The Stock Market thread

[flere-imsaho]

Well, at least they won't have to pay taxes on net income for a couple of decades.

[Edward64]

Fugly Futures

Dow -1.7%
S&P -2.7%
Nasdaq -3.2%

[RainMaker]

It could be worse, you could have your money in the ruble.

[Edward64]

Weird, they are back up strongly. I check MarketWatch: Stock Market News - Financial News - MarketWatch. Just so you know I wasn't BS'ing you guys

U.S. stock-index futures tumbled late Sunday after President Vladimir Putin raised Russia’s nuclear alert level following stinging new sanctions from the West over the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Dow Jones Industrial Average futures YM00, -1.26% plunged more than 500 points immediately after trading began late Sunday, but recovered somewhat and were last down around 400 points, while S&P 500 futures ES00, -2.19% and Nasdaq-100 futures NQ00, -2.49% fell even more sharply.

But checking futures now and they are:

Dow +2.5%
S&P +2.2%
Nasdaq +1.6%

Not going to complain ...

[Flasch186]

Not on my screen


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Yup, back to all red ranging from -1.7% to -2.7%.

[sterlingice]

Could be worse. Could be Russian stock market

SI

[Lathum]

Crypto going crazy. Rumor I heard is people putting their money there instead of rubles.

[JPhillips]

How do the legit crypto exchanges deal with the international sanctions?

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

How do the legit crypto exchanges deal with the international sanctions?

Some of the exchanges are willing to work with governments and accept certain regulations, but it's not that hard to get around and the system also supports essentially anonymous peer-to-peer transactions.

Iran's been working around this for years and if it weren't for Putin's distrust of the system, Russia would be far, far ahead of anyone in that game by now.

Basically, to answer your question, Bitcoin is up close to 20% today alone.

[JPhillips]

I was thinking of places like Coinbase that rely on the transactions between real currencies and crypto. How do those places make sure they don't end up out of business through sanctions violations?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I was thinking of places like Coinbase that rely on the transactions between real currencies and crypto. How do those places make sure they don't end up out of business through sanctions violations?

Those places are for people who want to feel comfortable using a streamlined platform that is at least on the surface reputable. No one who does serious trading is using them because the fees are crazy. I was going to buy 5K on Coinbase the other day and they wanted $150 in fees so I went elsewhere.

[Edward64]

FWIW, regarding crypto

Can Russia use cryptocurrencies to evade Western sanctions? Likely, to some extent, but it’s 'very hard to do at scale,' says one analyst - MarketWatch

The ability to move cash through crypto would “definitely be some level of buffering,” Rance Mashek, president and founder of trading platform iVest+ told MarketWatch in an interview.

“Unless the Russian companies are on the sanctions list, we can’t see anything that would keep a US-based company from paying a Russian company through crypto to just transact,” Mashek said.

Ari Redbord, head of legal and government affairs at blockchain intelligence firm TRM Labs, echoed the point, saying that “there is no question in my mind that Russia will attempt to use cryptocurrency to launder funds and evade sanctions.”

However, “it’s very, very hard to do at scale,” said Redbord, who once worked as a senior adviser to the undersecretary for U.S. terrorism and financial intelligence. “The liquidity is just not there,” Redbord said. The war is likely to “require billions of dollars and it is very hard to off ramp billions of dollars of crypto.”

“They will find ways to do it. It just can’t be in the huge amounts that would come anywhere near replacing or getting close to replacing what they’re essentially losing with the sanctions that have been imposed,” Redbord said.

[flere-imsaho]

I was under the impression that one of the features of blockchain was that everyone with access to it could see the genuine history of transactions and this couldn't be forged?

If so, I don't see how crypto would work for this use case. It works until someone finds out that you, an American citizen, executed a transaction with a sanctioned Russian counterparty. Then you, the American citizen (or institution) are in a world of trouble.

