Bonfire.1996 said:
I do expect SMCI to announce a split sometime before the next earnings report. There will be pressure from institutional holders to calm the volatility.
Yes and no.I bleed maroon said:
4) The tangible negative effects of splits are that lower stock prices can potentially allow more stock manipulation, since derivatives are relatively more accessible. Also, even a simple mechanical split does create some minor friction and expense to the company (and therefore the shareholder).
I'm holding and I think it will go through $200, maybe not today, but soon.flashplayer said:
What's the target on POWL for those of you who played it? Taking profits now or holding?
Totally agree - - I originally had something to that effect in the "positive effects" category, but realized I would have written a novel by that point, so I kept the post somewhat summarized.Heineken-Ashi said:Yes and no.I bleed maroon said:
4) The tangible negative effects of splits are that lower stock prices can potentially allow more stock manipulation, since derivatives are relatively more accessible. Also, even a simple mechanical split does create some minor friction and expense to the company (and therefore the shareholder).
While a lower price means easier access to derivatives, a high price that is out of reach for the common investor leaves only institutional access to derivatives which I would argue opens it up to MORE manipulation, as there is no checks and balances from the sentiment of the regular investor/trader.
$210-$220 if it gets a new highProgN said:I'm holding and I think it will go through $200, maybe not today, but soon.flashplayer said:
What's the target on POWL for those of you who played it? Taking profits now or holding?
So how much did you take? Guess I'll hodl.ProgN said:Do not take a loss on SMCI, just weather the storm. Wall Street just pissy because they didn't declare a split. SMCI should've and their advisors they're listening to are f'ing morons, but I'll be adding more of it if it opens down $100Texaggie7nine said:
Doubled up on POWL this morning and went in on SMCI about as much as well. Maybe I'll break even tomorrow.
Texaggie7nine said:So how much did you take? Guess I'll hodl.ProgN said:Do not take a loss on SMCI, just weather the storm. Wall Street just pissy because they didn't declare a split. SMCI should've and their advisors they're listening to are f'ing morons, but I'll be adding more of it if it opens down $100Texaggie7nine said:
Doubled up on POWL this morning and went in on SMCI about as much as well. Maybe I'll break even tomorrow.
Y'all are SO welcome.McInnis 03 said:
POWL is a solid gap fill short for the morning, you may get your pull back to close to yesterdays close.
Mid $600's not out of the question.Brian Earl Spilner said:
I've got buys on NVDA down to 780.
750 seem to be the make or break support?
Bottom ticking can be hard on a FED day. But I like that area too. Tight stop.Charismatic Megafauna said:
Trend spider calling 138 for a 200sma touch, I'm going to take a position there if we get it
id say at least 5:1 but I'm not a professional.valvemonkey91 said:Bonfire.1996 said:
I do expect SMCI to announce a split sometime before the next earnings report. There will be pressure from institutional holders to calm the volatility.
How big of a split? 3:1? What your opinion?
If the market were to boom on Fed, the short covering and put sales could be crazy.Spoony Love said:
SPY puts are picking up juice as we move into Fed meeting at one. Calls have held steady all day.
Bought my shares at $750. I'm not worried about SMCI at all.Texaggie7nine said:So how much did you take? Guess I'll hodl.ProgN said:Do not take a loss on SMCI, just weather the storm. Wall Street just pissy because they didn't declare a split. SMCI should've and their advisors they're listening to are f'ing morons, but I'll be adding more of it if it opens down $100Texaggie7nine said:
Doubled up on POWL this morning and went in on SMCI about as much as well. Maybe I'll break even tomorrow.
Quote:
As we will be reviewing in detail at the Spring 2024 workshop, when we look at #2 above, the balance sheets of the banking system, and we compare it to #4 above, the explosive growth in deficits - then we have a fundamental divergence. To keep $1 trillion in new debt funded every 100 days, and to do so at what are from a historical perspective still quite low interest rates, may require pulling a lot of new money from the balance sheets of the Fed and banks every 100 days. The problem is - that money isn't there, the banking system is in trouble.
Someone has to fund that new $1 trillion every 100 days. The less that the Fed and the banks can fund, the more that other market participants have to fund. What this meant before 2008, is that large increases in government debt required increases in interest rates to pull in more money. If this happens, it basically shatters the foundational premise of most markets today, which is that the Fed is in control of medium and long term interest rates.
This is another example of a model failure that is still in the early stages, and could get much worse at any time. The Fed in its hubris assumed that there would never be higher inflation, and therefore, there would never be higher interest rates. When the Fed's mistakes set off the inflation, and the Fed increased interest rates to try to contain the inflation, it simultaneously set off an interest payment spiral in the national debt, even while the same increase in interest rates created massive losses on the balance sheets of the Fed and banking system, which now limits the ability to fund the deficits. This then creates another potential point of failure for #1 above, which is the market damage resulting from the Fed potentially losing control of interest rates due to its inability to fund the fantastic rate of growth in the national debt.
What we have underway right now is a ticking clock. Unless there is A) a radical reduction in deficits; or B) a radical change in monetary creation that separates it from the balance sheets of the banking system; then at some point as a result of what is already underway, we will likely get C) a return to the historic norm of the interest rates for medium and long term government debt being set by the markets; which will likely lead to D) extraordinary losses in inflation-adjusted terms for many securities and most retirement accounts, as the last of Rational Bubble is popped with a return to long term average valuations.
To say that the current system will necessarily break may seem a bit hyperbolic - but, this is a good place to step back and look at history. For all of US financial history prior to 2008, we did not have an activist Federal Reserve using the deposits of the banking system (via banking reserves) to control medium and long term interest rates, while funding the national debt as it grew to unprecedented levels, while promising unlimited monetary creation to bail out markets as needed. We've been living inside an unprecedented aberration - a bizarrely different financial environment - that is showing multiple signs of breaking under strain. The "doomsday scenario" discussed is simply market forces bringing a return to the normal market environment that existed before 2008, something that most financial and economic authorities in the 20th century would have treated as not only possible but necessary and even inevitable.
Maybe because as of yesterday, sentiment got oversold on intraday timeframes leading into it.txaggie_08 said:
I don't know how the markets pick up any upward steam from the Fed today. Inflation is showing no signs of slowing, how can they spin much positivity?
That said, I'm sure since this is what I'm thinking I'll be completely wrong and the market will send off into another bull run.