Jump to content
G0ldfinger

Jim Sinclair thread (News & Views)

Recommended Posts

They will be auctioning these babies on Monday http://www.isda.org/companies/HellenicRepublicCDS/docs/ICM-14614675-v1-The_Hellenic_Republic_-_Initial_List.pdf

 

The Auction will set the final price of the Bonds and thus determine the payout.

 

If the Auction sets a price of say 30%, then only 70% of the net notional will be paid out.

 

I think there is more than one auction planned for Greece as there are a number of different types of bond. We will get a very good indication on Monday of the total payout.

Thanks for that.

Keep us posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good rationale for leaving:

"To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money. Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for."

 

It seems to fit in with the Fulford notion that the elite banksters see trouble lurking ahead for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Fed backstop was a guarantee of AIG's derivatives position (which I admit was a mess - they were outside the bank regulatory system, and using bizarre and inappropriate methods to value their derivatives.) Lehman's went bankrupt, and its derivative and other obligations were not backstopped by the Fed.

 

The Fed was dealing mainly with an excess of Fear. But they did not step in and take over derivative positions, only guaranteed those of AIG. As I said above, the mistake they made was guaranteeing 100%. They should have guaranteed 50-75% of the loss amounts - and then the actual amounts forked over would have been less. I think in hindsight even Fed employees would agree with my assessment.

 

The Fed backstop was a backstop of money market funds, AIG and the US banking system.

 

The concern is the correlation of the financial system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Fed backstop was a guarantee of AIG's derivatives position (which I admit was a mess - they were outside the bank regulatory system, and using bizarre and inappropriate methods to value their derivatives.) Lehman's went bankrupt, and its derivative and other obligations were not backstopped by the Fed.

 

The Fed was dealing mainly with an excess of Fear. But they did not step in and take over derivative positions, only guaranteed those of AIG. As I said above, the mistake they made was guaranteeing 100%. They should have guaranteed 50-75% of the loss amounts - and then the actual amounts forked over would have been less. I think in hindsight even Fed employees would agree with my assessment.

You are talking like the Lehmans filing and AIG bailout were two separate things but the chronology seriously suggests otherwise. It was Lehmans filing that screwed AIGs derivative book, and the belief at the time was that it would cause a cascade failure of the entire banking system. The policy response to prevent this financial armageddon was beyond anything previously imagined. Even if you would argue this was simply a bankster scam, it was not allowed to play out without intervention, and thus provides no evidence to suport the notion that a counterparty failure nets out to insignificance.

 

This is not a good example of how derivatives are actually pretty stable and not that big of a risk:

Lehmans filed on 15 Sept 2008

AIG bailed out by the Fed to the tune of $85 billion on 16 Sept 2008

Ben Bernanke asked Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson join him, to call on members of Congress, to describe the need for a congressionally authorized bailout of the nation's banking system ($700 billion) 17 September 2008

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are talking like the Lehmans filing and AIG bailout were two separate things but the chronology seriously suggests otherwise. It was Lehmans filing that screwed AIGs derivative book, and the belief at the time was that it would cause a cascade failure of the entire banking system. The policy response to prevent this financial armageddon was beyond anything previously imagined. Even if you would argue this was simply a bankster scam, it was not allowed to play out without intervention, and thus provides no evidence to suport the notion that a counterparty failure nets out to insignificance.

 

This is not a good example of how derivatives are actually pretty stable and not that big of a risk:

Lehmans filed on 15 Sept 2008

AIG bailed out by the Fed to the tune of $85 billion on 16 Sept 2008

Ben Bernanke asked Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson join him, to call on members of Congress, to describe the need for a congressionally authorized bailout of the nation's banking system ($700 billion) 17 September 2008

 

Sure.

When the Fed allowed Lehmans to go under, suddenly credit perceptions shifted dramatically.

AIG DID have a CDS problem, a huge one, because of the way it ran its books - They were not really hedging anything.