[Edward64]

So 2 questions:

1) Should I buy some Russian energy penny stocks now? Seem like a good bet for long term - 5+ years. I guess bankruptcy is a real possibility though

2) Is it ethical to buy Russian energy penny stocks? I think the answer is no but just wondering

Gazprom, Lukoil and Sberbank are now penny stocks as Russian companies collapse in London - MarketWatch

Russian natural-gas giant Gazprom, oil-producer Lukoil and leading bank Sberbank are all penny stocks based on their trading on the London Stock Exchange, as the local market was shut for a third day.

Sberbank SBER, -78.43%, which had assets of over $500 billion at the end of 2021, was trading for 3 cents a share in afternoon action. The European Commission on Wednesday approved the resolution plan for its Croatian and Slovenian arms that will be sold. Its Austrian and Czech operations will be wound down, with depositors compensated up to €100,000.

Lukoil LKOD, -93.23%, Gazprom OGZD, -23.50%, and Rosneft Oil ROSN, -77.71% continued to collapse as the dollar-denominated secondary listings in London remained the one venue where Russia’s top companies could be valued.

[molson]

I don't think you can ethically put money into Russia when even American corporations are puling out.

I'm not a super-vested ethical investing or consumerism kind of person but, this is way over the line.

[sovereignstar v2]

Pretty sure you can't even buy them.

[sterlingice]

FWIW, the WSB crowd was pondering this today but the conventional wisdom was that you can't buy and sell on the Russian exchange and the stock certs on other exchanges are essentially worthless. Then again, it's from WSB so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

SI

[Ksyrup]

Epic Games bought Bandcamp. Interesting to see how they expand on Bandcamp's model. And I hope they don't screw up what Bandcamp currently does.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

So 2 questions:

1) Should I buy some Russian energy penny stocks now? Seem like a good bet for long term - 5+ years. I guess bankruptcy is a real possibility though

2) Is it ethical to buy Russian energy penny stocks? I think the answer is no but just wondering

Gazprom, Lukoil and Sberbank are now penny stocks as Russian companies collapse in London - MarketWatch

The concern is that they'll just nationalize the companies and you'll lose everything you invested.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Epic Games bought Bandcamp. Interesting to see how they expand on Bandcamp's model. And I hope they don't screw up what Bandcamp currently does.

Does anyone stick a flute in their pussy?

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Edward64

So 2 questions:

1) Should I buy some Russian energy penny stocks now? Seem like a good bet for long term - 5+ years. I guess bankruptcy is a real possibility though

2) Is it ethical to buy Russian energy penny stocks? I think the answer is no but just wondering

Think of it this way. What if you are one of only a few people who buys up large quantities of the stock, but Russia props it up somehow because so much of the world is dependent on Russian energy and all of a sudden, five years from now, trading begins again and you're an instant millionaire?

Do you congratulate yourself on a small investment that probably didn't change anything in Ukraine but changed your life? Or do you end up just donating the money to a country that's trying to rebuild its basic infrastructure and could really use the help.

If the latter, then why not just put the money in a low-risk fund today and save it for when Ukraine is trying to rebuild? If the former, then, yeah, not much question in my mind that it's not ethical.

In reality, there are 6,000 20-somethings who have had bots running for about a week now that have already cornered whatever market exists that has the potential to explode over this issue. If it does, invest in the cocaine and luxury automobile market.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Think of it this way. What if you are one of only a few people who buys up large quantities of the stock, but Russia props it up somehow because so much of the world is dependent on Russian energy and all of a sudden, five years from now, trading begins again and you're an instant millionaire?

Do you congratulate yourself on a small investment that probably didn't change anything in Ukraine but changed your life? Or do you end up just donating the money to a country that's trying to rebuild its basic infrastructure and could really use the help.

If the latter, then why not just put the money in a low-risk fund today and save it for when Ukraine is trying to rebuild? If the former, then, yeah, not much question in my mind that it's not ethical.

In reality, there are 6,000 20-somethings who have had bots running for about a week now that have already cornered whatever market exists that has the potential to explode over this issue. If it does, invest in the cocaine and luxury automobile market.

