|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:18:34 GMT -5
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Oct 4, 2014 at 12:33pm
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:36:10 GMT -5
Posted Oct 6, 2014 at 8:37am by JoeRockss:
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:38:28 GMT -5
Post by JoeRockss on Oct 7, 2014 at 5:20pm
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:40:39 GMT -5
Oct 10, 2014 at 6:32am
Post by JoeRockss on Oct 10, 2014 at 6:32am
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:43:11 GMT -5
Post by vulcanized crawler on Oct 10, 2014 at 6:46am Vulcanized Crawler Friday, 10/10/14 07:06:42 AM Re: The Oracle Kid post# 343317 Post # of 343324 Jack-In-The-Box....and Amway on the side? so i was off base with him roaming the Tundra up near the northern lights? drat. i hate being wrong. but, at least if we all buy enough amway products, we'll all get paid...in time. you have to look at the silver lining (from ihub cmkx board) The Oracle Kid Thursday, 10/09/14 08:38:01 PM Re: Vulcanized Crawler post# 343299 Post # of 343324 Urban is working part time at the Jack in the Box in Boulder City, Nevada. All part of the cover given to him by the DOJ. He gambles at the Hacienda www.haciendaonline.com/ and drives a little super-charged red Gremlin Unlce Melvin had in his barn. Across the highway from the Hacienda is a gold showing and down the hill is an old turquoise mine Urban is getting Emmerson to stake. Only a matter of time before some option agreements get signed and the next play starts!
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:44:39 GMT -5
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Oct 15, 2014 at 3:30pm
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:46:13 GMT -5
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Oct 28, 2014 at 5:06am
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:49:07 GMT -5
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Oct 28, 2014 at 5:19am
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:49:59 GMT -5
Post by John Winston Lennon o'Boggie on Oct 28, 2014 at 6:28am
That's a nice read this morning.. Why..? Because I really feel we had a lot to do with Reg SHO...
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:50:46 GMT -5
Post by portrush on Oct 28, 2014 at 2:11pm
Fed Set to End QE3, but Not the QE Concept Bond Buying Will Remain a Tool in the Central Bank’s Monetary-Policy Arsenal
By PEDRO NICOLACI DA COSTA Oct. 28, 2014 12:14 p.m. ET Wall Street Journal
Federal Reserve officials meeting Tuesday and Wednesday are virtually certain to end their latest bond-buying program, but they won’t be retiring the policy for good.
Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen, shown last week, has said she wouldn’t rule out more bond buying if needed to spur growth.
Their recent comments show bond purchases are now an established part of the Fed’s policy tool kit that they could employ again in times of deep economic trouble. The central bank has employed three rounds of bond-buying programs since the 2008 crisis, first to stabilize the financial system and later to spur stronger growth.
Several Fed policy makers say they think the latest round of Treasury and mortgage-bond purchases, begun in late 2012, helped lower long-term interest rates, boosting hiring and growth. But they also see a high bar to launching more bond buying—known as quantitative easing, or QE—seeing it as a last resort to use only if very low interest rates and communications efforts were to fail to reverse a sharply worsening economic outlook.
“I think QE is quite effective,” Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren said in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal, describing the approach as an option for dealing with an adverse shock to the economy.
John Williams, president of the San Francisco Fed, said in a recent Journal interview that he would consider more bond buying in a “worst-case scenario,” in which the forecasts for growth and inflation were very poor and officials had already exhausted other tools to spur the economy.
Supporters of QE note the unemployment rate has dropped to 5.9% in September from above 8% when they launched the current and third round of bond purchases. The economy has grown for most of the past five years, though modestly and erratically. And while inflation has been running below the Fed’s 2% target for more than two years, it has risen a bit and stabilized in recent months.
CENTRAL BANK WATCH
Here is how the central banks in four major advanced economies have moved two key levers of monetary policy in recent years, and how two important economic indicators have responded. View the interactive.
Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen has said she wouldn’t rule out more bond buying if needed, and Fed Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer deemed the program “largely successful.”
Yet opponents in academia, on Capitol Hill and even at the Fed cite a number of concerns. Many point to the weak economic growth of recent years and see little benefit to bond buying and many risks.
Fed officials such as Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser and Richmond Fed President Jeffrey Lacker worry the new money the Fed created to buy bonds—more than $3 trillion through the three programs—could fuel excessive inflation when growth picks up or asset bubbles that could cause financial instability and potentially another crisis.
Mr. Lacker is among those particularly unhappy with the Fed’s purchases of mortgage-backed bonds in the latest program, saying it “tilts the playing field against borrowers in other economic sectors, such as businesses and renters.”
The Fed’s bond buying has generated plenty of research, with differing conclusions about its effectiveness. Many of the studies agree the programs worked very well to stabilize the financial system during the 2008 crisis, but disagree about how effective the programs have been in boosting growth since then.
In a 2012 speech, then-Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke cited a Fed study estimating the first two rounds of Fed bond purchases in 2008 and 2010 “may have raised the level of output by almost 3% and increased private payroll employment by more than 2 million jobs, relative to what otherwise would have occurred.”
But some studies have found much smaller or unclear benefits.
Mr. Williams wrote a paper this year concluding the Fed’s bond-buying programs “have proven a potent but blunt tool, with uncertain effects on financial markets and the economy.”
Arvind Krishnamurthy, a professor at Stanford University, said his research suggests the bond purchases helped through their direct effect on asset values—for example, by lowering bond yields and pushing up stock prices—and also through the strong signal they sent about the Fed’s intention to keep interest rates down for some time to bolster the economy.
