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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 8:48:09 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

Here's a distraction to keep peoples minds off crappy numbers cnn.com U.S. to launch 24/7 hunt for bin Laden

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:03:16 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

Buy the dip, he says! ========================= Stick With the Buying Plan for Friday By James J. Cramer RealMoney Columnist 3/4/2004 9:42 AM EST URL: thestreet.com snips: "Unlike other moments, this one does feel "fulcrum." Last night I had a couple of guys stop me at Kings supermarket, of all places, just to tell me how important Friday's number is to the market. I am not deviating. Even if it is a fulcrum moment, I am sticking with the laws of the Big Bad Event, which is that the reaction, if negative -- which I expect it to be -- truly will be the buying opportunity that gets us off this dime we've been stuck on. While the number of "bulls" is higher than I would like, the cash on the sidelines is just nuts. I have never seen so much money waiting for prices to come down 5% to commit. To me, that means there's no way we'll get down 5%. In fact, a market down 2% or 3% would be something to pounce on. Which is why if Friday is a fulcrum moment, meaning an event that produces a sea change in the market, I think the sea change will be to a higher moment, not lower, and I want to buy, not sell."

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:05:41 AM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

Full blurb....all new hires were government employees: U.S. Feb. nonfarm payrolls up tepid 21,000 By Rex Nutting WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) - U.S. nonfarm payrolls increased by 21,000 in February, far below Street expectations of 130,000, the Labor Department said Friday. The unemployment rate remained at 5.6 percent. January's payrolls were revised lower by 15,000 to 97,000. Economists expected February payrolls to rise 130,000, according to a survey conducted by CBS MarketWatch. Private-sector payrolls were flat in February, with government agencies accounting for 21,000 new jobs. Manufacturing lost 3,000 jobs. Services added 46,000 jobs, including 13,000 in retail. Temporary help services added 32,000 jobs. Average hours worked in the economy fell 0.1 percent. Average hourly wages rose 3 cents, or 0.2 percent, to $15.52. Wages are up 1.6 percent in the past 12 months.

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:11:43 AM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 116555

Treasury Bears Crucified Treasurys rally on report showing weak job growth ($TNX) By Rachel Koning CHICAGO (CBS.MW) -- The bond market rallied Friday in the wake of a disappointing U.S. jobs report. The move was most pronounced in the shorter maturities, which are most sensitive to Federal Reserve interest rate decisions. The benchmark 10-year Treasury note was up 25/32 at 100 21/32. Its yield tumbled to 3.92 percent from 4.04 percent Thursday. U.S. nonfarm payrolls increased by 21,000 in February, far below Street expectations of 130,000, the Labor Department said Friday. The unemployment rate remained at 5.6 percent. January's payrolls were revised lower by 15,000 to 97,000.

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:12:47 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

