents buying and selling a share of stock at breakeven. Supposedly, the exchanges pay these premiums for adding liquidity. But we are seeing liquidity in stocks where none is needed.”

[4plex: John is implying that the volume oddity is an unintended consequence of flash trading – other analysts have suggested that the 4 stocks in question are being manipulated, pointing to the fact that 3 of them have been bailed out by the govt in one way or another and the 4th one is on life-support – who knows what the truth is]

[4plexowner]

I used to get frustrated with John Mauldin because he wasn’t bearish enough for my tastes – his continual talk of the ‘muddle through’ economy made me think he was more interested in keeping his clients than in discussing economic realities – his tone has shifted in recent weeks – perhaps he is acknowledging that the chances of muddling through are becoming slimmer and slimmer

here is John’s latest:
The Hole in FDIC
http://news.goldseek.com/MillenniumWaveAdvisors/1253513460.php

as Arraya points out, John rips the FDIC a new one in this article (by pointing out the facts in a straightforward, logical manner supported by charts) – check out his comments on artificial deflation if you still place any validity in govt provided economic numbers – he also briefly mentions flash trading and some volume oddities in the equities markets – if you have money in stocks you should educate yourself on how they actually work (and not how you think they work)

snippets from John’s letter:

“Yes, we are seeing statistical growth in the economy this quarter and probably the next. But unemployment is rising and wages and incomes are falling. We will go into that next week.

We are in for a very poor, jobless recovery, and the risk of falling into a double-dip recession is quite high. The stock market is pricing in a steep V-shaped recovery in both GDP and corporate profits. I am not convinced.”

“How Can Just Four Stocks Be 40% of the NYSE Volume?

Before I hit the send button, a brief comment on a very odd market happening. It appears that recently up to 40% of the volume in the NYSE is in just four low-priced financial stocks. “According to Reuters, four beaten-up financial companies – Bank of America (BAC), Citigroup (C), Fannie Mae (FNM), and Freddie Mac (FRE) – have accounted for upwards of 40 percent of the trading volume on the New York Stock Exchange to begin this week.”

The stocks are basically churning in price. Why is this? There are a lot of theories, so let me offer one of my own. I think it has a lot to do with flash trading. As I wrote in a previous letter, with high-frequency program trading hedge funds and sophisticated brokers can make as much as 0.5 cents buying and selling a share of stock at breakeven. Supposedly, the exchanges pay these premiums for adding liquidity. But we are seeing liquidity in stocks where none is needed.”

[4plex: John is implying that the volume oddity is an unintended consequence of flash trading – other analysts have suggested that the 4 stocks in question are being manipulated, pointing to the fact that 3 of them have been bailed out by the govt in one way or another and the 4th one is on life-support – who knows what the truth is]

[4plexowner]

I used to get frustrated with John Mauldin because he wasn’t bearish enough for my tastes – his continual talk of the ‘muddle through’ economy made me think he was more interested in keeping his clients than in discussing economic realities – his tone has shifted in recent weeks – perhaps he is acknowledging that the chances of muddling through are becoming slimmer and slimmer

here is John’s latest:
The Hole in FDIC
http://news.goldseek.com/MillenniumWaveAdvisors/1253513460.php

as Arraya points out, John rips the FDIC a new one in this article (by pointing out the facts in a straightforward, logical manner supported by charts) – check out his comments on artificial deflation if you still place any validity in govt provided economic numbers – he also briefly mentions flash trading and some volume oddities in the equities markets – if you have money in stocks you should educate yourself on how they actually work (and not how you think they work)

snippets from John’s letter:

“Yes, we are seeing statistical growth in the economy this quarter and probably the next. But unemployment is rising and wages and incomes are falling. We will go into that next week.

We are in for a very poor, jobless recovery, and the risk of falling into a double-dip recession is quite high. The stock market is pricing in a steep V-shaped recovery in both GDP and corporate profits. I am not convinced.”