James Bullard , president of the St. Louis Fed, said in a recent interview with Bloomberg TV the Fed could consider continuing the bond purchases beyond this month to keep its options open amid falling U.S. inflation expectations. But no other Fed official has shown support for the idea.
Policy makers have been winding down the bond-buying program all year and decided at their September meeting to end it after this month if the economy continued to improve as expected.
Mr. Rosengren, an advocate for aggressive policies to bring down unemployment, said the Fed’s criteria for ending the bond program have been met. Reaching “5.9% [unemployment] relative to where we were when we started the program is a substantial improvement,” he said.
He said even if his forecast for continued employment gains deteriorated dramatically, he wouldn’t turn to more bond purchases as the first line of defense. “There are other tools that we can use,” he said, such as holding interest rates very low for longer than anticipated and communicating that intent publicly.
Many investors expect the Fed to start raising its benchmark short-term rate from near zero in the middle of next year, a view some top officials have encouraged.
Write to Pedro Nicolaci da Costa at pedro.dacosta@wsj.com
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:51:47 GMT -5
Post by JoeRockss on Nov 2, 2014 at 10:10am Mining deals a positive sign, but insiders skeptical Lundin companies strike deals for copper, gold assets but other would-be acquisitors stay on sidelines By Peter Koven, Financial Post October 28, 2014 Read more: www.vancouversun.com/business/resources/Mining+deals+positive+sign+insiders+skeptical/10332367/story.html#ixzz3HvacRor9The past month has provided a jolt that the Canadian mining industry’s bankers and lawyers have awaited for a long time. But is it sustainable? Insiders are not convinced. Since the start of October, there have been two sizable private equity mining deals announced, plus a $1.8-billion US asset sale and related financing and the sale by Kinross of a mothballed gold project in Ecuador. Lundin Group companies were the buyers on the latter two transactions. While mining mergers and acquisitions have moved along at a decent pace this year, these transactions stood out from the pack. Private equity, for one, has been the talk of the mining business for months. There have been predictions that a wave of private equity investment is set to pour into the cash-needy sector and give it a lift, but those deals simply have not materialized the way the industry expected. Two transactions this month gave Canadian miners some renewed hope: Magris Resources’ private-equity-backed $500-million acquisition of the Niobec mine in Quebec, and a $73-million takeover of Chaparral Gold Corp. involving private equity firm Waterton Global Resource Management. Outside of private equity, the big announcement was Lundin Mining Corp.’s $1.8-billion-US purchase of Freeport-McMoRan’s 80-per-cent stake in the Candelaria mining complex in Chile. To get the deal done, Lundin arranged a complex $2.2-billion-US financing package. That includes a $600-million bought deal, the single biggest mining equity financing of the year. It got a terrific reception from shareholders despite rough market conditions, as Lundin shares traded well above the $5.10 offer price after the stock was sold early last week. The Lundin group struck again on Oct. 21 with Fortress Minerals’ $240-million-US purchase of Kinross’s Fruta del Norte high-grade gold project in Ecuador. Toronto-based Kinross had acquired the project in 2008 with a $1.2-billion takeover of Aurelian Resources, but suspended work on it and wrote off much of its value after a dispute with the Ecuadorean government. Fortress will be renamed Lundin Gold when the deal closes. “The good news is there seems to be quite a bit of support for the right stories,” said John Turner, head of the global mining group at Fasken Martineau LLP. “There are other [deals] bubbling under the surface at the moment. I think you’ll see some in the next few weeks as long as the market doesn’t deteriorate further.” Others are less optimistic. Investment bankers said the market reaction to the Lundin deals is a great sign, but they noted that resources tycoon Lukas Lundin might be one of the only people in the sector who could get that kind of shareholder support. They also doubted many companies have the courage and conviction to do the sort of transformative deals that Lundin just announced. There have been plenty of quality assets up for sale in the industry over the last couple of years, but few companies appear willing to pay a premium to get them. The skepticism also remains over private equity, where billions of dollars have been raised for mining investments and very little has been spent. Waterton alone raised more than $1 billion US for a precious metals fund earlier this year. And Magris chief executive Aaron Regent (formerly Barrick Gold CEO) said his Niobec deal is just the “first of many.” It makes sense for private equity to be interested in mining, as valuations are cheap compared with almost anything else. But experts said that private equity players continue to have misgivings about this sector, both because of commodity volatility and a lack of mining expertise in their shops. They doubt the Niobec and Chaparral deals are the sign of a big trend, though more deals are likely. “Even with falling commodity prices and falling valuations, I’m not certain it’s going to help traditional private equity funds get comfortable allocating capital in the mining sector,” Waterton partner Cheryl Brandon said. Waterton has been the exception rather than the rule, as it has done 29 transactions since launching in 2009. The firm has a team of technical people from the mining sector, and is happy to hold onto assets for seven years or more — a long time horizon compared to most private equity firms. “We’ll be extremely active given we’ve identified which projects we like, which management teams we want to invest alongside of and now it’s a matter of executing,” Brandon said. www.vancouversun.com/business/resources/Mining+deals+positive+sign+insiders+skeptical/10332367/story.html#ixzz3HqOdnWXg
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:52:18 GMT -5
Post by John Winston Lennon o'Boggie on Nov 2, 2014 at 10:22am
Nice read.. Thank You
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:53:25 GMT -5
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on yesterday at 5:16am
thanks Sniffer.........
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:54:14 GMT -5
Post by vulcanized crawler on yesterday at 6:11am
so iraq got an apple one? ild like to get an abacus or two before they throw them out.
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Nov 5, 2014 18:55:03 GMT -5
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on about an hour ago
|
|