ElCidCampeador

Total Rating:
0 / 0

24 Comments

    • Thu Sep 25th 08:02 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Buffett Is Not a Savior but an Investor
      Also, I think Goldman will benefit from their new structure by having access to capital (internal deposits) at a much lower rate than previously (through external financing).
      View article »
    • Thu Sep 25th 08:00 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Buffett Is Not a Savior but an Investor
      As I heard several yesterday, this was the most expensive ad campaign Goldman could have rolled out...but a very effective one.

      Buffett got a great deal with guaranteed returns to keep his investors happy, while Goldman got some cash that will help the continued effort to "pave over holes" and make possible some acquisitions of regional depository banks.


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Wed Sep 3rd 10:45 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Of Wars and Strategic Metals
      Great article. I like your macro point of view...similar to mine. On the topic of Russia and PGM metal stockpiles, Russia has one of the largest stockpiles of palladium in the world. Although the specific amount is undisclosed, it is enough to move markets. Overall, I think PGMs and related equities are a great long-term. I'm in SWC, PAL, and AAUK. As for other resources that will be a focus in the "global scramble for commodities"...ta... a look at coal, nat gas, and water. In addition to solar (cheap to produce and simple to implement) and wind (US is a relatively "windy" country), coal and nat gas (US has competitive advantage due to domestic supply) will play a huge role in the push for energy diversification. I'm also researching the tightening supply of potable water and the growing demand for drinking and irrigation.


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Fri Aug 29th 14:45 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Hedge Fund Manager's Notebook: Why Hummers Are Greener Than Hybrids, and Tech & Homebuilders May Be a Buy
      7)....Announcements from Japan, China on fiscal stumulus packages...could result in some nice short-run bull runs and a good profit-taking opportunity going long on the way up and short on the way back down to reality...

      By the way, T-Bird, are you a fellow T-Bird alum???
      View article »
    • Thu Aug 28th 11:31 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      High Prices Cut Demand for Metals
      The supply issue in South Africa (source of about 75% to 80% of world platinum production and upwards of 90% of reserves) is focused on the nation's electricity shortage. Eskom, the nationalized utility has not added capacity to keep up with demand for electricity. I've read analyst reports saying that there is no way to add capacity on a significant level in the next five years. When Eskom has to cut power (coined "load-shedding&qu... it can strongly affect the mining industry in ways ranging from outright closure of operations (gold and platinum mines closed for five days in Jan) or cutback in operations due to limited electricity.

      While the mining giants such as Anglo and Implats are exploring their own power generation, an impending coal shortage (where S.Africa gets most of their energy) and high price of diesel fuel will not make this any more cost-effective. One company to watch is Sasol (SSL), which is one of the world's leaders in synfuel development. With rising inflation and a slowing economy, S.Africa must salvage their mining industry to stay afloat while the rest of the world slows...which could lead to some new energy-related infrastructure investments between Eskom, Sasol, and the S.African gov't...

      It's an interesting situation, and one to watch in the coming months and years.


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Tue Aug 19th 11:57 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Russia's Too Risky - Barron's
      I think we are all forgetting that Russia is an EMERGING MARKET. It is not a developed market and simply cannot be compared to the US or the Eurozone on any real level. Of course there is risk and the threat of geopolitical instability. People don't invest in Russia because of stability and low volatility. They invest because the perceived gains in individual investments are believed to outweigh perceived risks. There are great companies in every country on earth...some are easier to find and invest in than others. Even Zimbabwe has great companies...

      In a broad, macro context, I'm extremely bearish on Russia in general...but some individual companies look great to me. However, if commodity prices slow down, I think the Russian economy will see the current problems magnify, as well as the emergence of new issues. I don't think the economy is diversified enough and a lot of new wealth is leveraged on the commodity boom...


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Fri Aug 15th 14:10 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      6 Reasons to Expect Impressive Economic Growth from Russia
      Jason, good article...I appreciate your contrarian view.

      Do you have any commentary on Russia in terms of inflation expectations and from which sector of the economy the GDP growth will come?

      With y/y double-digit headline inflation and a rather accommodative monetary policy, a slight economic slowdown, possibly triggered by lower commodity prices could cause some significant rifts in the Russian economy.

      Also, a lesser focused-upon issue is the extremely low level of unemployment (for an Emerging Market) and higher level of capacity utilization, reflecting that the level of economic productivity will not likely be organically derived. I continue to see GDP growth estimates in the mid-7% range for 2009, but cannot envision where the growth would come from.

      Typically, FDI and immigration would "fill these holes," but with the recent military operations in Georgia (loss of faith in Medvedev/Putin and added geopolitical instability) and obscenely low immigration growth (0.28 per 1000 according to CIA Factbook), growth will have to be generated from within. In the event of a commodity price downturn, there simply won't be the influx of capital that would be needed to fuel growth. Even if commodity prices push higher, I have not seen the kind of capital plowback that could sustain enough growth to shadow the growing rate of inflation.

      Thoughts?


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Fri Aug 15th 13:20 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Private Equity Deals Wane
      EE, you need to sharpen up your basic economic knowledge. A stable monetary policy is good for the US in the sense that we do not produce every single thing we need domestically. If the dollar were to appreciate sharply for an extended period of time, it would hurt the US economy because exports would fall dramatically. Deflation also destroys the value of fixed assets, such as real estate...as well as valuations in the equity markets. The end result of deflation is simple - economic depression.

      As for inflation, it is necessary. Low and controlled inflation is a byproduct of a healthy economy. It allows for a "cushion" for wages to be cut instead of jobs eliminated altogether. One of the basic principles of the Phillips Curve is that the higher unemployment is a result of extremely low inflation.

