OT: Buying GM Stock, a steal at $2?

[jmatta]

GM is going to file chapter 11, so stay away. As for the financials? Citi, BoA and Chase are all insolvent if you strip away the government money and factor in the off balance sheet (level 2 and 3) investment losses. Citi's market cap at .98 a share is nil. BoA and Chase aren't far behind. Chase will have to suck up $41 B in Bear Stearns losses and the WaMu fallout rendering them nil, unless Obama keeps handing out bailout money. BoA and Citi are effectively nationalized already, so why don't we call a spade a spade?

[Perfectlap]

^well there's trillions of dollars that are sitting pretty in money market accounts and short term bonds from domestic and foreign investors (where Prince Al-Waleed when you need him) that will come back into financials at some point. Its been nearly 7 months of pent up cash worldwide at this point.
Everything goes through energy and the banks. You'll never escape that in a consumer economy the size of ours. I tend to think it costs a lot more to build a bank from scratch than to keep one on life support until the chemo is done.

It's these times that make me think of the investor during the great depression that picked up paper one day and bought every stock of every good company that was trading for less than a dollar. I think he made a lot of money.

[fatmike]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

It's these times that make me think of the investor during the great depression that picked up paper one day and bought every stock of every good company that was trading for less than a dollar. I think he made a lot of money.

That was Templeton

[fatmike]

Originally Posted by jmatta

GM is going to file chapter 11, so stay away. As for the financials? Citi, BoA and Chase are all insolvent if you strip away the government money and factor in the off balance sheet (level 2 and 3) investment losses. Citi's market cap at .98 a share is nil. BoA and Chase aren't far behind. Chase will have to suck up $41 B in Bear Stearns losses and the WaMu fallout rendering them nil, unless Obama keeps handing out bailout money. BoA and Citi are effectively nationalized already, so why don't we call a spade a spade?

Yep. All true. I happen to like my chances with these stocks. Not a lot of reason to short them anymore. And if you haven't noticed, the government IS handing them money.

[Brucelee]

Last updated: 12:55 am
March 11, 2009
Posted: 12:22 am
March 11, 2009

If the US government assumes greater control over US bank Citigroup or automaker General Motors, that might "trigger" their removal from the Dow index, the Dow Jones Indexes said yesterday.

John Prestbo, editor and executive director of the DJ Indexes, which selects the 30 stocks in the Dow Jones industrial average, said he tracks both companies "every day to see what the status is."

Should either stock be removed, "everything is on the table basically in terms of replacements," Prestbo said

[super66]

So the question is if GM goes under, what can I pick up a vette for?

Or will they still be overpriced? Just like the Circuit City "sales", mark it up and then discount it to just a little bit more than Wal Mart's price haha....oh well, everything has been overpriced here for awhile, including my Porsce

Hopefully some changes will take place, but judging how the oil companies resorted to price fixing and nothing has been or will be done, we may not see the change to get the economy going.

btw...I wouldn't buy GM stock, a cheap vette, hell yes

[Brucelee]

I don't think that there is any credible evidence that the oil companies nor even OPEC has been able to fix oil prices.

If they could, I think they MIGHT be a bit higher right now.

[super66]

Originally Posted by Brucelee

I don't think that there is any credible evidence that the oil companies nor even OPEC has been able to fix oil prices.

If they could, I think they MIGHT be a bit higher right now.

If you're willing to look past the $140 barrel of oil last summer then I guess we have no evidence. Give it time, at one point there wasn't any credible evidence of Enron having it's hand on California's energy crisis but that sure has changed.

And we'll probably disagree, but when one side cuts production, and the other side cuts how much gas they make because they don't like what happened to the price of their product, it's fixing the price. Or some will say, no it's just supply and demand. And as a direct result of their efforts, gas prices are higher than where they need to be right now.

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by super66

If you're willing to look past the $140 barrel of oil last summer then I guess we have no evidence. Give it time, at one point there wasn't any credible evidence of Enron having it's hand on California's energy crisis but that sure has changed.

And we'll probably disagree, but when one side cuts production, and the other side cuts how much gas they make because they don't like what happened to the price of their product, it's fixing the price. Or some will say, no it's just supply and demand. And as a direct result of their efforts, gas prices are higher than where they need to be right now.

What you describing IS supply and demand. Price fixing is when all of the suppliers act in concert to set the price irrespective of demand. Fact is, demand dropped and prices dropped, just like you would expect. Now, suppliers are providing fewer units at lower prices, just what you would expect in a commodity. If oil producers could fix prices, the prices would have just stayed at $4 a gallon. They didn't. And they won';t stay fixed here either.

Gold miners don't go after all the gold they have when gold prices are expected to be down. Farmers will not plant the whole field if they think prices are depressed.

Sorry, even OPEC has not been able to FIX prices, even though they would like to.