“How Can Just Four Stocks Be 40% of the NYSE Volume?

Before I hit the send button, a brief comment on a very odd market happening. It appears that recently up to 40% of the volume in the NYSE is in just four low-priced financial stocks. “According to Reuters, four beaten-up financial companies – Bank of America (BAC), Citigroup (C), Fannie Mae (FNM), and Freddie Mac (FRE) – have accounted for upwards of 40 percent of the trading volume on the New York Stock Exchange to begin this week.”

The stocks are basically churning in price. Why is this? There are a lot of theories, so let me offer one of my own. I think it has a lot to do with flash trading. As I wrote in a previous letter, with high-frequency program trading hedge funds and sophisticated brokers can make as much as 0.5 cents buying and selling a share of stock at breakeven. Supposedly, the exchanges pay these premiums for adding liquidity. But we are seeing liquidity in stocks where none is needed.”

[4plex: John is implying that the volume oddity is an unintended consequence of flash trading – other analysts have suggested that the 4 stocks in question are being manipulated, pointing to the fact that 3 of them have been bailed out by the govt in one way or another and the 4th one is on life-support – who knows what the truth is]

[4plexowner]

I used to get frustrated with John Mauldin because he wasn’t bearish enough for my tastes – his continual talk of the ‘muddle through’ economy made me think he was more interested in keeping his clients than in discussing economic realities – his tone has shifted in recent weeks – perhaps he is acknowledging that the chances of muddling through are becoming slimmer and slimmer

here is John’s latest:
The Hole in FDIC
http://news.goldseek.com/MillenniumWaveAdvisors/1253513460.php

as Arraya points out, John rips the FDIC a new one in this article (by pointing out the facts in a straightforward, logical manner supported by charts) – check out his comments on artificial deflation if you still place any validity in govt provided economic numbers – he also briefly mentions flash trading and some volume oddities in the equities markets – if you have money in stocks you should educate yourself on how they actually work (and not how you think they work)

snippets from John’s letter:

“Yes, we are seeing statistical growth in the economy this quarter and probably the next. But unemployment is rising and wages and incomes are falling. We will go into that next week.

We are in for a very poor, jobless recovery, and the risk of falling into a double-dip recession is quite high. The stock market is pricing in a steep V-shaped recovery in both GDP and corporate profits. I am not convinced.”

“How Can Just Four Stocks Be 40% of the NYSE Volume?

Before I hit the send button, a brief comment on a very odd market happening. It appears that recently up to 40% of the volume in the NYSE is in just four low-priced financial stocks. “According to Reuters, four beaten-up financial companies – Bank of America (BAC), Citigroup (C), Fannie Mae (FNM), and Freddie Mac (FRE) – have accounted for upwards of 40 percent of the trading volume on the New York Stock Exchange to begin this week.”

The stocks are basically churning in price. Why is this? There are a lot of theories, so let me offer one of my own. I think it has a lot to do with flash trading. As I wrote in a previous letter, with high-frequency program trading hedge funds and sophisticated brokers can make as much as 0.5 cents buying and selling a share of stock at breakeven. Supposedly, the exchanges pay these premiums for adding liquidity. But we are seeing liquidity in stocks where none is needed.”

[4plex: John is implying that the volume oddity is an unintended consequence of flash trading – other analysts have suggested that the 4 stocks in question are being manipulated, pointing to the fact that 3 of them have been bailed out by the govt in one way or another and the 4th one is on life-support – who knows what the truth is]

[4plexowner]

Concho, if you had studied the precious metals markets in depth you would know that the IMF has been threatening to sell this same 400 tons of gold for at least 20 years now and it has yet to be sold

so, yes, you are very correct to think that IMF gold sales are meant to manipulate the market

if you really studied in depth you would find that these threats to sell the IMF gold, coincidentally, seem to occur when gold is threatening to break above some level that the central banks / TPTB have decided to defend

as you can see by observing your own behavior, the IMF threat has done exactly what it was intended to do, which is to steer you away from going long in the precious metals market

some analysts think the IMF sale may actually occur this time – who knows, history says otherwise

