Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Auric Goldfinger's Short List -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gringodoc who wrote (10466)	9/22/2002 11:37:59 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 19428

Crude Oil Rises to 19-Month High as Iraq Rejects New UN Terms By Angela Macdonald-Smith Singapore, Sept. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Crude oil rose to a 19- month high after a report that Iraq won't accept new United Nations conditions on weapons inspections, renewing concern the U.S. may attack the Middle East oil producer. Crude oil for November delivery rose above $30 a barrel for a second day, trading at $30.33 at 10:26 a.m. Singapore time in after-hours electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. On Feb. 14, 2001 crude oil rose as high as $30.85 a barrel. Iraq won't accept any new UN resolution that counters last week's agreement with Secretary-General Kofi Annan on the return of UN weapons inspectors, Agence France-Presse reported on Saturday, citing the Iraq News Agency. The U.S. accused Iraq's President Saddam Hussein of developing weapons of mass destruction. The statement by Iraq ``implies Saddam is not going to allow free and unfettered access to the arms inspectors,'' said Simon Games-Thomas, head of energy at Rothschild Australia. The U.S. has said Iraq must first give UN weapons inspectors unlimited access to its territory to avoid war. Any U.S. attack may disrupt oil shipments from the Middle East, which supplies about one-third of the world's oil. Crude oil has risen 54 percent this year, partly on concern about possible disruptions and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries' production cuts. Striking First U.S. President George W. Bush has outlined a policy of striking first against ``rogue states and terrorists'' and pressed Russia, a permanent member of the Security Council with veto power over resolutions, to support action against Iraq. Last week, Iraq said it will permit the return of weapons inspectors without conditions, pushing oil prices down by 2 percent on Sept. 17. On Friday, November crude oil rose as high as $30.15 before closing at $29.84, as Bush sought approval from U.S. lawmakers for a resolution authorizing military action against Iraq. The proposed resolution, which is scheduled for debate this week, would empower Bush to use ``all means that he determines to be appropriate'' to disarm Iraq. U.S. lawmakers such as Arizona Senator John McCain and Alabama Senator Richard Shelby predicted that Bush's resolution would have little trouble passing the U.S. Congress. ``It's looking more and more like the U.S. is going to do something, with or without support from the UN Security Council,'' said David Thurtell, a commodities analyst at Commonwealth Bank of Australia. ``It's just a matter of when, not if.''

To: gringodoc who wrote (10466)	9/24/2002 11:41:28 AM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 19428

10:22am 09/24/02 EDS plummets as Merrill says 'sell' (EDS) By Michael Baron Electronic Data Systems (EDS) is plunging $4.32, or 26.2 percent, to $12.20, after Merrill Lynch lowered its rating on the company's stock to "sell" and withdrawing its financial estimates. The firm says it believes that EDS, whose market capitalization dropped more than 40 percent on Sept. 19 following a warning, is facing a loss from settling derivative instrument exposure that could result in a charge of up to 21 cents a share to settle the transaction. Merrill explains that this move "effectively eliminates free cash flow" for 2002, and it will make it difficult for EDS to effectively compete for large contracts, which often require large upfront investments.

To: gringodoc who wrote (10466)	9/24/2002 11:01:41 PM
From: Sir Auric Goldfinger	Respond to of 19428

Yes very interesting WCOM/Citi stuff. Glass Stegal probably deserves to be dusted off given that action..

To: gringodoc who wrote (10466)	9/25/2002 11:01:53 AM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 19428

Stocks tanking in September? It's no surprise Don Bauder September 25, 2002 September is the sleepiest month, but October is the wildest, so it's no time to do a Rip Van Winkle. Any stock market excitement this month and next may not have staying power – big rallies erased by big losses, and vice versa. But with stocks yesterday plunging through their July 23 lows, streaking downward to levels not seen since October of 1998, there could be another bounceback rally, although there is really little news that would appear to justify it. Earnings confessional season is not going well. Scandals mount. Iraq is a black cloud. Any upside trigger is likely to be a surprise. According to the Stock Trader's Almanac 2002, September has been the losingest month over the last 51 years. The Dow Jones industrial average has dropped an average 0.6 percent in the last 51 Septembers. Next worst is May, down an average 0.1 percent. The average loss for the Standard & Poor's 500 for the last 51 Septembers is 0.4 percent – again, the worst for all months. One reason September tends to be so gloomy is that at the end of the third quarter, institutional investors are prettying up their portfolios by dumping the dogs. The window-dressing pulls the whole month down. Believe it or not, October is a near-average month, according to the almanac. The Dow has moved up an average 0.3 percent the last 51 years – seventh place among the months. But October has such a bad name because of some memorable years – 1929 and 1987 in particular. There was a one-day plunge of 554 Dow points on Oct. 27, 1997, and another big downer on Friday the 13th of 1989, along with back-to-back mayhem in both 1978 and 1979. Still, Yale Hirsch, who publishes the Old Tappan, N.J.-based almanac, points out, "October is a bear killer." Bear markets ended in October in 1946, 1957, 1960, 1962, 1966, 1974, 1987, 1990 and 1998. Actually, as the almanac has been pointing out since 1986, the market registers the overwhelming part of its gains between Nov. 1 and April 30. It doesn't do much the rest of the year. So one strategy is to be in stocks from early November to late April, then shift to bonds – thus avoiding any stock traumas in September and October. Yesterday was the kind of desultory down day often seen in Septembers. The market was moderately down, not expecting the Federal Reserve to lower rates. But when the Fed did as it was expected to do, the market nonetheless plunged, only to rise again, and finally fall at the end. The Federal Reserve cited "emergence of heightened geopolitical risks" – that is, Iraq – as one more reason for economic concern. And most economic indicators are on the weak side. The talk of a double-dip recession is a little silly. We're already in a double-dip; whether the current economic downleg turns into an actual recession is mainly of interest to economists who love to split definitional hairs. The bear market has now dragged on about three times longer than the normal bear, so the seers who are talking about a primary bear market – one that will last for years – have more and more credibility. Sums up Wells Fargo economist Sung Won Sohn, who is not known for bearish views: "The pessimism in the marketplace won't go away even if the economic and political landscape brightens somewhat. An extended period of churning and volatility is ahead of us." Short-term traders can make money (and lose it) in periods of great volatility. But long-term investors should stay awake: Your broker might be churning your account. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Don Bauder: (619) 293-1523; don.bauder@uniontrib.com