Its the former. Yeah, I was thinking not ethical but hoping someone would have a good argument that it didn't matter.

[Edward64]

I know the Russian stock market is closed this week, and am guessing it'll stay closed next week. An article I read said when it opens, there'll be a big crash and therefore, just as well keep it closed for now. However, the price paid is lack of investor confidence for a long time.


Now about the US markets. I'd think it would be going much lower too. Lots of Russian business lost etc. Lots of future Russian business likely going to China, maybe India etc. Oil prices going up. Even hint of nuclear threat etc.

But the US markets are doing decent. Supposedly because of ...

Why the stock market refuses to plunge on Russia-Ukraine crisis

Market pros say that investors are looking beyond all the headline chaos and remain fixated on the king daddy of factors that tend to upset stock price valuations.

Higher interest rates from the Federal Reserve. Weird stuff, right?

"One of the reasons why the stock market has held up so well is belief that the Fed will not be as aggressive in their new tightening policy as some were thinking they would be before the crisis in eastern Europe erupted. So if we get some positive reinforcement on this subject, the stock market could hold up (or even bounce) for a while," said Miller Tabak chief markets strategist Matt Maley.

Maley is on the mark here, judging by the positive reaction in stock prices to fresh commentary from Fed chief Jerome Powell in his testimony to lawmakers today.

“The bottom line is we will proceed but we will proceed carefully as we learn more about the implications of the Ukraine war,” Powell told the House Financial Services Committee.

Yahoo Finance Fed correspondent Brian Cheung points out Powell said he supports increasing short-term interest rates by 0.25% in the next policy-setting meeting on March 15 and 16.

Coming into March, most market experts were bracing for a 50-basis rate hike at the March meeting followed by eight to 10 more increases in rates into year-end. But Powell has officially reset the narrative, and investors love it.

[albionmoonlight]

Investors are terrible at forecasting wars | The Economist

[Edward64]

Man, all I can say is the first 2 months have sucked. Really sucked.

[Edward64]

Been wondering when the Russian stock exchange will reopen and what will happen after. Prob won't open next week, and there will be a big crash right after it does.

If I was Russian and had money in MOEX, would I sell or would I just wait to see what happens, hoping that it'll go back up slowly? HODL might be good. Also, can investors deduct their losses on their taxes?

I doubt anyone really has any answers right now. Just an interesting conundrum if I was Russian invested in the market. If a regular Russian investor is near retirement, he is totally frakked.

Thinking also about the people my company is going to let go. Hard enough to find a decent job in Russia but prob impossible now to find an equivalent position (or any). Regular Russians are so frakked.

[Edward64]

Some good news this morning. Futures are up strongly today on with Zelenskyy stating reality about NATO membership and continued talks.

Dow futures jump more than 400 points on hopes for Russia-Ukraine talks - MarketWatch

U.S. stock futures rallied Wednesday more on hope than reality, as Russia continued to shell Ukraine ahead of a key diplomatic meeting.

Futures on the Dow Jones Industrial Average YM00, 1.44% rose 456 points, or 1.4%, to 33058

Futures on the S&P 500 ES00, 1.60% gained 1.6%, or 67 points, to 4236

Futures on the Nasdaq 100 NQ00, 1.96% gained 2%, or 259 points, to 13526

On Tuesday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, -0.56% fell 185 points, or 0.56%, to 32633, the S&P 500 SPX, -0.72% declined 30 points, or 0.72%, to 4171, and the Nasdaq Composite COMP, -0.28% dropped 35 points, or 0.28%, to 12796.

The S&P 500 has dropped nearly 5% over the last four sessions.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Edward64

My portfolio is still pretty bruised from Jan but past couple days has helped.

House price on Zillow has continued to creep up. We're past the target that we said we would sell the house, pocket the profits, and go live in an apartment (or travel trailer). Reality though is probably have to wait until daughter finishes college, finds a job, and settle in somewhere.