New York Crude Oil Rises Above $37 a Barrel on Venezuela Unrest March 5 (Bloomberg) -- Crude oil futures in New York rose to more than $37 a barrel for the first time since the buildup to the Iraq war on concern increasing protests in Venezuela may limit shipments to the U.S. before the peak summer driving season. Venezuela's ambassador to the United Nations, Milos Alcalay, resigned yesterday, saying President Hugo Chavez's government isn't protecting human rights or adhering to democratic principles. Ten people have been killed in protests since Friday. Venezuela is one of the four biggest suppliers to the U.S., where gasoline inventories fell for a fifth week in six last week. ``U.S. gasoline supplies are looking dangerously low and with news of unrest in Venezuela, it's adding further fuel to the fire,'' said Rob Laughlin, a director at London futures brokerage GNI Ltd. ``If shipments are disrupted, there's a worry U.S. refiners won't be able to meet demand this summer.'' Crude oil for April delivery rose as much as 48 cents, or 1.3 percent, to $37.12 a barrel in after-hours trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. On London's International Petroleum Exchange, April Brent crude rose as much as 51 cents, or 1.6 percent, to $33.40 a barrel. Both prices are the highest since March 2003, when the U.S. and U.K. were preparing to invade Iraq. Chavez said Sunday his country would stop all oil shipments to the U.S. if the country tries to blockade or invade Venezuela. Strikers seeking Chavez's ouster largely shut the country's oil industry in December 2002 and January 2003. ``Refiners are worried they're going to see a repeat of last year's problems,'' said Dave Thomas, an oil analyst at Commerzbank Securities in London. ``Shipments from Venezuela to the U.S. were severely disrupted and if the same happens this year, price spikes in the crude and gasoline markets will be inevitable given how low supplies already are.'' Venezuela Production A spokesman for Petroleos de Venezuela, the state-owned oil company, said yesterday that operations remain unaffected by the protests and stand at 3.2 million barrels a day. The figure is disputed by former employees of the company, who said output is closer to 2.6 million barrels a day. ``As a result of the last strike, all leaders prone to head any initiative of this type were removed,'' said Alan Viergutz, chairman of Venezuela oil services company Grupo Centec, in Caracas. ``It is unlikely that there will be another oil strike in Venezuela.'' The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries won't reverse its decision to cut production even though oil prices continue to climb, Venezuelan Energy and Mines Minister Rafael Ramirez said. ``We are firm in our conviction to follow through with the cut in April,'' Ramirez told reporters after a meeting at the presidential palace yesterday. OPEC Resolve OPEC, which pumps a third of the world's oil, plans to reduce production by 2.5 million barrels by April 1. It wants to preempt a drop in prices during the second quarter, when fuel demand typically falls following the end of winter. The unrest in Venezuela comes as U.S. refiners are struggling to replenish gasoline stockpiles for the summer driving season, which begins in May. U.S. gasoline inventories fell 1.4 million barrels to 202 million in the week ended Feb. 27, the lowest in 12 weeks, the Energy Department said Wednesday. Supplies are 4.7 percent below the average for the same period during the past five years. Gasoline for April delivery rose 0.48 cent, or 0.4 percent, to $1.1100 a gallon on Nymex at 8:22 a.m. London time. Yesterday, it climbed 0.9 percent to $1.1052 a gallon. Refinery Shutdowns Refiners' efforts to boost gasoline reserves have been hampered by a lack of raw material available for processing, traders said. U.S. crude oil supplies stand close to 28-year lows. A series of unplanned shutdowns by refiners in the past month has also prevented gasoline reserves from being rebuilt. Valero Energy Corp., the third-largest U.S. oil refiner, shut a gasoline-making unit at its St. Charles refinery in Louisiana because of a mechanical failure, Reuters reported yesterday, citing unidentified people with a knowledge of the plant's operations. ``The last thing we need are refineries going down with supplies as tight as they are,'' said Laughlin. ``The market is thriving on all these bullish factors.''

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:19:38 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

Roach Loses It It is just plain too late now IMO. He is right about the ultimate deflation however. His remedy of a hike into this would crash world markets. It is just plain too late to avoid the death trap of progressive deflation. morganstanley.com

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:23:53 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

