Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2008:September:29 Monday <Tuesday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2008/9/29-10/1 [Uncategorized] UID:51323 Activity:nil
9/29    I just bought a new Nikkor and it says I must send it my warranty card
        within 10 days of purchase if I want the full FIVE year Nikkor
        warranty. Must I send it the card? Also the warranty says "It is not
        transferable", so does that mean when I send in my card, I can no
        longer sell it with the warranty (making the lens much less valuable)?
2008/9/29-10/1 [Politics] UID:51324 Activity:nil
9/29    Good bye capitalism, HELLO BARAK COMMUNISM!!!
        \_ You are so cute when you are an idiot.
           \_ hey man, he still supports the bailout. i don't like it one
              bit. -Dem
2008/9/29-10/1 [Computer/Networking] UID:51325 Activity:nil
9/29    I'm looking for a new wireless router / firewall, preferably
        something that supports 802.11n. Any recommendations?
        \_ Which 802.11n?
           \_ Draft 2.0 or whatever version is supported by the the
              MacBook and iMac.
2008/9/29-10/4 [Computer/Companies/Google] UID:51326 Activity:moderate
9/29    Just six more days like today! -GOOG short $100 guy
        \_ It's already half of where it used to be in spite of fanbois
           like Tom talking it up like it would be the next GE. BTW, BRK-B
           was up today. Very interesting that it's up on a day like today.
           \_ GE 52-week high: 42.15.  Current: 23.10.  -tom
              \_ GE market cap = $228.80B. GOOG market cap = $119.80B.
                 \_ yeah, so?  -tom
                    \_ GOOG's not there yet and probably never will be.
                       It would not have made sense for GOOG to stay flat
                       while GE fell in half. GOOG's already
                       overcapitalized as-is.
                       \_ By what measure is GOOG overcapitalized?  What do
                          you think a reasonable PE ratio would be for GOOG?
                          \_ The same measure that allowed AOL to purchase
                             Time-Warner only for the company to later
                             pretend AOL never existed.
                             \_ That's not an answer.  It's not even Eng  Time-W\
arner only for the company to later
                             pretend AOL never existed.
                             \_ That's not an answer.  It's not even English.
                                What do you think a reasonable PE ratio would
                                be for GOOG?   -tom
                                \_ What do you think a reasonable market cap
                                   would be for GOOG?
                                   \_ I think GOOG can support a trailing PE
                                      in the neighborhood of 30 and a forward
                                      PE in the neighborhood of 20 for at
                                      least the next two years.  How that
                                      translates into market cap will depend
                                      on macroeconomic issues.  Google will
                                      still be the dominant internet search
                                      and advertising firm two years from now,
                                      but it will depend on the advertising
                                      market.  -tom
                                      Now will you answer the question? -tom
                                      \_ PEG should equal about 1 and it looks
                                         like GOOG growth is down to about 10%,
                                         so P/E should be 10. It is about 3X
                                         overcapitalized then.
                                         \_ Well, if GOOG's growth is really
                                            down to 10%, you might be right.
                                            But in 2007 GOOG made $9.9B,
                                            and it has already made $6.3B in
                                            But in 2007 GOOG made $4.2B,
                                            and it has already made $2.6B in
                                            the first two quarters this year,
                                            so you're off by at least a
                                            factor of two, barring
                                            macroeconomic conditions which
                                            impact Google's growth (and
                                            everyone else's).  -tom
                                            \_ What is GOOG's forward growth
                                               rate? I would be surprised if
                                               they grow at even 10% in Q4.
                                               \_ I think it's safe to say
                                                  that GOOG's forward growth
                                                  rate is higher than the
                                                  broad market's.  From
                                                  06 to 07 earnings grew
                                                  by 40%.  From 07 to 08
                                                  they look likely to grow
                                                  by at least 25%.  So
                                                  by your own measure,
                                                  Google is fairly valued.
        \_ (9/30) Damn, it's now up 7.66% so far today.
2008/9/29-10/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:51327 Activity:nil
9/29    "This bill failed because Barack Obama and the Democrats put politics
        ahead of country," McCain spokesman Holtz-Eakin said.