 

So they were highly, highly vulnerable to a spike up in credit risk.

 

Even so, it looks like the Government will eventually get back the money it lent to AIG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure.

When the Fed allowed Lehmans to go under, suddenly credit perceptions shifted dramatically.

AIG DID have a CDS problem, a huge one, because of the way it ran its books - They were not really hedging anything.

 

So they were highly, highly vulnerable to a spike up in credit risk.

 

Even so, it looks like the Government will eventually get back the money it lent to AIG.

 

As is every bank. Show me a bank with a credit businees and Ill show you a bank that loses money when risk appetite plunges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are talking like the Lehmans filing and AIG bailout were two separate things but the chronology seriously suggests otherwise. It was Lehmans filing that screwed AIGs derivative book, and the belief at the time was that it would cause a cascade failure of the entire banking system. The policy response to prevent this financial armageddon was beyond anything previously imagined. Even if you would argue this was simply a bankster scam, it was not allowed to play out without intervention, and thus provides no evidence to suport the notion that a counterparty failure nets out to insignificance.

 

This is not a good example of how derivatives are actually pretty stable and not that big of a risk:

Lehmans filed on 15 Sept 2008

AIG bailed out by the Fed to the tune of $85 billion on 16 Sept 2008

Ben Bernanke asked Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson join him, to call on members of Congress, to describe the need for a congressionally authorized bailout of the nation's banking system ($700 billion) 17 September 2008

 

Yep, you beat me to it.

 

It seems to me all the major players are leveraged to a single outlook ie.'the risk has been eliminated' and if anyone is allowed to go bankrupt the rest will go with them, because as has been said since, the letting go of Lehmans was the major mistake Paulson et al made. They at the time probably also thought 'it nets out to a small number'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, you beat me to it.

 

It seems to me all the major players are leveraged to a single outlook ie.'the risk has been eliminated' and if anyone is allowed to go bankrupt the rest will go with them, because as has been said since, the letting go of Lehmans was the major mistake Paulson et al made. They at the time probably also thought 'it nets out to a small number'.

Perhaps.

 

I think Bubb is technically correct to point out that it nets down to a relatively small (but still very large) number. So 100s of billions, rather than the supposed quadrillions. While that is many orders of magnitude less, I'm just not sure it makes that much difference when it unravels, assuming the banks/pension funds/insurance giants have many orders of magnitude less again set aside to cover losses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sinclair is a ....

 

You are a ....

 

Go figure who you think it is best to take advice from?

Thanks for making it easy, CIGA

 

I will suspend you for a week. It will be a different website by then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't delete this thread.

 

If we could just get back to posting Sinclair news etc that would be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't delete this thread.

If we could just get back to posting Sinclair news etc that would be good.

It is safe, Errol.

 

But I might change the title in a minor way.

(But not to show disrespect to Mr. S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we should start some threads on other people who we follow or like .

 

And might it be an idea to include people who are not investors Just thread on people we follow are listen too ?

Might be a M. P. , A reporter , a Guru , a writer or anything along these lines. We could share info and things that these people say, write.

 

Some of us might find another that we would like to follow. We may all get something out of it.

 

 

But if we do this then we should show respect for the forum member and the person that they follow.

 

I.E. If call me Joe or Bubb starts a thread on someone that some members think are a nut job. Then other members should not belittle that poster or the person. If you are not into the person then it would be best just to start away from the thread.

Its one thing to talk about and disagree with what has been posted but it's the abuse we could do without.

 

Just an idea anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we should start some threads on other people who we follow or like .

 

And might it be an idea to include people who are not investors Just thread on people we follow are listen too ?

Might be a M. P. , A reporter , a Guru , a writer or anything along these lines. We could share info and things that these people say, write.

 

Some of us might find another that we would like to follow. We may all get something out of it.

 

 

But if we do this then we should show respect for the forum member and the person that they follow.