The spin begins immediately - Too funny Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I appreciate this opportunity to comment on the labor market data that we released this morning. Nonfarm payroll employment was little changed in February (+21,000), as the number of jobs held steady in most major industries. Since August 2003, total payroll employment has risen by 364,000. The unemployment rate was 5.6 percent, unchanged over the month but down from its recent peak in June 2003. Turning first to our payroll survey data, construction employment declined in February (-24,000) following an increase (+34,000) in January. Taking a longer view, employment in construction has trended upward since March of last year; over the period, 123,000 jobs have been added. Employment in manufacturing basically was unchanged in February (-3,000). The rate of job loss in our Nation's factories has moderated quite a bit since last summer. The improvement has been more pronounced in durable goods manufacturing. In fact, employment in a few durable goods industries, such as fabricated metals and wood products, is up slightly in recent months. For manufacturing overall, the factory workweek edged up in February to 41.0 hours, and overtime hours were unchanged at 4.5 hours. Both measures are up substantially since last summer. Also within the goods-producing sector, mining employment continued to trend slowly upward in February; oil and gas ex- traction has accounted for much of the recent growth. None of the major segments of the service-providing sector showed a significant employment change in February. Wholesale trade employment was unchanged following 3 months of growth. Among retailers overall, there has been no net job growth since the onset of the holiday shopping season last fall. Employment in a few retail components continued to edge up in February, notably building material and garden supply stores. Employment was essentially flat in financial activities in February, although the securities component continued to add jobs. Employment in securities is up by 18,000 since August. Credit intermediation, which includes mortgage banking, has lost 22,000 jobs over the same period. The job total in information was little changed in February; employment declines in the industry have eased since last fall. As with other industries, this represents somewhat of an improvement, given that the information sector had lost 15 percent of its jobs between March 2001 and October 2003. There was little employment change in professional and business services overall in February. Within the sector, temporary help services added 32,000 jobs over the month. With the exception of a small decline in January, employment in temporary help has been climbing steadily since April 2003. Over the period, there has been a net gain of 215,000 jobs. Employment in health care and social assistance continued to trend upward in February. However, the average gain for the first 2 months of this year has been about half the average monthly increase for 2003. Hospital employment declined over the month, while there was a job gain in social assistance, largely in child day care services. Employment in State government rose by 20,000 over the month and has trended up since last summer. Over the same period, employment is down in local government. Average hourly earnings for private production or nonsupervisory workers rose by 3 cents in February. Over the 12 months ending in February, hourly earnings increased by 1.6 percent. Taking a look at some of the measures obtained from our survey of households, the unemployment rate was unchanged at 5.6 percent in February. The number of unemployed persons also was little changed at about 8.2 million. Both measures are below their recent highs of June 2003. Jobless rates for major worker groups either remained the same or showed little movement over the month. The labor force participation rate fell to 65.9 percent in February, reflecting a steep drop-off in the number of men in the labor force. The employment-population ratio was down over the month to 62.2 percent; it held at or near that level for most of 2003. The number of persons working part time who would have preferred full-time employment declined over the month to 4.4 million. It had been at about 4.8 million during the last several months. Among those not in the labor force, the number of discouraged workers--those who have stopped seeking work because of discouragement over their job prospects--was 484,000 in February, about the same as a year earlier but well above the levels that existed prior to the recent recession. In summary, nonfarm payroll employment was little changed in February as the job totals in most industries held steady, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 5.6 percent. My colleagues and I now would be glad to answer your questions.

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:25:55 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

Cramer was predicting 300K-400K new jobs...again...lol...

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:29:42 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

Question of the Day (posed by Jimi on the FOOL) How long before the Bush administration insists Venezuela is providing sanctuary to Osama bin Ladin?

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:39:11 AM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