        A majority of House Democrats supported the proposal and the majority
        of House Republicans opposed it. A total of 133 House Republicans
        voted against it, with 95 Democrats opposing the plan.
        \_ obama and mccain both need to be kicked in the head.  they both
           still support the bailout in its current form.
           \- look, there are some dems being slightly difficult trying
              to make sweeping changes to mortgages and even more so bank-
              ruptcy laws. but they are not any where near proposing insane
              things like "capital gain taxes to free frozen capital" ...
              which is basically a step away from "let's sell hawaii to
              dubai". if you cant see the difference, you are truly a
              dumbfuck. unfortunately there are a lot of you, including
              the alaskan lipstick pig. as long as these people are pulling
              the debate ... i hate to say rightward ... since this is
              really outer space beyond anything in the reasonable spectrum...
              it distorts the jockeying toward something acceptable.
              it distorts the jockeying toward something acceptable. obama
              in a sense has little to do given that pelosi and frank etc
              are negotiating in good faith, have supportive of bernanke
              and paulson, and keeping the dems if line better than the
              republicans are. even junior bush isnt being that awkful.
              the republicans nuts are the problem, and that is a problem
              for mccain and the republican leadership [i dont think mitch
              mcconnel is front and center on this, but a lot of the nuts
              in this case are in the R leadership]. but in no sense is there
              obama - mccain equivalence, or dem/rep equivalnence.
              \_ i see the difference and i think am in agreement w/you -pp
              \_ further proof that liberals can't spell and indent and
                 capitalize because they think they're special
                 \- nobody called me a liberal until i began to rant against
                    these incompetent, lying assholes.
              \-BTW, i dont think the current bill is "socialist"/hardass
                enough, but i am not sure if doing nothing is better than
                the current plan [i.e. cost the wall street and equity owners
                what they should pay, but risk the unemployment rate going
                up a few percent]. i think the real intervetion needs to
                look like the WBUFFET "aid package" to GS ... tap their
                cash flow in a bond-like way, and get equity stake ...
                but again i dont understand the implications of the govt
                holding voting/non-voting equity. i would probably be ok
                giving WBUFFETT $700bn and tell him to do what he can ...
                sort of a Modern Financial Cincinatus :-)
2008/9/29-10/6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:51328 Activity:nil
9/29    A key problem with this bailout is that the final version was
        released on Sunday, and Dems and Republicans were expected to follow
        their leadership and vote Yes after reviewing it for < 24 hours.
        This is crazy for a $700B bailout.  Every House member who voted for
        it should be kicked out in November.
        If you're gonna spend $700B, you FUCKING DO IT RIGHT.  150+ economists
        are against this plan.  See for one approach.
        \_ It isn't $700B
           \_ please elaborate
            \_ $250B at first, $100B available by asking for it.  Another
               $350B that is only available if congress explicitly agrees
               to it via a joint resolution after the Treasury asks for it.
               So it's really a $350B plan with the option to increase the
               plan if desired.  (Which is still a lot of money)
               \_ Plus, we probably end up getting most of it back.
                  \_ how much of RTC did we get back?
                  \_ So let's see... the govt buys the assets that the banks
                     want least (presumably because it's tied to borrowers
                     who are most likely to default), and the govt wants to
                     not buy it at firesale prices, since that would cause
                     the banks to realize large losses and still make them go
                     out of business, so we'll buy it at prices that are
                     fairly close to "hold to maturity" (this according to
                     Ben, anyway). And then we hope and pray that we can
                     actually hold it to maturity without the borrowers
                     defaulting. How does it stand to reason that we'll
                     probably get most of it back? Just because the govt buys
                     their debt, these people will now more likely not default?
                     \_ The reality is that the default rate is pretty low
                        in either case. The problem is that no one wants
                        to buy the debt. It's a liquidity problem. The
                        banks would probably be fine if they had enough cash
                        reserves to operate, but they were counting on
                        selling the securities. Recall that in the early
                        1990s banks owned a lot of RE and it caused them
                        massive liquidity problems even though they would have
                        made large profits if they could have held on for 10
                        more years. Banks don't want houses, though. They
                        want cash. The gov't can afford to sit on it. Note
                        that I am still against the bailout.