      Essentially, your comments show your lack of knowledge on economic policy, so there really isn't much sense in attempting rebuttals...

      neeb??, dialogues are indeed great. You pose an interesting question...which holds a great deal of truth. However, when the economy tightens up, people begin complaining about grocery bills and stop shopping at Whole Foods/Fresh Market in lieu of Costco/Walmart. In that sense, costs are controlled before expenditures are even made...


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Thu Aug 14th 16:26 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Private Equity Deals Wane
      Money has, does, and will always run the world. It's a simple fact of life.

      As long as "things" can be owned, those with more "things" will wield more power. Denying this - or arguing against property ownership - is inherently flawed because not all people are equal. Some have more skills in certain areas more valuable than others...some wish to work harder... The people with the most valuable skills, willing to work the hardest should be justly rewarded. Capitalism does this. It is by no means a perfect system, but it is the best we have right now.

      At the same time, power and wealth need checks and balances - as well as "safety nets" in place for those deficient in certain skills or work ethic...and, YES, I am advocating a certain level of social programs and entitlement provisions, but it must be a careful balance as to not end up "subsidizing laziness."

      Just as that extreme should be monitored and avoided, as should the other - obscene wealth. I am talking about money that sits and does nothing...not money that builds companies and infrastructure, creating a better world and better lives for those in it.

      All that in consideration...and apologies for rambling a bit...why would anyone be surprised for the financial system and regulations to favor the wealthy?!?! The wealthy are, after all, those who create wealth. However, it was - and still is - completely absurd to make claims that Bernanke and the Fed have the goal of draining wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy, as the author purported.

      Questioning legislation, political/social structures, etc is healthy and much-needed in any society, so I'm not criticizing that whatsoever. I am, however, ridiculing certain comments that are uneducated and flat-out irresponsible.


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Thu Aug 14th 14:48 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Private Equity Deals Wane
      "Private equity and the Fed have the same goal: To drain wealth from the poor/middle class and re-distribute it to the rich."

      That really might be the most ridiculous thing I have read in quite some time. I'm not sure which specific Marxist philosophy you follow, but the Fed certainly wasn't established to transfer wealth away from the middle class.

      Section 2a of the Federal Reserve Act says..."The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market Committee shall maintain long run growth of the monetary and credit aggregates commensurate with the economy's long run potential to increase production, so as to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates."

      Those goals certainly seem like they would benefit all of society to me.

      As for your attack on Private Equity firms, it is advantageous for banks to raise capital from PE firms simply because many of them are flush with cash and have orchestrated turnarounds before.

      Yes, some PE deals have seen a level of corporate plundering, but nothing is pure. The vast majority of PE deals make money and work because the new management runs the company by the numbers and they manage risk better than the previous operators...which is something that always works and will always make money...

      Please, spend your time learning basic economic and financial principles rather than reading and commenting on populist conspiracy theories.


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Thu Aug 14th 13:54 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      US Dollar Strength - Why Sell It?
      Great commentary...My view is that the US has been the first to feel economic pressures and will be the first to emerge from such pressures.


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Thu Aug 14th 12:29 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Just How Correlated Are Oil and Equities?
      ...very interesting article and some great comments!

      Arsuron brings up a great point. While the S&P500 does constitute an appropriate benchmark, the names are changed periodically to specifically reduce volatility and attempting to mirror the current state of the US economy in terms of aggregate business performance.

      Also, while no experiment or analysis of correlation can be perfect, I would argue that a single correlation figure is irrelevant when examining the price of oil and its affect on the broad US economy. about 3/4 of oil's demand in the US comes from gasoline, which - at the retail level - does not move as freely as oil. Rising oil prices lead to rising gasoline prices at a slightly-lagging pace; however, falling oil leads to falling gasoline prices at a much slower pace. I don't have any specific data for this, but it would be very interesting to see.

      Logically, more money spent on oil means higher expenses for most US businesses and less disposable income for US consumers. Both of these things will absolutely lead to a worse economy, ceteris paribus.


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Wed Aug 13th 16:00 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Economic Cost of the Military Industrial Complex
      "Speak softly and carry a big stick." Theodore Roosevelt had it right...we already have the biggest stick in the world, but now we just need to work on speaking a bit more softly.

      While the US expenditures on DoD might be massive, nothing is more important than having a strong defense to protect citizens, domestically and abroad, as well as to defend certain ideals around the world. Without paving way for further argument from those on this board who seemingly post only for the sake of argument, I feel that "American must remain good to remain great." While I will never support the US allowing its military to become less of a global force, I do think that more humanitarian work could be done. The US does a lot right now, but more can always be done.

      Additionally, more technological advances have come from DARPA and even NASA than we could even fathom...not just missiles, tanks, etc...but surgical techniques, transportation, and synthetic materials. Without healthy funding, many of these advances would not exist.


      Cheers

      View article »
    • Wed Aug 6th 14:40 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Why I'm Anti a 'Windfall Profit Tax' on Big Oil
      OTL, I'd like to add a 3rd rule to your list: CONGRESS MUST HAVE MORE NON-LAWYERS.

      There is no reason a bunch of lawyers should be deciding US policy on energy, banking, healthcare, economics, etc, etc...

      As for windfall profits, the only success they would attain is to make the US less of an attractive place to base operations. The most important aspect of Capitalism is allowing for the environment that rewards success. Levying taxes on companies with record profits is simply anti-Capitalistic.

      Populist economic policies simply do not work...


      Cheers
      View article »
    • Tue Aug 5th 16:33 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Minefields in LatAm: Dodging Political Pitfalls
      Great article! Good coverage and geopolitical analysis...I'd also love to see a similar piece on Africa....

      Cheers
      View article »
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»