Here is how they rig the unemployment numbers post from Pituophis on the fool ================================================= The labor force participation rate fell to 65.9 percent in February, reflecting a steep drop-off in the number of men in the labor force. I've harped on this before, but whatever pro-forma voodoo they are using to massage this number lower and lower and lower is at the heart of how they manage to keep the unemployment rate steady to falling while the actually number of people not working goes up by hundreds of thousands...you have to go back to July, 1987 to find a time when fewer people have been interested in working... =================== Civilian Participation Rate research.stlouisfed.org 1988-01-01 65.8 1988-02-01 65.9 1988-03-01 65.7 1988-04-01 65.8 1988-05-01 65.7 1988-06-01 65.8 1988-07-01 65.9 1988-08-01 66.1 1988-09-01 65.9 1988-10-01 66.0 1988-11-01 66.2 1988-12-01 66.1 1989-01-01 66.5 1989-02-01 66.3 1989-03-01 66.3 1989-04-01 66.4 1989-05-01 66.3 1989-06-01 66.5 1989-07-01 66.5 1989-08-01 66.5 1989-09-01 66.4 1989-10-01 66.5 1989-11-01 66.6 1989-12-01 66.5 1990-01-01 66.8 1990-02-01 66.7 1990-03-01 66.7 1990-04-01 66.6 1990-05-01 66.6 1990-06-01 66.4 1990-07-01 66.5 1990-08-01 66.5 1990-09-01 66.4 1990-10-01 66.4 1990-11-01 66.4 1990-12-01 66.4 1991-01-01 66.2 1991-02-01 66.2 1991-03-01 66.3 1991-04-01 66.4 1991-05-01 66.2 1991-06-01 66.2 1991-07-01 66.1 1991-08-01 66.0 1991-09-01 66.2 1991-10-01 66.1 1991-11-01 66.1 1991-12-01 66.0 1992-01-01 66.3 1992-02-01 66.2 1992-03-01 66.4 1992-04-01 66.5 1992-05-01 66.6 1992-06-01 66.7 1992-07-01 66.7 1992-08-01 66.6 1992-09-01 66.5 1992-10-01 66.2 1992-11-01 66.3 1992-12-01 66.3 1993-01-01 66.2 1993-02-01 66.2 1993-03-01 66.2 1993-04-01 66.1 1993-05-01 66.4 1993-06-01 66.5 1993-07-01 66.4 1993-08-01 66.4 1993-09-01 66.2 1993-10-01 66.3 1993-11-01 66.3 1993-12-01 66.4 1994-01-01 66.6 1994-02-01 66.6 1994-03-01 66.5 1994-04-01 66.5 1994-05-01 66.6 1994-06-01 66.4 1994-07-01 66.4 1994-08-01 66.6 1994-09-01 66.6 1994-10-01 66.7 1994-11-01 66.7 1994-12-01 66.7 1995-01-01 66.8 1995-02-01 66.8 1995-03-01 66.7 1995-04-01 66.9 1995-05-01 66.5 1995-06-01 66.5 1995-07-01 66.6 1995-08-01 66.6 1995-09-01 66.6 1995-10-01 66.6 1995-11-01 66.5 1995-12-01 66.4 1996-01-01 66.4 1996-02-01 66.6 1996-03-01 66.6 1996-04-01 66.7 1996-05-01 66.7 1996-06-01 66.7 1996-07-01 66.9 1996-08-01 66.7 1996-09-01 66.9 1996-10-01 67.0 1996-11-01 67.0 1996-12-01 67.0 1997-01-01 67.0 1997-02-01 66.9 1997-03-01 67.1 1997-04-01 67.1 1997-05-01 67.1 1997-06-01 67.1 1997-07-01 67.2 1997-08-01 67.2 1997-09-01 67.1 1997-10-01 67.1 1997-11-01 67.2 1997-12-01 67.2 1998-01-01 67.1 1998-02-01 67.1 1998-03-01 67.1 1998-04-01 67.0 1998-05-01 67.0 1998-06-01 67.0 1998-07-01 67.0 1998-08-01 67.0 1998-09-01 67.2 1998-10-01 67.2 1998-11-01 67.1 1998-12-01 67.2 1999-01-01 67.2 1999-02-01 67.2 1999-03-01 67.0 1999-04-01 67.1 1999-05-01 67.1 1999-06-01 67.1 1999-07-01 67.1 1999-08-01 67.0 1999-09-01 67.0 1999-10-01 67.0 1999-11-01 67.1 1999-12-01 67.1 2000-01-01 67.3 2000-02-01 67.3 2000-03-01 67.2 2000-04-01 67.3 2000-05-01 67.1 2000-06-01 67.1 2000-07-01 66.9 2000-08-01 67.0 2000-09-01 66.9 2000-10-01 66.9 2000-11-01 66.9 2000-12-01 67.0 2001-01-01 67.2 2001-02-01 67.1 2001-03-01 67.1 2001-04-01 66.9 2001-05-01 66.7 2001-06-01 66.7 2001-07-01 66.8 2001-08-01 66.6 2001-09-01 66.8 2001-10-01 66.8 2001-11-01 66.7 2001-12-01 66.7 2002-01-01 66.4 2002-02-01 66.7 2002-03-01 66.6 2002-04-01 66.7 2002-05-01 66.7 2002-06-01 66.6 2002-07-01 66.6 2002-08-01 66.6 2002-09-01 66.8 2002-10-01 66.6 2002-11-01 66.4 2002-12-01 66.4 2003-01-01 66.3 2003-02-01 66.3 2003-03-01 66.2 2003-04-01 66.4 2003-05-01 66.3 2003-06-01 66.5 2003-07-01 66.3 2003-08-01 66.2 2003-09-01 66.1 2003-10-01 66.2 2003-11-01 66.2 2003-12-01 66.0 2004-01-01 66.1 2004-02-01 65.9

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:44:39 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

Cynical comment on jobs from the FOOL And I would bet they are all "borrowed" from the january and december downward revisions.

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:50:06 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

FNM rallies on this news - how stupid Mish

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 9:53:41 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

Sold my April Gold call for 50% gain. I bought an Apr ITM 390 call yesterday and an Aug 410 call. Holding the August call. Mish

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 10:21:20 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

Thoughts on VZ oil from bankingintern on the fool Venezuela is going to get far worse before it gets better unless a sniper gets lucky or we sned in the marines (do we have them to spare). I know one of the disdent pdvsa directors that chavez sacked, he is in houston working with the industry for what comes next after chavez. Venezuela has been a traditional exporter of gasoline, and now it is a sporatic importer because they sacked the technical staff that ran their refineries who happened to take plant diagrams and operating specs with them so now everythings runs at less than idea conditions. That gasoline went to the US market... If they can't export at ALL the gulf coast refiners ARE going to have some trouble since several of the refineries are set up to run venezuelan crude.They can use other stuff but their gasoline output will be lowered and/or operating costs will be higher. Further, they use chartered ships for most of their transport and your standard insurance doesn't cover loading up from a country in the middle of civil unrest, thus oil may flow but it may not leave. Transport will be the weakest link, thats my prediction.

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 10:30:16 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

From John Succo on GSE's and Treasuries Remember that the GSE's abhor moves like this in bonds. They are short gamma in bonds because as rates move down they risk losing assets (against their liabilities) as people pre-pay mortgages. I would guess they are sitting there right now deciding whether they should buy bonds up here or wait for a pullback. Either way, the higher the volatility in the bond market, the higher their costs.

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 10:39:14 AM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

Brian Reynolds on Employment Numbers Payroll employment rose 21k, far below the published Bloomberg consensus of 130k, and the whisper numbers that we had put in the 175-200k range. Downward revisions to the two prior months brought the number down to 132k below the published consensus. A look at the hours worked data reveals the number to be as weak as the headline implies, and is consistent with our view that the outpacing of consumption by production is making it difficult to get a sustained surge in employment. While we wrote that we had no special insight into what this particular number would look like, we did note that, the bigger the whisper number, the more room for disappointment there was. Over the last week, we noted that back-month Fed Funds futures contracts had risen 11 basis points on the thought that a strong number would accelerate a Fed tightening. This number has removed all of those fears; the back month contracts' implied yields are down 14 basis points, more than erasing the tightening fears of the last week. With so many investors counting on a strong number, the 10-year Treasury is again putting in a stellar performance off a soft payroll number. It is up a 1 and 3/4 points on the day and is currently trading below the 3.93% level that, if it holds and continues, would be expected to boost mortgage refinancings. Stock futures have plummeted, so we will have to see if the change in the bond/stock relationship is stretched enough to attract asset allocators into stocks from bonds. =================================================== Hmmmm Stock futures have plummeted, so we will have to see if the change in the bond/stock relationship is stretched enough to attract asset allocators into stocks from bonds. Looks like it. Nice snapback rally Mish

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 10:51:49 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

How stupid of us to not see the real problem. It's obviously the weather. ggg nytimes.com The problems showed up in nearly every corner of the labor market. Manufacturers cut jobs for the 43rd consecutive month. Hourly wages for most of the workforce rose just 3 cents, roughly at the rate of inflation. The average length of unemployment rose to 20.3 weeks, its highest level since 1984. The one glimmer of hope, economists said, was that last month's unusually harsh weather forced households to delay some spending and companies to postpone projects, raising the possibility that job growth would bounce back in March. ======================================================== Damn it sure seems like the weather has been bad for years now. When will it all end? Mish

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 10:54:38 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

We reaffirm that exchange rates should reflect economic fundamentals. Excess volatility and disorderly movements in exchange rates are undesirable for economic growth. biz.yahoo.com

To: gregor_us who wrote (1255)	3/5/2004 11:21:14 AM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

Employment Disaster Lies and Damn lies: 265,000 net jobs were LOST during the month - and the numbers below have been diddled to make it appear that things stayed the same. Can you believe this crap? Read on... Here's the press release from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Nonfarm employment was little changed (+21,000) in February, and the unemployment rate remained at 5.6 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Employment levels in most of the major industries were little changed over the month. This is an amazing admission - because the report of +21,000 jobs was the best the Department could come up with under election year pressure. Does this sound like the much hyped about 2.5 million job creation number bandied about by the completely out of touch people in the WH staff? Read the rest of the disgusting truth here: urbansurvival.com =================================================================== Mish notes: 21,000 jobs were added IN TOTAL when 125,000 were expected! But if you dig deeper you see the govt added (ta da) 21,000 employees. Remove govt jobs and we added ZERO jobs (which of course means we really lost jobs, and tons of them). LMAO