Financial topics

[Higgenbotham]

Another summary of the oil debacle today.

https://www.forexlive.com/news/!/why-th ... e-20200420

[Higgenbotham]

https://www.slideshare.net/Akarawat99/h ... n-47095357

page 26 for rules
pages 35, 36, 40, 41 for examples of weekly charts showing low risk shorts to take in a bear market (this is in position to potentially trigger)

2008 CNBC stock picking contest winner

This system is very close to firing off a sell signal on the weekly. I'll be reviewing the weekly chart examples in the book soon to confirm that my interpretation is correct.

[Higgenbotham]

Course Title: How to Destroy an Economy 101
Instructor: Professor Benjamin Shalom Bernanke

"Sanford C. Bernstein found an “unprecedented” spike in the US oil marginal cost last year, jumping to $114 a barrel, up from $89 in 2011."
"The full cost of producing new oil for the 50 largest publicly traded oil companies in the world is $92 a barrel according to Bernstein Research. In fact, the cost of producing the marginal new barrel of oil has been rising at 14 percent per year since 2001, Bernstein says."

Bernanke has built a huge permanent cost structure into energy production without the wage income to support it. The more money he has pumped in, the faster oil production costs have risen and the faster income has fallen in proportion to energy costs. Perhaps today we are seeing the long term consequences of that come home to roost in the stock market or perhaps it will wait just a bit longer.

[Higgenbotham]

Costs rise for ‘technological barrels’ of oil
US shale oil is increasing the marginal cost of production

Javier Blas, Commodities Editor MAY 29 2013

New technologies such as fracking in the US shale industry are boosting crude oil supplies – but these new “technological barrels” are flowing at a high cost.

Sanford C. Bernstein, the Wall Street research company, calls the rapid increase in production costs “the dark side of the golden age of shale”. In a recent analysis, it estimates that non-Opec marginal cost of production rose last year to $104.5 a barrel, up more than 13 per cent from $92.3 a barrel in 2011.

The big increase will have implications both for the market and oil companies, helping to put a floor to energy prices (A floor at minus $40 per barrel?) but also capping the profitability of the sector.

At the epicentre of the shale revolution is the US, and it represents a paradigm of the cost of technology. Sanford C. Bernstein found an “unprecedented” spike in the US oil marginal cost last year, jumping to $114 a barrel, up from $89 in 2011.

Christophe de Margerie, chief executive of Total, the French oil producer, last month warned that technology is not reducing marginal costs in the oil industry. Instead, he said: “What we call technological barrels are day after day more expensive.” (I thought technology solves all our problems)

The trend of rising production costs in the US shale and Canadian tar sands is of particular concern, as the International Energy Agency – the Western’s countries oil watchdog – anticipates that 40 per cent of the incremental oil production capacity over the next five years will come from North America.

US shale and Canadian tar sands production is even more important for the non-Opec supply outlook. The IEA forecasts that North America will account for roughly 65 per cent of non-Opec production capacity growth until 2018.

The trend also matters for “Big Oil” companies, including ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BP, Chevron and Total, and smaller exploration and production groups. As Sanford C. Bernstein puts it, the shale revolution is bringing vast new supplies into the market that are capping oil prices just as production cost surged.

“Net income margins in the sector are now at the lowest in a decade,” the firm said after reviewing the economics of the world’s 50-largest listed oil companies. “This is not sustainable. Either prices must rise or costs must fall,” it added.

Sanford C. Bernstein estimates that the marginal cost of oil production has increased about 250 per cent over the last decade, rising from just under $30 a barrel in 2002 to a record of $104.5 a barrel last year. At the same time, cash costs have risen from $9.70 a barrel in 2002 to $44.20 a barrel last year.

https://www.ft.com/content/ec3bb622-c79 ... 144feab7de

[Higgenbotham]

I kept my short ES position at 5 lots today. Will probably increase to 10 lots next week. I've been trying really hard to hold back because, as stated previously, bear market rallies (assuming that's what this is) tend to go much further than I think they can.

The only reason I tried to increase this week was because I thought a high had been made at 2846 on the ES and therefore the market was in downtrend, but it became evident that high was not likely to stick. The ES last traded around 2870 at 4 pm Chicago time. I think a gap down Sunday night is possible (hearkening back to a similar situation on March 13).

I've added 2 lots so far this week, bringing my total short ES position to 7 lots and break even to 2677. The market is currently about 55 points above my break even.

[aeden]

Trend is amos salem window.
Do not be deceived.
They are not democrats.
Slowly book four will be noted.

Get to the Light.
The judgement seal ends if we are lucky it was conveyed.
I got that call tonight.

