Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

alstry (36.32)

Merideth Whitney Remarkably Consistent.....The Market's Reaction Manic Depressive!!!

Recs

17

July 13, 2009 – Comments (16)

A Few Months Ago.....












This Morning.....












 

What Changed????????????????  Notice the last five words before the video gets cut off.....

16 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On July 13, 2009 at 5:39 PM, portefeuille (99.66) wrote:

--------------------

The odds catch up to Meredith Whitney

Investors who are too lazy to do their own research want desperately to believe that somebody out there has Wall Street figured out, has untangled the skein of emotion and economics that drives invesment and can tell investors what to do or manage their money for them. There's always somebody. Unfortunately it's a different somebody every few years.
Given the glut of financial prognostication, every time the market does something radical it's almost a necessity that SOMEONE will have called a warning or a "buy" call. That's their cue for fame and riches. It's not the cue for the public to start listening to their every word. In 1987 it was Elaine Garzarelli who "predicted" the stock market crash. In the 1990s it was Abby Joseph Cohen who "predicted" the bull market. Now it's Meredith Whitney, who made a bearish call on Citigroup in the fall of 2007. The Call was good but it wasn't omniscient, David Weidner noted in April.
Well, almost. The Call did not say Citigroup was stuffed with hundreds of billions of dollars in toxic assets. It did not say that multiple banks will fail unless the government intercedes. It didn't mention Bear Stearns (which she once expected to earn more than $11 a share in 2009), Lehman Brothers or American International Group Inc. It was a call that Citi was losing money and would have to take drastic action to raise capital.
Now Whitney is moving markets again by upgrading Goldman Sachs to a "buy" after newspapers reported over the weekend that Goldman is set for a blockbuster quarter. Goldman is up $4 to $146, and the market is up modestly. But where was Whitney last fall, when Goldman was $50? She will continue to be in the spotlight until, like Cohen and Garzarelli, she proves she is mortal and fallible. It's already happening.

--------------------

(from here)

 

Report this comment
#2) On July 13, 2009 at 5:58 PM, tfirst (25.42) wrote:

The stress test wasn't so stressful...I would like to point out that Ron Paul and more than 200 members of Congress want to audit the Fed.....The Fed's reply was that if they did, they would spend this country into depression.  Torches and pitchforks......

Report this comment
#3) On July 13, 2009 at 6:09 PM, alexpaz (29.11) wrote:

I bet she sold 1,000's of GS calls today...FRAUD

Report this comment
#4) On July 13, 2009 at 6:21 PM, AdirondackFund (< 20) wrote:

Nice Post Alstry.  Ever seen a blowoff wave before?  You're looking at one right here. 

Report this comment
#5) On July 13, 2009 at 6:27 PM, toopersent (81.09) wrote:

Psssh...nevermind the fact that GS is actually a good bank.  If you really want to call them a bank.  They have minimal exposure to deposits...

 

The only reason I have beef with her call is because it was so LATE.  

Report this comment
#6) On July 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM, outoffocus (23.49) wrote:

The only reason I have beef with her call is because it was so LATE.  

Yea seriously. A buy at $146 per share? Are you nuts?

Report this comment
#7) On July 13, 2009 at 7:08 PM, toopersent (81.09) wrote:

I like JPM a lot better at a fraction of the price.

Report this comment
#8) On July 13, 2009 at 7:23 PM, topsecret09 (44.31) wrote:

  This Is complete lunacy!!!!!!   I don't care If Goldman Sachs makes a TRILLION dollars!!!!!  That does not change the fact that CONSUMERS ARE NOT SPENDING !!!!, there SAVING their money right now.......... How on Gods green earth can you come out of a recession IF THE CONSUMER IS NOT SPENDING MONEY,and the banks ARE NOT LENDING MONEY !!!!?????   Sheesh..............