                        \_ ^liquidity^solvency
                           taxpayer should take a loss because Hank said so
                           \_ Or, the taxpayer could take a gain. You really
                              don't know and neither does anyone else. Do you
                              even know how the bailout bill plan for auctioning
                              securities was going to work? I guess it doesn't
                              really matter now, but the next bill will have
                              something like it. You claim that the taxpayer
                              will take a loss, but the truth is, we won't know
                              for a while if that is true or not.
                              \_ how much of RTC did we get back?
                                 \_ I don't know, but we got 100% of the money
                                    we lent out using the HOLC and even got a
                                    slight profit. We even got 100% of the RFC
                                    money back. How much of the RTC did we get
                                    back, you seem to know.
                                       \_ That does not answer the question, but
                                          one person quoted that the US would
                                          end up getting 50% back. But the
                                          total cost ended up double (?) the
                                          original estimate.
                                     \_ We lost $124B on a total purchase of
                                        $400B of debt and distressed assets:
                                        \- re: the S&L crisis:
                                           1. the circumstances of the s&l
                                              crisis was deposit insurance
                                              not an intervention. so the
                                              govt in a sense didnt have a
                                              choice [or the nature of the
                                              choice was different ... e.g.
                                              the could have closed firms
                                              earlier ... if you are interested
                                              in a difference between today
                                              [FDIC now] and "yesterday"
                                              [FSLIC back in the late 80s] see
                                           2. to understand the full costs,
                                              you must add the signficant costs
                                              of the failed FSLIC in addition
                                              to the successor, the RTC [there
                                              are a bunch of smaller orgs as
                                              well, but those can be ignored].
                                              [the FSLIC shutdown about $100bn
                                              worth of S&Ls and was insolvent
                                              from very early in the process,
                                              but continued to go through the
                                              administrative motions]
                                           3. these assets the RTC had were
                                              seized, not purchased, and the
                                              seized, not purchased, and then
                                              disposed of. so the govt can
                                              be criciized about how they
                                              disposed of stuff, but not their
                                              selection of what to buy ...
                                              in the current situation the
                                              problem facing the govt is
                                              how much to pay when buying and
                                              holding, as opposed to how to
                                              dispose of a carcass while
                                              keeping your promise.
                                              \_ "You really don't know and
                                                  neither does anyone else."
2008/9/29-10/4 [Uncategorized] UID:51329 Activity:nil
9/29    DJIA down 6.98%.  Did this break any record?
        \_ No. 10/19/87 it plunged 22.61% and 12.82% on 10/28/29.
           \_ Largest single-day point drop in history, though.
        \_ well, biggest percentage decline since 1987
2008/9/29-10/4 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:51330 Activity:nil
9/29    Angry 401(k) holders are calling politicians asking them why the
        bailout didn't go through.  Australia pressuring Congress to pass the
        bill to prevent the global economy from imploding.  Real estate and
        financial lobbyists massing for DC.
        ... Predictions?
        IMO, I don't see why we can't have a blue ribbon panel examine the
        issue and figure out how to inject the money.
        \_ i lost around $40,000 off my 401k..but i prefer preserving
        \_ I lost around $40,000 off my 401k..but I prefer preserving
           freedom instead of passing this commie bill
           \_ I agree.
           \_ We need a much more commie bill than this, one that partially
              nationalizes the banks and lowers everyone's mortgage. And for
              $700B, we could get it.
              \_ i can has a free haus?
                 \_ More like, you can get a 10% coupon on the house you
                    overpaid for in 2006 and stay in it and pay the
                    mortgage, instead of dumping yet another Notice of
                    Default on an overstressed financial system.
                       \_ Huh?
                    \_ I'd be curious how many people actually want to keep
                       the mortages.  House flippers probably don't want to.
                       I also met a couple that bought a house pretty cheap 15
                       years ago, but pulled out tons of equity, and have now
                       been foreclosed.  Do they actually want the house?  I
                       don't know.
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2008:September:29 Monday <Tuesday>