δοκιμάζετε τὰ πνεύματα

[Higgenbotham]

This is to say nothing of the fortuitous circumstances that figure into every success story. In his book Success and Luck (2016), the US economist Robert Frank recounts the long-shots and coincidences that led to Bill Gates’s stellar rise as Microsoft’s founder, as well as to Frank’s own success as an academic. Luck intervenes by granting people merit, and again by furnishing circumstances in which merit can translate into success. This is not to deny the industry and talent of successful people. However, it does demonstrate that the link between merit and outcome is tenuous and indirect at best.

According to Frank, this is especially true where the success in question is great, and where the context in which it is achieved is competitive. There are certainly programmers nearly as skillful as Gates who nonetheless failed to become the richest person on Earth. In competitive contexts, many have merit, but few succeed. What separates the two is luck.

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/a-be ... ad-for-you

I've called it the lottery economy.

Where does a lottery economy exist? In a globalized world.

Where does the opposite of a lottery economy exist? In an economy that is profoundly local. In my opinion, an economy that is profoundly local is more cooperative, egalitarian, compatible with human nature, and more satisfying to the majority of the people.

Not only is a lottery economy wrong and contrary to human nature, it is lethally harmful. Putting Gates at the top of the pyramid mostly due to fortuitous circumstances and then having him appoint himself as an expert on global health is dangerous. He shouldn't be there in the first place and he doesn't know what he is doing. I'd rather take a trip to my local medicine man and die of coronavirus than have Gates mandate a high tech solution that may have unknown harmful effects for generations.

Quotes from articles such as the above seem to indicate a growing change in sentiment that a globalized world may not be for the best and I'm seeing a lot of them.

I've read a lot of Gates' drivel and, while he's undoubtedly a smart guy, he lacks a lot of knowledge and depth of thinking. There are at least 10 people who have posted on this forum over time that I would personally feel more comfortable if they were to be making decisions about who to vaccinate and how.

[Higgenbotham]

In most mainstream places in the US, most people reading the above would probably conclude, "Aha! I'll bet old Higgenbotham is an anti-vaxxer! I'll bet his daughter will go unvaccinated! Shame, shame, shame."

That's not the case. My daughter was born on January 6, 2020 and so far she has received all vaccines mandated by the goofballs who are running the show as well as one optional vaccine.

To digress for a minute, I wanted my daughter to be born as close to the collapse as possible, which is why I had no children until age 58. She has no middle name. I wanted her middle name to be Crash but my wife wouldn't allow it.

Getting back to the vaccines, my approach was different. Even post collapse, my daughter is going to be exposed to all kinds of harmful substances and vaccines are only a small percentage of the harmful things she will be exposed to. I wrote previously that I made sure my wife's Vitamin D levels were optimal during the pregnancy. In addition to that, I probably took hundreds of actions that may ensure this child is robust enough to withstand the environmental assaults that will be hurled at her. These things were as varied as eating ~12 fruits and vegetables per day while the sperm were developing in my body to running intervals and lifting weights for several months prior to conceiving her.

So far, she is very healthy. I noticed today that my wife bought her a pair of pants that have glitter on them and small pieces of glitter are on my clothes. I didn't say anything. You can only do so much and I feel I did everything I could (glitter is highly toxic - there is absolutely no limit to human stupidity.

[John]

** 21-Apr-2020 Glitter

> In most mainstream places in the US, most people reading the above
> would probably conclude, "Aha! I'll bet old Higgenbotham is an
> anti-vaxxer! I'll bet his daughter will go unvaccinated! Shame,
> shame, shame."

> That's not the case. My daughter was born on January 6, 2020 and
> so far she has received all vaccines mandated by the goofballs who
> are running the show as well as one optional vaccine.

> To digress for a minute, I wanted my daughter to be born as close
> to the collapse as possible, which is why I had no children until
> age 58. She has no middle name. I wanted her middle name to be
> Crash but my wife wouldn't allow it.

> Getting back to the vaccines, my approach was different. Even
> post collapse, my daughter is going to be exposed to all kinds of
> harmful substances and vaccines are only a small percentage of the
> harmful things she will be exposed to. I wrote previously that I
> made sure my wife's Vitamin D levels were optimal during the
> pregnancy. In addition to that, I probably took hundreds of
> actions that may ensure this child is robust enough to withstand
> the environmental assaults that will be hurled at her. These
> things were as varied as eating ~12 fruits and vegetables per day
> while the sperm were developing in my body to running intervals
> and lifting weights for several months prior to conceiving her.

> So far, she is very healthy. I noticed today that my wife bought
> her a pair of pants that have glitter on them and small pieces of
> glitter are on my clothes. I didn't say anything. You can only do
> so much and I feel I did everything I could (glitter is highly
> toxic - there is absolutely no limit to human stupidity.

When you gotta glow, you gotta glow, so glow little glowworm glow.

Congratulations on the birth of your daughter!

[Higgenbotham]

** 21-Apr-2020 Glitter




When you gotta glow, you gotta glow, so glow little glowworm glow.

Congratulations on the birth of your daughter!

Here she is in her glittery pants. All that glitters is gold.