KR with another strong positive day to buttress yesterday's strong move up on earnings. Up another 6.5% on a down tape is pretty impressive. I still wonder if it'll last because most moves like this pretty much don't in this market but impressive nonetheless. Just mentioned on CNBC up 26% this week alone and at ATHs.
OT: Stock and Investment Thread
- Thread starter RU05
- Start date
In my investing life, international has never outperformed US over even a modest amount of time.
No technicals, just patience!Retesting lows? That's technician talk...I thought you don't like technicals lol.
I want to add more UPRO and TQQQ when/if is going under my CB level. Also, hoping SOXL will creep a little closer to $30. Being greedy with that one!!!
I've added a little FB around 199. Averaging down a position. Will buy more if it goes lower.
I mean I'm not the arbiter of the thread but it wouldn't bother me. The market is based on the economy and commodity prices affect it as well. I can easily talk about specific stocks and the like around anyone else's interest in economic discussion.
Coming up with my plan of attack for next week. Looking to add to TQQQ and UPRO, and start on SOXL. But I also may add to my long hold stocks (doing some analysis this weekend).
RSX only down a little today - sitting at $5.65.
Wait, why is this not a buying day when all the other down days were buying days? Just curious ,not inflammatory.
Just that I have bought at these levels already. Hoping to lower my CBs, not increase them. See the post above. Got some planning to do this weekend. Sitting on a crazy amount of cash from my bonuses earlier this week.
It's funny Tim Seymour on Fast Money made a comment that was similar to a thought I had recently. He said a line like it's 2010 Fast Money.
I haven't heard or read about metal and mining names like BHP, PCU, FCX, NUE, X or agri names or fertilzer names as frequently as I have recently in a quite a long time. Commodities back in fashion again, at least for the time being. I guess what once was old is new again lol.
I haven't heard or read about metal and mining names like BHP, PCU, FCX, NUE, X or agri names or fertilzer names as frequently as I have recently in a quite a long time. Commodities back in fashion again, at least for the time being. I guess what once was old is new again lol.
Don’t forget, if you use Specific Share Identification you can sell in a more tax efficient manner (e.g, sell blocks of shares bought at different times with the block’s appropriate cost basis. This is more efficient that fifo or average cost.
Last edited:
I’ve seen that reference a bunch in this thread but reflexively my mind still automatically goes to Colgate Palmolive not the intended meaning of you all lol.
We should require a vote of congress before we do
My thought is that a case could be made that the US and UK have an obligation to Ukraine based on the Budapest memorandum signed when Ukraine gave up it’s nuclear weapons
Yes, when possible, I look through the blocks to see which I should sell first. However, I don't sell much. Mostly accumulate.
I’m dumbfounded. I was waiting for the standard “buy the dip”. Meanwhile, I (LB3) have been buying strategically at a high level in 2022, and it’s paying off. But most of my success over the last 13 months has been materials and energy.
Like I’ve said I didn’t pay much attention to this thread before the market downturn so had to look up what the hell a LB was lol. Even CL I didn’t realize what the hell that meant at first other than the ticker symbol. Too many abbreviations that aren’t ticket symbols make things confusing lol.
Come on guys, leave the guy alone, he is 100% invested in the stock market with unlimited cash on the sidelines.
I’m starting to think many retail traders have been wiped out and don’t have money left for dip buying. I was always of the opinion that retail traders were fueling the rally with gov’t stimulus, plus Big Money riding that wave pushing the market even higher. Well, no more stimulus and retail trader piggy banks are empty. The last 2 years have been insane especially when you look at how many stocks have dropped from ATHs, not to mention BS like the SPAC-attack (those sponsors should be in jail) and the meme-stonk phenomenon. Long live the 3LBs! FWIW, I’ve been putting some money to work although nothing as really worked outside of energy and defense. I’m rolling the dice a bit on financials. Curious if folks think the defense sector run up continues to go higher or immediately drops once Ukraine headlines normalize.
All the bounces (or dips) from UKR will go away once the direct conflict ends.....regardless who wins. That's what always happens. Gotta stick to your plan and not get too off track with these artificial events.
There was an article a while ago showing that the pandemic boom was mostly driven by institutional money, not new retail investors. Institutional money is just so much bigger. The big boys dumped many sectors impacted by the shutdown and poured into stay at home plays. Retail got the headlines with GME and others, but overall, this was just a patch on the fanny of what really was happening.
Since we have so much disposal monthly earnings, this is actually true! From a certain POV.
You missed out on a lot of fun! The 3 Little Bears narrative is priceless. One of my better ones.
Well some of the defense names look like they've broken out of a somewhat longer term resistance level. So that's a positive sign but I could see them have a pull back to that area to retest but it's possible it holds because whenever Ukraine/Russia resolves in whatever fashion the world has kind of changed. Defense spending across western countries is going to remain level at worst and more likely go up like Germany has mentioned. How much of that is being priced in now though? Who knows.
World might have also changed with regards to energy and how much of a reliance there is on a hostile Russia and the realization that green energy isn't mature enough to satisfy demand. If there is a notion that oil will remain elevated and the price per barrel is enough to justify more cost intensive oil extraction that might give the services/drillers like the names in OIH a little bit of a run. It's not a light switch though so they have to feel the capital expenditures for such extraction/exploration will pay off with sustained elevated prices. I'm not expert enough to know what the sustainable PPB needs to be though. I remember years ago reading articles where the price per barrel had to be in the 70s or something to make those kind of extractions profitable. With technology improvements and what not I'm not sure what the equilibrium is. Commodities are notoriously volatile too whether it's oil, metals, agri etc...
Just one company, but from the Devon CEO:
Devon Energy won’t increase oil production amid recent oil price surges on the war in Ukraine, CEO Rick Muncrief told CNBC’s Jim Cramer on Friday.
“Our plan is our plan, and that is basically flat volume growth. We’re going to focus on free cash flow generation, and we want that to accrue to our investors, to our shareholders,” Muncrief said during the Investment Club’s latest “Monthly Meeting.”
The CEO of Club name Devon explained that by the time any increase in production saw the bottom line there’s no guarantee — and more likely the probability — that oil prices won’t be any where near current highs. He said emphatically that there’s “no change to our plan whatsoever” coming down the pike.
I’d have to see the article because it doesn’t make sense - new institutional money doesn’t just magically appear - they have certain investment requirements so the notion that the pandemic hit and suddenly institutions start pumping money into the market strikes me as unlikely. The market was fueled by gov’t stimulus and the rise of the retail trader. And Big Money made a fortune by hitching their wagons to the retail trades before jumping ship at the top.
I hadn't seen that but there you go. Some of these extraction methods are cost intensive and not simple and easy to just turn on and off. If PPB predictability isn't there and sustainable then they won't do it.
I mentioned this before, but I'm sure the industry execs understand T. Boone Pickens famous quote:
"The solution to the problem of $100 oil is $100 oil"
Obviously, this price is not sustainable and quickly impacts demand.
Gas price have gone up nearly 50 cents in the past week near me.
Not sustainable.
Not sustainable.
As a rule of thumb IMO institutional money is what drives things, there may be a rare exception here and there like the meme stocks. If retail and institutions are on opposite sides institutional money is going to rule the day. Easy money helped everyone both institutions and retail. Now with easy money starting to whittle away institutions are selling and retail money isn't enough to "buy the dip" to stem the tide and by and large IMO retail money is never enough with few exceptions.
oil and nat gas has been relatively cheap for about 8 years. $100 oil, inflation adjusted, is not high. Oil is far off the inflation adjusted high of $181. Cheap oil and nat gas in the USA has been a huge benefit to the economy, many business that rely on oil, and the stock market. I saw a chart on CNBC this week that energy costs used to equal 10% of a family’s expenses, and over the last few years was about 5%, and it’s not too far above 5% now. This has resulted in more disposable income which has helped many industries. I have no clue if energy prices are sustainable, but settling above $100 is not out of the realm of possibilities……. At least until the next recession.
Last week one of the big oil CEOs was on with Cramer.....I think CVX? He said oil should be $60-70 solely based on demand. That's what is in their plans when figuring out future investments and business activities for the next several years.
Oil companies are being very disciplined and not racing out to pump more. I assume this is the reason why.
I suspect Berkshire will continue to go after nat gas companies. (Or Occidental acquiring some of them) Nat gas is a cleaner energy source, which will be needed to generate the growing use of electric. Many of the nat gas companies are throwing off a lot of free cashflow. Almost half of Occidental is nat gas and LNG.
Last edited:
Many oil and gas companies expanded way too quickly during the fracking revolution and took on massive amounts of debt to fund it. Multiple bankruptcies resulted when prices fell. Hell, we briefly had negative oil prices in April 2020. That is still fresh in their minds. Banks have placed capex restrictions on E&P, cash flow is being applied to repay debt and to repurchase shares. Over time, these lessons will be forgotten and drilling will increase. But expect high prices for several years.
Just read article that OXY is doing just that…paying down debt and trying to get its credit rating raised.
Concerning oil - its been my understanding that while taking on massive debt you need a growing economy to pay the debt - but you need oil to fuel the growing economy. The "alternative" stuff wont do it.
Major oil companies were planning on expansion but oil company boards were taken over by radicals who drove cuts in production (Exxon cancelled investment for a desired 20% production increase in coming years). A lever in those takeovers was Blackrock - told by CCP to drive the crippling green agenda of they would not be allowed to play in China's sandbox. Its China and Russia who fund a lot of the green (and a reason for what's up in Ukraine)
Hillary in 2014:
“We were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media,” the document shows her saying. “We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I'm a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you, and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia.”
Major oil companies were planning on expansion but oil company boards were taken over by radicals who drove cuts in production (Exxon cancelled investment for a desired 20% production increase in coming years). A lever in those takeovers was Blackrock - told by CCP to drive the crippling green agenda of they would not be allowed to play in China's sandbox. Its China and Russia who fund a lot of the green (and a reason for what's up in Ukraine)
Hillary in 2014:
“We were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media,” the document shows her saying. “We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I'm a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you, and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia.”