 

I.E. If call me Joe or Bubb starts a thread on someone that some members think are a nut job. Then other members should not belittle that poster or the person. If you are not into the person then it would be best just to start away from the thread.

Its one thing to talk about and disagree with what has been posted but it's the abuse we could do without.

 

Just an idea anyway.

 

Are you Bubb? Are you his girlfriend? Are you related to him? Are you paid by Bubb to write this stuff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you Bubb? Are you his girlfriend? Are you related to him? Are you paid by Bubb to write this stuff?

Are you paid by someone else to attack people on GEI

 

The guy just wants the site to succeed. Do you want something else... for some reason?

 

I think you should be able to see from when he/she posts that he (?) resides in another location

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you Bubb? Are you his girlfriend? Are you related to him? Are you paid by Bubb to write this stuff?

 

 

No, Im not Bubb. Nor am i his Girlfriend. And he dose not pay me to write anything.

 

Bubbs been asking for ideas the last few weeks on how to make the site better for the users. Im just trying to to put some ideas into the mix. Thats all. Some my be good others will be bad.

 

The site has over 4000 members. Many do not post, Their maybe lots of reasons for this. But if we add new ideas, How a mix of points of view on different subjects it may help some of the non posting members to start posting. Some of them may be very interesting people. Who could add something to the already great info that has built up on this site over the years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you Bubb? Are you his girlfriend? Are you related to him? Are you paid by Bubb to write this stuff?

 

That is childish, tone it down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halight, your suggestions are good ones. I don't normally comment or respond to negative/distracting tosh such as that posted by d2thdr, I have better things to do with my time than wasting my time on people who like to waste time. Time is the most valuable commodity of all, don't forget.

 

It's unfortunate I don't have the time to "donate" myself as a Mod (maybe Bubb wouldn't want me as one anyway). I can tell you it would be a take no prisoners style approach. A month ban for that for starters, and if they are really that interested in GEi then when they come back perhaps they might engage a few brain cells and post something constructive next time round. It's a public forum, anyone can read it, no one wants to read tiresome rubbish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's unfortunate I don't have the time to "donate" myself as a Mod (maybe Bubb wouldn't want me as one anyway). I can tell you it would be a take no prisoners style approach. A month ban for that for starters, and if they are really that interested in GEi then when they come back perhaps they might engage a few brain cells and post something constructive next time round.

 

It's a public forum, anyone can read it, no one wants to read tiresome rubbish.

Haha.

Maybe I am far too lenient.

I would be please to have you as a Mod, if/when you have the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halight, your suggestions are good ones. I don't normally comment or respond to negative/distracting tosh such as that posted by d2thdr, I have better things to do with my time than wasting my time on people who like to waste time. Time is the most valuable commodity of all, don't forget.

 

It's unfortunate I don't have the time to "donate" myself as a Mod (maybe Bubb wouldn't want me as one anyway). I can tell you it would be a take no prisoners style approach. A month ban for that for starters, and if they are really that interested in GEi then when they come back perhaps they might engage a few brain cells and post something constructive next time round. It's a public forum, anyone can read it, no one wants to read tiresome rubbish.

 

 

Thank you for the positive feed back :) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iv only just started in the last two weeks to download the king world news. Not sure what I think about them yet. Their dose seem to be a bit of ramping on them But after all it is a bulls podcast so I do expect some of that. I have taken some info away from the ones that I have listened too. So I will for the time be carry on with them..

 

 

welcome to the dark side :lol:B)

 

Seriously KWN does have some good guests - Rick Rule (now why do I always think of 80's rappers in loud clothing when I hear that name) and John Hathaway are particulary good without being too contraversial. So is Bill Fleck.

 

Like you say it is a gold and silver bulls podcast but at least you know where they stand !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question for those who follow Jim Sinclair's work more closely that I. In his recent KWN interviews JS has said specifically that GOLD will be the last man standing along and I think he said the same for gold shares.

 

But.... no mention of silver ?

 

Is JS indifferent or anti silver - anyone know ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×