Report this comment
#9) On July 13, 2009 at 7:32 PM, topsecret09 (44.31) wrote:

And,buy the way, Is this the same Golman Sachs that was ready to fold and disappear as a publicly traded company?  This whole TARP thing stinks to high heaven. Ther needs to be an INDEPENDENT Investigation Into the FED,and how all of this was sold to the public. We have a very serious problem with regard to the "FREE MARKETS",and the FED needs to be audited,just like Ron Paul recommends........   Or maybe we should just keep printing money out of thin air,and prop up some other sectors of our economy while we are at at !!!  You want to know how to stimulate the economy???  Give every man woman and child  a $50,000 check........ now THAT will stimulate the economy.   Jim

Report this comment
#10) On July 13, 2009 at 7:39 PM, topsecret09 (44.31) wrote:

Oh,and one more thing........  The FEDERAL DEFICIT just went over a TRILLION dollars for the year. Whats that spell ? INFLATION. Not only will we get MASSIVE INFLATION In the coming months and years ahead,It will be made even worse by all of the HOT AIR emminating from all of the talking heads on wall street !!!!!!

Report this comment
#11) On July 13, 2009 at 10:15 PM, ralphmachio (28.60) wrote:

the rythem of this conversation is that of a small group of cracked out chickens.  Everyone's stuttering, stammering, and pecking around in circles.  Did it look like she was nervous?  Did it sound like she was trying to be right no matter what happened?  Who is 'buying time', and since when is that a great investment?  "Buy it, but be ready to sell it, the banks may do well until they inevitably crash to pieces" is what I was able to read between the lines.  

No matter what else MW says, I'll try and remember she recd GS. 

   Those guys sounded like they really needed a break, you know, some down time.  The whole room of them sounded like they have been up for days, passin around a broken lightbulb.  They're all hopped up on bad economic data, and they might need some sort of intervention. 

Report this comment
#12) On July 14, 2009 at 1:08 AM, HawkVA (< 20) wrote:

Welll said  portefeuille!!  And, Wall Street must perpetuate the myth that an astute individual can understand the markets well enough to profit because they are efficient and free.  If investors thought that the game was rigged they might leave the casino.   

Agree with topsecret09 too - and then some.  GS profit comes at the expense of other investors (and sometimes taxpayors).  When they have profits and others do not it shows me that the game is rigged.  Reminds me of the old trader adage "if you don't know who the sucker is - then you must be it".  You would think that this reminder would hurt markets.

The economy will not recover until transparency and confidence in our capital markets has been restored. Jessie's Americain Cafe makes the case much more eloquently than I ever could.

 

 

Report this comment
#13) On July 14, 2009 at 7:46 AM, toopersent (81.09) wrote:

When they have profits and others do not it shows me that the game is rigged.

Or that they are simply a better company to invest in. MW said it very clearly that she is making a bearish call on the economy, but a bullish call on GS. Because the economy is in such bad shape is the reason why GS can make so much money.

But what it sounds like some of you don't understand is that we NEED someone to make some sort of profits around here. GS will have to pay taxes on all that profit they are making. Sure, we would love for the money makers to be in a different sector or even a different industry all together (lets face it, the financial sector should not be the ones leading the recovery; it would be nice to see consumer discretionaries make some money).

Sure, the game might be rigged, but I'll need more proof than just "well, you guys are making profits when we are losing them, so you must be cheating."  That is quite a silly argument, and a losing one.

Report this comment
#14) On July 14, 2009 at 7:59 AM, dividends4ever1 (< 20) wrote:

I dont have anything against MW. She has been at the right place at the right time, and who wouldnt want a chance to capitalize on all that fame and fortune?
Again I ask, why not upgrade at $100?
Why wait until the day before earnings (knowing that free taxpayer money used for trading to make ALOT of money) to upgrade?

As always mom and pop america are late to the party. Anyone can see on a chart that the pros are going to be selling into any strength here as average americans buy, thinking they are missing the train.
Sorry, I am just telling people what they need to hear, not what Wall Street wants them to hear.

compdivplan.com

Report this comment
#15) On July 14, 2009 at 10:14 AM, toopersent (81.09) wrote:

Oh, now is definitely NOT the time to buy GS and I feel sorry for anybody dumping $150 a share, when they can get almost as profitable a bank in JPM for a fifth of the price. 

 

Report this comment
#16) On July 30, 2009 at 2:32 AM, UltraContrarian (31.77) wrote:

"GS will have to pay taxes on all that profit they are making."

They offshore as much of their profit as possible.  So no, they don't pay taxes on all of it.

Anyways you are right, there are much more sophisticated arguments for why GS is a bad actor in our financial system, and in particular has an unfair advantage in its relationship with the US government. Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement