"Viking" <noway@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:9pnrt3h0bu8ofq0nnhmjcrjqmt69l523e6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> What else do you call it when Bear Stearns' stock was,
> what, $58 two weeks ago, and now it was just sold for
> $2/share?
Among other things, I'd call it a situation in which a lot
of stock holders are panicked and fearful about what is
the present risk of bankruptcy for Bear Stearns & Co.
I may just take a look at Bear Stearns' financials and
compare their holdings of mortgage-backed securities
with those of Citibank's. One might just be able to get
a big pile of assets at Bear Stearns for a whole lot
cheaper than the Arabs paid when they bought into Citibank.
Of course, I watch games of Catch the Falling Knife
a whole lot more often than I participate in 'em.
The darling Megan McArdle of _The Atlantic_ magazine
has a brief commentary on what's happening at
Bear Stearns:
<http://thecurrent.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/bear-stearns-megan.php>
The comments left behind by some of her readers include
some gems. "ZH" at 11:14 PM hints that as the panic
spreads among traders, other firms that haven't the risk
exposure of Bear Stearns may also be trading at bargain
prices. "Luis A. del Valle" at 4:23 AM cautions an earlier
commenter that "Economics and Finance are not subjects
such as English literature, in which any asinine comment
has merit." (Gee, I wish I'd had that remark on hand a little
earlier to quote in response to a panicked boob who posted
in the soc.retirement news group.)
Commenter "slick" at 11:36 AM observed, "Listening to
the media, you'd think it was Armageddon, and that
unemployment was running at 15% and inflation at 20%!
....Not to minimize the very real problems, but can we
get a grip, people?" "Earl T" at 12:06 PM chimes in to
remind everybody of the obvious, "The _average_ IQ
in the US is only about 100..." There's "Brian Macker"
at 12:25 PM and 1:29 PM telling everyone willing to
read his long-winded rants (his word) in which he
pats himself on the back for predicting it all way back
in 2003 in the alt.atheism news group (the obvious place
for financial insights, eh?) But I'm not buying what
"Brian Macker" is saying because in his 1:36 PM
comments he wrote silly stuff using economically
meaningless phrases such as "My house... is worth a
lot less than the market says it is." (Gee, and just how
does Macker suppose he knows what his house is
"worth," anyway, besides from his personal fee-yul-
ings? Here's a clue for Macker: "The market" never
"says" what a house -- or anything else -- is "worth."
"Worth" is an entirely subjective concept. The market
only deals in _prices_. Sheesh, what an economic
illiterate Macker is! I expect more from someone
like Macker who babbled on and on about how he's
informed by the Austrian school of economics.)
"Chicago Mike" at 1:10 PM made what's IMO
the most cool-headed fact-based response so far,
"I think one thing that some people are forgetting
is that Bear Stearns has not been accused of fudging their
books, hiding debts, or engaging in other malfeasance.
There is a reason why BSC decided to move up their
earnings re****t to tomorrow because, in their minds,
it will demonstrate that things aren't as bad as people
are making them out to be."
--
No op****tunity is lost. The other person takes it.
Anonymous
|