China would love to buy this gold – they’d get a single price for 400 tons without driving the gold market price up – will China be allowed to purchase this gold? that’s another question since the US has final say-so over selling any IMF gold and the US and China are currently in a pissing war

[4plexowner]

Concho, if you had studied the precious metals markets in depth you would know that the IMF has been threatening to sell this same 400 tons of gold for at least 20 years now and it has yet to be sold

so, yes, you are very correct to think that IMF gold sales are meant to manipulate the market

if you really studied in depth you would find that these threats to sell the IMF gold, coincidentally, seem to occur when gold is threatening to break above some level that the central banks / TPTB have decided to defend

as you can see by observing your own behavior, the IMF threat has done exactly what it was intended to do, which is to steer you away from going long in the precious metals market

some analysts think the IMF sale may actually occur this time – who knows, history says otherwise

China would love to buy this gold – they’d get a single price for 400 tons without driving the gold market price up – will China be allowed to purchase this gold? that’s another question since the US has final say-so over selling any IMF gold and the US and China are currently in a pissing war

[4plexowner]

Concho, if you had studied the precious metals markets in depth you would know that the IMF has been threatening to sell this same 400 tons of gold for at least 20 years now and it has yet to be sold

so, yes, you are very correct to think that IMF gold sales are meant to manipulate the market

if you really studied in depth you would find that these threats to sell the IMF gold, coincidentally, seem to occur when gold is threatening to break above some level that the central banks / TPTB have decided to defend

as you can see by observing your own behavior, the IMF threat has done exactly what it was intended to do, which is to steer you away from going long in the precious metals market

some analysts think the IMF sale may actually occur this time – who knows, history says otherwise

China would love to buy this gold – they’d get a single price for 400 tons without driving the gold market price up – will China be allowed to purchase this gold? that’s another question since the US has final say-so over selling any IMF gold and the US and China are currently in a pissing war

[4plexowner]

Concho, if you had studied the precious metals markets in depth you would know that the IMF has been threatening to sell this same 400 tons of gold for at least 20 years now and it has yet to be sold

so, yes, you are very correct to think that IMF gold sales are meant to manipulate the market

if you really studied in depth you would find that these threats to sell the IMF gold, coincidentally, seem to occur when gold is threatening to break above some level that the central banks / TPTB have decided to defend

as you can see by observing your own behavior, the IMF threat has done exactly what it was intended to do, which is to steer you away from going long in the precious metals market

some analysts think the IMF sale may actually occur this time – who knows, history says otherwise

China would love to buy this gold – they’d get a single price for 400 tons without driving the gold market price up – will China be allowed to purchase this gold? that’s another question since the US has final say-so over selling any IMF gold and the US and China are currently in a pissing war

[4plexowner]

Concho, if you had studied the precious metals markets in depth you would know that the IMF has been threatening to sell this same 400 tons of gold for at least 20 years now and it has yet to be sold

so, yes, you are very correct to think that IMF gold sales are meant to manipulate the market

if you really studied in depth you would find that these threats to sell the IMF gold, coincidentally, seem to occur when gold is threatening to break above some level that the central banks / TPTB have decided to defend

as you can see by observing your own behavior, the IMF threat has done exactly what it was intended to do, which is to steer you away from going long in the precious metals market

some analysts think the IMF sale may actually occur this time – who knows, history says otherwise

China would love to buy this gold – they’d get a single price for 400 tons without driving the gold market price up – will China be allowed to purchase this gold? that’s another question since the US has final say-so over selling any IMF gold and the US and China are currently in a pissing war

[4plexowner]

but the nickels are shiny!!!

[4plexowner]

but the nickels are shiny!!!

[4plexowner]

but the nickels are shiny!!!

[4plexowner]

but the nickels are shiny!!!

[4plexowner]

but the nickels are shiny!!!

[Author]

Posts