The markets love it...what a farce.

Let's see: The Fed is broke...so it "sells" 3 year Treasuries (ie., it borrows more money), then it turns around and purchases longer term securities with the money it just borrowed.  Do I have that about right? 

In other words, the Fed borrows money to try and manipulate interest rates.  Is there really more to it than meets the eye?  Does this really stimulate anything?  What am I missing by not jumping for joy?

Answer: Nowhere.  They're manufactured out of thin air (via the printing press).

Question: Will investors ever realize doing so is detrimental to the long-term financial health of the planet?

Answer: I doubt it; seems like nearly everyone is along for the ride.

Can't be that Spain admits it needs 125 billion Euro to shore up its banks, nor can it be that their request has been granted.  After all, where's the money coming from, or should I say, where is it being printed?

And with that news, Zerohedge reports that Ireland has asked that their bailout terms be renegotiated.  Can Greece be far behind?  Now that's certainly not bullish.  So why will the markets respond favorably to this absurdly irresponsible action?

Link to Zerohedge article: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/here-they-come-ireland-demands-renegotiation-its-bailout-terms-match-spain 

Opened at $0.76, high of $0.77, dipped to $0.59, and now has rebounded to $0.70.  Volume is strong but not off the charts.  Was $0.59 a short term blip to be ignored since today's candle is looking like a hammer?

Matt or Steve (or anyone else in the trading community),

I purchased SDS late April @ $15.10 per share.  RSI at the time was around 45.  Stock closed today @ $17.31 with an RSI of 74.96.  My understanding is that when the RSI moves above 70 its an indication the stock is becoming overbought.  If that's true, how does that happen when the underlying security only rises 14.6% from the bottom.  Is that because its a relative indicator and most equities are tanking?  Is this really an indication that SDS is now overbought?  Or does that only mean "overbought" relative to other equities? 

Take a trip to Shanghai over summer, wait for a 90 degree day with nothing more than a slight breeze, try taking a deep breath and you'll have your answer.  

is probably right on point.  I suspect for many traders, the fear of a loss is what holds them back.  Seen this phenomenon ad infinitum at the racetrack.  People playing with scared money or letting other "baggage" find its way into their decision-making process...seeking reassurance before they place their bet. In the case of trading, instead of properly assessing risk/reward and acting accordingly, the psychology of "not wanting to lose" often impacts one's ability to take the trade.

There's a fine line between entering a position early or at just the right time vs "being late".  Just my opinion, but I think what holds us back from time to time is that we find it difficult to trust our instincts; instead, we seek some form of guaranty that doesn't exist.  Intellectually we know better, but trading is more about psychology than it is about intellectual pursuit.

Strings attached, Matt?  What a novel idea.  Why would the banks feel obligated to set a precedent when our government refuses to follow such sensible advice.  After all, no demands for a share of future profits (or interest) were insisted upon when bailing out Goldman Sachs et all.  Best deal we negotiated was a return of capital...if that.  Could've easily demanded 50% of all future profits in exchange for the lifeline they were thrown.   

Agree wholeheartedly with your point of view, KC.  Simply inconceivable!!  I can imagine reducing the interest rate on a mortgage in certain circumstances, but reduce the principal owed without payment??!?  I'm speechless.  You're right: this will encourage those who may be borderline to simply stop making payments.  Nice deal if you can get it.

As for the rest of us: The only way our principal is reduced is by us continuing to MAKE our monthly payments.  Talk about a mixed up world. 

Seems to be pulling back on lighter volume after large runnup early April.  Right at 50 MA.  Thoughts on whether it moves higher from here or breaks down??

Anyone besides me sitting on shares of MFN contemplating what to do by Friday's deadline regarding three options to tender shares??

I'm skeptical of option 3 (the "all cash offer" of $15.582 U.S.D. subject to proration and allocation by the company) since its well above today's close at $14.05/share.  Don't quite know the ramifications of "subject to proration and allocation, but it doesn't feel good.  Should have cashed out two weeks ago but didn't.  Option 2 (higher % of PAAS) is also subject to "proration and allocation", which to me means by default option 1 (guaranty of .55 shares of PAAS + $1.837 U.S.D.) is probably the best move at this point in time since its assured (assuming shareholders approve the deal).

Or, I suppose I can sell into the market in the next day or two, as the stock looks poised to bounce - it sits just above its 200 day moving avg and its rising 50 day moving average.

Anyone have a better analysis?    

Appreciate that you guys are always looking for ways to improve the product.  Great can always become greater!

New Gold (NGD) reports incredible results and the stock is down 3% today;

  http://newgold.com/Theme/NewGold/files/2011%20Financial%20Results%20vFINAL%20March%201%202012.pdf

but I have to disagree with you regarding popularity of the sector.   It may get its fair share of press but.... 

I manage a mid-sized law firm, oversee the firm's profit sharing plan, know quite a few clever people between employees, business contacts, colleagues, family and friends...and can honestly say, that of the 300-400 individuals in my email address book, maybe 4-5 have precious metals investing even on their radar screen.  That's a small % of investors...and I'm fairly certain that's representative of the population at large in this country. 

Can't be a crowded trade, in my opinion.  So, there must be a different explanation.

I remain completely baffled when it comes to understanding the movement of precious metal mining stocks. 

Seems to me that when gold and silver are beaten down (like yesterday), the miners take an even stronger hit.  When gold and silver move up ($25.00+ today), the miners drift lower yet again.  Huh?  If there isn't any manipulation happening behind the scenes, what is it?? 

Am I to believe there is absolutely NO correlation between the movement of the underlying metal and the movement of the mining stocks, or is it a one-way street (correlation only on the way down)? 

Very frustrating, to say the least.  Precious metals mining stocks are the only equities I keep as core holdings; everything else is strictly a trade.  Wish I had treated the miners like I treat all the other stocks (buy/sell short-term strictly by the charts), but I haven't.

From the posts I read, I suspect I have company in that regard.

Jumped into CVO about two weeks ago @ $3.80.  Stock broke out and ran to $4.20's; decided to keep a wide stop @ $3.88.  Yesterday I was taken out on what appeared to be the final trade of the day, right at $3.88.  Today, well today the stock soared to as high as $5.20 (currently trading around $4.88). 

I guess its not my day.  Still working on perfecting those stops.   And yes, I can laugh it off.  What's the alternative?

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=cvo 

when we repeatedly touch the ceiling (in this case the pivot point)?

Just got off a "Plan Sponsor" webnar touting the benefits of investing in Target Date Funds.  Made me want to throw up!!!  Nothing like leaving it to others to take full responsibility for YOUR life savings and expecting those funds to grow and grow and grow.  I would venture to guess everyone subscribing to breakpointtrades.com would agree that making money is a whole lot harder than simply selecting a mutual fund based upon your expected retirement age. 

The sheer nonsense of this advice from supposed "financial experts" makes you wonder whose interests they really have at heart (remember: there's an annual fee associated with each of these funds and its based upon a % of assets under management).  Funny its almost mandatory that  fiduciaries (plan sponsors) offer this crap and convince their employees that asset allocation is the key to finding the financial "golden fleece".  Industry standards demand it of employers, and if you're an employer and don't toe that line, you set yourself up for a lawsuit when participants get hit with losses in a market downdraft ala 2008. 

And to think such irresponsible behavior is taking place in nearly every business across the country.  wow - what a con!!  give me a cup and handle any day. 

the full range of austerity measures...and have them remain in place long term, I'd like to take the other side of that trade!!!