• Investing in 2008
    Posted by on September 30th, 2008 at 4:31 pm

    From Guest of a Guest, the 401-keg:

    If you had purchased $1,000.00 of AIG stock one year ago you would have $44.34 left.
    With Wachovia, you would have had $54.74 left of the original $1,000.00.
    With Lehman, you would have had $0.00 left.
    But, if you had purchased $1,000.00 worth of beer one year ago…drank all of the beer, then turned in the cans for the aluminum recycling REFUND, you would have $214.00 cash.

  • Worst Percentage Days for the Dow
    Posted by on September 30th, 2008 at 4:04 pm

    Date………………………………..% Chg
    10/19/1987………………………..-22.61
    10/28/1929………………………..-12.82
    10/29/1929………………………..-11.73
    11/6/1929………………………….-9.92
    12/18/1899………………………..-8.72
    8/12/1932………………………….-8.40
    3/14/1907………………………….-8.29
    10/26/1987………………………..-8.04
    7/21/1933………………………….-7.84
    10/18/1937………………………..-7.75
    2/1/1917……………………………-7.24
    10/27/1997………………………..-7.18
    10/5/1932…………………………-7.15
    9/17/2001…………………………-7.13
    9/24/1931…………………………-7.07
    7/20/1933…………………………-7.07
    9/29/2008…………………………-6.98
    7/30/1914…………………………-6.91
    10/13/1989……………………….-6.91
    1/8/1988…………………………..-6.85

  • The Dow Vs. the S&P 500
    Posted by on September 29th, 2008 at 11:10 pm

    As I mentioned before, the Dow held up much better than the S&P 500. The number 777 is already taken a title for today’s activity, but if the Dow had fallen the same percentage as the S&P 500, the loss would have been 981 points. The 181 basis point difference between the two indexes is one of the biggest gaps in history.

  • This Seems Appropriate
    Posted by on September 29th, 2008 at 10:43 pm

  • Flashback: WaMu Ad
    Posted by on September 29th, 2008 at 10:35 pm


    (Via: Wall Street Fighter)

  • House to Wall Street: Drop Dead
    Posted by on September 29th, 2008 at 9:17 pm

    Today was the Dow’s worst point decline ever. The decline amounted to 777.68 points which is more than the Dow was worth at its 1982 low (btw, the Nasdaq closed at 1983 today). On a percentage basis, the Dow lost 6.98%.
    Think about this: The sell-off erased $1.2 trillion off the stock market which was in response to a bailout plan of $700 billion.
    The S&P 500 lost 106.62 points which is a total of 8.79%. That’s unusual that the Dow held up so much better than the S&P. Our Buy List was “only” down 6.11%.
    By percentage terms, this was the worst selloff for the S&P 500 since 1987. My data only goes back to 1950, so it’s the second-worse sell-off since then.
    By my records, this is 21st worst percentage decline for the Dow since the index began in 1896. Although, I saw a report from AP saying it was the 17th worst. The Christian Science Monitor said it was the 18th worst.
    dow092908.png

  • HR 3997
    Posted by on September 29th, 2008 at 3:33 pm

    Well, I guess they were right..it was a partisan vote. Large sections of both parties voted against the bill. The Democrats voted 140-95. The Republicans voted 65-133.
    Here’s the roll call.

  • Crossing Wall Street: Tomorrow’s News Today, and Cheaper
    Posted by on September 29th, 2008 at 3:25 pm

    I’m not going to say I called it. But I did, in fact, call it:

    I’m going to be the first to call it, this bailout plan is going down. I don’t know how or when, but I don’t see this thing lasting. At best, it’s going to be dramatically revised.
    The plan has all the hallmarks of something the American public hates. It’s too expensive. It’s secretive…we just woke up one day and were told we needed it. We don’t know if it will work. It seems un-American.

  • The Nayes Have It
    Posted by on September 29th, 2008 at 2:32 pm

    The bailout package goes down 205-228. Ultimately, I think the “or else” predictions weren’t credible.

  • Should Lehman Have Been Allowed to Fail?
    Posted by on September 29th, 2008 at 12:02 pm

    I certainly though so, but now the evidence may point the other way:

    Lehman’s bankruptcy filing in the early hours of Monday, Sept. 15, sparked a chain reaction that sent credit markets into disarray. It accelerated the downward spiral of giant U.S. insurer American International Group Inc. and precipitated losses for everyone from Norwegian pensioners to investors in the Reserve Primary Fund, a U.S. money-market mutual fund that was supposed to be as safe as cash. Within days, the chaos enveloped even Wall Street pillars Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley. Alarmed U.S. officials rushed to unveil a more systemic solution to the crisis, leading to Sunday’s agreement with congressional leaders on a $700 billion financial-markets bailout plan.
    The genesis and aftermath of Lehman’s downfall illustrate the difficult position policy makers are in as they grapple with a deepening financial crisis. They don’t want to be seen as too willing to step in and save financial institutions that got into trouble by taking big risks. But in an age where markets, banks and investors are linked through a web of complex and opaque financial relationships, the pain of letting a large institution go has proved almost overwhelming.
    In hindsight, some critics say the systemic crisis that has emerged since the Lehman collapse could have been avoided if the government had stepped in. Before Lehman, federal officials had dealt with a series of financial brushfires in a way designed to keep troubled institutions such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Bear Stearns Cos. in business. Judging them as too big to fail, officials committed billions of taxpayer dollars to prop them up. Not so Lehman.

    One of the major problems with this mess is that we don’t know what we don’t know. If we had saved Lehman, would it have made things much better?