I added LULU too.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Monday, October 29, 2007
Food for thought
China may show the world lots of good things, but after I have been living in Beijing for the past 9 months, I think Chinese rich people are lack of the spirit found in the following quote.
"In other parts of the country, things like a great estate are the symbols people most respect," Sutton, a professor of management science and engineering at Stanford and co-founder of the Stanford Technology Ventures Program, said. "But here, the greatest status symbol is a person's ability," he added, to "still bring out hot new companies" and show that you are "working on the hot new technologies.""Here" is Silicon Vally. The above I quoted from "prematurely rich in Silicon Vally".
Splitting
Clearly the NASDAQ is only one leading us higher; The DOW, the S&P and the RUSSEL 2000 lag seriously behind. Who will win? Only the God knows.
Financials
This Banking index chart is not pretty and that is after the Fed's rate cut boost. I don't like a rally without the financials.
Sometimes, I DO agree with Jim Cramer
The following is from Jim Cramer's article "China bubble, so what" at Realmoney.com.
I don't care if China's a bubble. I care about making money. And that's one of the reasons why I am so disliked by so many "professionals" on Wall Street.
A couple of weeks ago when Baidu (BIDU - commentary - Cramer's Take - Rating) was at $209, I went on CNBC and talked about a conversation I had with Patrick Schultz, one of the fine researchers who work with me at TheStreet.com. Patrick had just completed a video with me in which he said Baidu could double and it would not be outrageous. He didn't say it would be cheap, he simply said it would not be outrageous. He even hinted that it could trade much higher than that.
No sooner did I finish the appearance on CNBC with my good friend Erin Burnett then I was bombarded by angry hedge fund managers who were short Baidu.
One went so far as -- holy cow! -- accusing me of doing "no homework." That, by the way, is always code: code for "you disagree with me and you are a nitwit because you do."
(In a line of total arrogance, albeit parenthetical, might I just say that I am always amazed at how stupid I am and how little homework I did and how many tens of millions I made in the market. I guess it shows that the more stupid you are and the less homework you do the more money you make.)
I initially tried to debate these poor, angry souls, but that is never worth it, because they are really just jealous that they are not on TV driving home their points and that my statements have just caused them to lose even more money.
That's OK, too. Being wrong costs money.
What amazed me, oddly, was that any of the critics really thought I believed that Baidu "deserved" to be at $500. I could care less what Baidu's worth. I care about what it could trade to. I couldn't care less if it is "overvalued." Of course it is overvalued. It was overvalued at $100, $200 and now $300. Oh, and stop trading, it will be overvalued at $400.
What I care about, as I said at the top of this piece, is making money, and sometimes you have to suspend the rules to make money if that's what you really want to do.
Some people want to be "right" and make money, and I am telling you that being right is not always the same as making money. Sometimes the really rigorous thing to do is to "suspend" your judgment temporarily and play the bubble because the money can be made so fast and it is so lucrative that it is worth playing.
"Aha, the intellectuals say, "how do you know when it will stop? How do you know you won't get caught in the bubble's bursting?" To which I say, "I don't know, who cares?" I think what is more important is that you choose the right instrument to play the bubble and play it whole-hog.
For example, if I really wanted to play Baidu I would have used stock replacement, I would have bought deep-in-the-money calls out a couple of months and then rolled them up each time it took out a new milestone. That way, in the end I am playing with house money and cutting my risk by accepting a 25-point loss -- typically the depth of the strike I pick -- in order to play the bubble. Again, I don't care that it is a bubble, I acknowledge that it is a bubble. I just want to be able to capitalize off the bubble rather than simply say "Nope, it is a bubble, I know better."
In the end, this is a fundamental difference between me and most others who have been at this game for a long time. It is why I was and will always be glad that I caught the last 2000 points in the Nazz in the 1999-2000 period even though I am reviled for not giving everyone the sell call or for staying bullish right up to the top and still recommending stocks. I don't know how else to do it. If you think I am going to sit on the sidelines and pass up 2000 Nazz points out of principle, you are nuts!
So, I say, criticize me all you want about recommending Baidu, or Focus Media (FMCN - commentary - Cramer's Take - Rating), or China Mobile (CHL - commentary - Cramer's Take) or PetroChina (PTR - commentary - Cramer's Take) -- the four horsemen of China -- I will ride them to the bank, and then I will give some back when the bubble bursts. But not before I have taken enough off while the critics sniffed.
Or, to put it more succinctly, they don't ask you at the bank whether you made it in Baidu.
They just take your money like any other deposit.
I don't care if China's a bubble. I care about making money. And that's one of the reasons why I am so disliked by so many "professionals" on Wall Street.
A couple of weeks ago when Baidu (BIDU - commentary - Cramer's Take - Rating) was at $209, I went on CNBC and talked about a conversation I had with Patrick Schultz, one of the fine researchers who work with me at TheStreet.com. Patrick had just completed a video with me in which he said Baidu could double and it would not be outrageous. He didn't say it would be cheap, he simply said it would not be outrageous. He even hinted that it could trade much higher than that.
No sooner did I finish the appearance on CNBC with my good friend Erin Burnett then I was bombarded by angry hedge fund managers who were short Baidu.
One went so far as -- holy cow! -- accusing me of doing "no homework." That, by the way, is always code: code for "you disagree with me and you are a nitwit because you do."
(In a line of total arrogance, albeit parenthetical, might I just say that I am always amazed at how stupid I am and how little homework I did and how many tens of millions I made in the market. I guess it shows that the more stupid you are and the less homework you do the more money you make.)
I initially tried to debate these poor, angry souls, but that is never worth it, because they are really just jealous that they are not on TV driving home their points and that my statements have just caused them to lose even more money.
That's OK, too. Being wrong costs money.
What amazed me, oddly, was that any of the critics really thought I believed that Baidu "deserved" to be at $500. I could care less what Baidu's worth. I care about what it could trade to. I couldn't care less if it is "overvalued." Of course it is overvalued. It was overvalued at $100, $200 and now $300. Oh, and stop trading, it will be overvalued at $400.
What I care about, as I said at the top of this piece, is making money, and sometimes you have to suspend the rules to make money if that's what you really want to do.
Some people want to be "right" and make money, and I am telling you that being right is not always the same as making money. Sometimes the really rigorous thing to do is to "suspend" your judgment temporarily and play the bubble because the money can be made so fast and it is so lucrative that it is worth playing.
"Aha, the intellectuals say, "how do you know when it will stop? How do you know you won't get caught in the bubble's bursting?" To which I say, "I don't know, who cares?" I think what is more important is that you choose the right instrument to play the bubble and play it whole-hog.
For example, if I really wanted to play Baidu I would have used stock replacement, I would have bought deep-in-the-money calls out a couple of months and then rolled them up each time it took out a new milestone. That way, in the end I am playing with house money and cutting my risk by accepting a 25-point loss -- typically the depth of the strike I pick -- in order to play the bubble. Again, I don't care that it is a bubble, I acknowledge that it is a bubble. I just want to be able to capitalize off the bubble rather than simply say "Nope, it is a bubble, I know better."
In the end, this is a fundamental difference between me and most others who have been at this game for a long time. It is why I was and will always be glad that I caught the last 2000 points in the Nazz in the 1999-2000 period even though I am reviled for not giving everyone the sell call or for staying bullish right up to the top and still recommending stocks. I don't know how else to do it. If you think I am going to sit on the sidelines and pass up 2000 Nazz points out of principle, you are nuts!
So, I say, criticize me all you want about recommending Baidu, or Focus Media (FMCN - commentary - Cramer's Take - Rating), or China Mobile (CHL - commentary - Cramer's Take) or PetroChina (PTR - commentary - Cramer's Take) -- the four horsemen of China -- I will ride them to the bank, and then I will give some back when the bubble bursts. But not before I have taken enough off while the critics sniffed.
Or, to put it more succinctly, they don't ask you at the bank whether you made it in Baidu.
They just take your money like any other deposit.
Friday, October 26, 2007
What am I going to buy?
I have not recommended any stocks in my newsletter for days. When the market gets better, which I think it will be soon, I like all the solar names and Chinese names. BIDU and WFR are two names I pick today.
NASDAQ daily
If we can close above 2800, I would say the decline is over. Anyway, even though it seems it may fail today, I do think the brighter tomorrow is around the corner.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Stop saves me again
After hour RVBD is trading at $38, another example why we should not gamble the earning.
Blocked again, damn!
I knew Blogspot will be blocked again, just did not think this soon. China immediately blocks Blogspot after the Communist Party of China (CPC) closed its 17th National Congress on Sunday. So much for democracy.
Monday, October 22, 2007
What did I say?
Thursday's decline tells me the short term top has showed up, in the mean time the earning season has started. Tighten stops, we are into consolidation period.Above is what I wrote in Oct 13's newsletter.
NASDAQ
This is what I told my members over the weekend, today's low is 2698 so far. I still treat it as a retreat in a bull market. Don't be too bearish.
Friday, October 19, 2007
Unblocking
Forget to mention, China just unblocked Blogspot recently. Feel so good when they did that. But they may block it again any day from now.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Updated
Please go check "winners" and "losers" to the right, I just updated my recent trades that I think they are remarkable.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Monday, October 8, 2007
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Crazy
This is crazy. If I could borrow shares, I would short it here. This kind of price movement makes me worried, I guess recent rally is closer to an end.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)