THE Wall Street Thread (merged)

by **JayHMorrison** » Tue 22 Jun 2004, 09:20:27

These are the professionals. :-)

Can you honestly believe these people are paid for this?
CNN Eight analysts with projections for 2010 on average forecast U.S. crude at $26.81 a barrel, down from a mean of $29.22 so far this decade,

The poll reveals a split between equities analysts and energy market specialists, with the latter inclining more to the view that Middle Eastern risks and tight inventories will ensure a stronger long-term oil price.

by **smiley** » Tue 22 Jun 2004, 09:49:24

Which analist did they ask: Nick Leeson ?

No seriously, in this world there is no such thing as free advice. When these kind of firms give public comments they tell you, what they want you to do.

In this case they want you to sit back, stop worrying about oil, and and bring all your savings to the stock market, so that they can make big profits.

Meanwhile they are hedging their profits by buying relatively cheap oil futures.

by **Guest** » Tue 22 Jun 2004, 10:22:13

Quote from the article:
"The rise caught many forecasters by surprise and most analysts ultimately expect prices to fall back as Middle East political tensions ease and new capacity eases strains on the global supply system."

If recent price increase is viewed as a 'surprise' then what logic leads to decrease in 2010?

by **DoctorDoom** » Tue 22 Jun 2004, 10:57:37

The futures market, which I watch every day, is trading crude in the $30 range out as far as 2010; this represents the effect of a gradual decline through $35-37 next year, low 30s the year after that. Clearly, the collective wisdom of the traders is that more supply is coming on line and the price will ease; I believe someone posted a report showing that several mega-projects are coming in 2005 and 2006. However, there are no mega-projects in the pipeline after that point, so it does make you wonder. Traders are probably also factoring in the resessionary effects of higher prices, especially on countries like China. The commodities trade is a tough business - don't kid yourself, these guys do it for a living and betting against them is like being asked to be skinned alive. They read everything - I'm sure they're well aware of the kind of information that's been posted here.

http://futures.tradingcharts.com/market ... ?market=CL

by **clv101** » Tue 22 Jun 2004, 14:28:51

Don't you have to take into account the future value of money when talking about the prices of futures? A Dec 09 futures price of $29 a barrel doesn't mean the going rate for a barrel of oil will be $29 in 5 and a half years. Isn't the idea $29 of today's money will by you a barrel of oil in 5 and a half years. But how much is $29 of today's money actually going to be worth in 5 and a half years... assuming 5% returns on investment $29 will be $36.13 so that's the real indication of what the price is likely to be.

Or am I showing my lack of understanding of the futures market here?

by **gg3** » Wed 23 Jun 2004, 07:24:38

$29-something or $36-something, either way adds up to the same bogus nonsense.

When Colin Campbell uses the term "economists" as an epithet, it must be these types of forecasters he's thinking of.

May they all have to heat their homes by burning their piles of ill-gotten money in their ornamental fireplaces!

by **clv101** » Wed 23 Jun 2004, 10:26:21

I totally agree the prices are nonsense... and that there's no chance oil's going to be <$40 a barrel at the end of the decade. The point is that although on the face of it futures prices look like oil's going to be cheaper... they really show the price being flat long term.

by **Guest** » Fri 25 Jun 2004, 13:14:59

When bottled water at Barnes and Noble is going for $2/qt ($8/gal), you know things have gotten really nuts.

by **Ayoob** » Tue 20 Jul 2004, 14:50:23

I think that'll be the first horse of the financial apocalypse. Some smart guy out there is going to figure out that Peak Oil means the end of the stock market. Well, it might not go all the way down to zero, but I think a major portion of the insurance industry is going to fail. Banks may fail as well, but they might see an enormous taxpayer looting to try to stem the tide of bank failures.

Our currency could face extreme devaluation, meaning Argentina-style 600% inflation. That's pretty much the end of that for city people.

I'm city people.

Right now, I'm getting my family ready to move to the countryside in Oregon where we should be able to scrape together a living. Goats, corn, potatoes, fruit trees, carrots, tomatoes, onions, etc. I don't think it's that hard to raise crops like that and I can't imagine that it's all that difficult to preserve that suff for winter either.

My question to you all is:

How long til Wall Street collapses, and how soon thereafter does the chaos begin? Could it be a years-long slow grind like the Japanese economy, or a sudden crash like any number of other places have seen? Got any ideas how much time we have left to prepare?

by **KiddieKorral** » Tue 20 Jul 2004, 14:54:45

It all depends on whether or not Asian central banks keep propping our economy up. If they decide they've had enough, it would be a sudden crash. If not, it would take a while.

by **JayHMorrison** » Tue 20 Jul 2004, 17:18:54

The stock market may collapse, but that doesnt mean that Wall Street will go away any time soon. Even 3rd world countries still have stock markets. There has been some form of stock market for hundreds of years going back to the tulip bubble.

by **Pops** » Tue 20 Jul 2004, 17:31:31

The Tulip Bubble LOL! I never heard it called that before.

Answer is…

Bounce to the bottom like a ball on a staircase!

Says me, but of course I’m no expert.

by **MonteQuest** » Fri 24 Sep 2004, 18:31:17

Just in case some might have missed the lesson a month ago, Wall Street this week brushed up on the multiple effects high oil prices could have on the economy and once again it did not like the conclusion.
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/01e99c8a-0e28- ... 511c8.html

by **JayHMorrison** » Fri 24 Sep 2004, 22:57:10

http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.a ... %20edition

NEW YORK (CBS.MW) -- Almost three years after Enron's bankruptcy, the U.S. energy sector is now under new ownership: Wall Street.

Energy -- how it is produced, distributed and traded -- is the latest infatuation for dealmakers. Some of the biggest investment firms have snapped up cheap refineries, power plants, pipelines, electric grids and even trading floors where the energy commodities are bought and sold.

For investors, the shift means that firms like Goldman Sachs (GS: news, chart, profile), Morgan Stanley (MWD: news, chart, profile) and Credit Suisse First Boston (CSR: news, chart, profile) are making quick dollars amid a sharp rise in energy prices in an industry that was sharply devalued after Enron blew up.

by **Markos101** » Fri 24 Sep 2004, 22:59:19

It will be interesting to see when they cash in on their investments.

Mark

by **tdrive** » Sat 25 Sep 2004, 01:38:50

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t will be interesting to see when they cash in on their investments...

by **MrPC** » Sat 25 Sep 2004, 04:10:55

They can't cash in until they sell it. When will they do that?

by **JayHMorrison** » Sat 25 Sep 2004, 07:32:34

They can collect the cash cow profits of ownership thru an energy crisis.

by **mididoctors** » Mon 27 Sep 2004, 06:26:27

The investment required in the energy sector may be disrupted by the markets demanding cash dividends from utilities if stock price becomes a driving issue rather han long term investment.

Wall street likes short term profits especially if the number of investors is high...

the margins in the energy sector do not reflect reality as cheap energy makes investment a "jerky' behind the trend process especially for transition technologies.

the utilities becoming cash cows would be a bad thing.

Boris
London

by **Ayoob** » Sun 10 Oct 2004, 15:29:39

Can you copy and paste the text?