FWIW read the below article on MS vs FB metaverse experience. I do think it'll be a big thing in the next 10-20 years.

I tested Meta and Microsoft’s metaverse apps — which one is closest to ‘Ready Player One’? | Laptop Mag

From about month ago, checked zillow again today and another nice bump since then. Don't see any houses for sale in zillow map for my neighborhood.

We've set another "will sell and move into an apartment" target price. I won't be surprised if we exceed that one as well in a years time.

[Edward64]

What a great day.

Now all we need is another 5-6 of these to come back to even.

[GrantDawg]

Someone just pointed out to me how easy it is to launder money using NFT's and now I understand how it is a thing.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Not sure what to make of it but why should the US have all the fun.

Panic Selling Grips Chinese Stocks in Biggest Plunge Since 2008

The Hang Seng China Enterprises Index closed down 7.2% on Monday, the biggest drop since November 2008. The Hang Sang Tech Index tumbled 11% in its worst decline since the gauge was launched in July 2020, wiping out $2.1 trillion in value since a year-earlier peak.

The broad rout follows a report citing U.S. officials that Russia has asked China for military assistance for its war in Ukraine. Even as China denied the report, traders worry that Beijing’s potential overture toward Vladimir Putin could bring a global backlash against Chinese firms, even sanctions. Sentiment was also hurt by a Covid-induced lockdown in the southern city of Shenzhen, a key tech hub, and the northern province of Jilin.
:
“If the U.S. decides to impose sanctions on China in total or on individual Chinese companies doing business with Russia, that would be a concern,” said Mark Mobius, who set up Mobius Capital Partners after more than three decades at Franklin Templeton Investments. “The whole story is still up in the air in this case.”

Investors have reason to be jittery after several big-name funds reported significant losses related to Russia. BlackRock Inc.’s funds exposed to Russia have plunged by $17 billion since the war began.

On Friday, the Golden Dragon Index, which tracks American depository receipts of Chinese firms, slumped 10% for a second consecutive day -- something that’s never happened before in its 22-year history. It slumped 18% last week, its steepest decline since at least 2001. China’s benchmark CSI 300 Index closed 3.1% lower on Monday. The onshore yuan also fell to its weakest in a month as sentiment toward Chinese assets turned sour.

[Edward64]

Two nice days in a row. I remember reading the possibility of Fed going with .5 basis points causing some concern. So .25 basis points is probably a relief. Still a long slog to fight inflation.

[lungs]

Back in the green overall. Warren Buffett has pulled me out of the hole that Cathie Wood dug for me. ARK to BRK.B was a good move a few months back.

Crypto seems to be trending up short term also. My “Do The Opposite of Reddit” strategy will hopefully pay off. My dollars invested in crypto has a negative correlation to the amount of posts in the Cryptocurrency subreddit. So far so good.

[Edward64]

Back to green as in from last Nov when it started to tank? I'm still about 10-15% down from that high.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Back to green as in from last Nov when it started to tank? I'm still about 10-15% down from that high.

No, I started my 'for fun' account right around the time of the Covid crash back in 2020. I'm down around 8% from November but gains not realized don't count

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by lungs

No, I started my 'for fun' account right around the time of the Covid crash back in 2020. I'm down around 8% from November but gains not realized don't count

Thanks for the clarification, I was thinking WTF am I doing wrong.

[Edward64]

Markets rise today after Fed tough talk and increased likelihood of +50 basis point increase in next couple months. It was this type of talk that had the markets tanking late last year.

I guess the markets like the tough love now and are bought in that it is needed.

Transitory inflation. Powell won't live that down.

[Edward64]

Looks like the markets are stabilizing some. Last week was good. Mon had some losses in the morning but recovered nicely.

I'm hoping the Ukraine situation and Fed more aggressive stance have now been factored into the markets, and we can go two steps forward, one step back (vs the other way the past 3 months).

I did look at my portfolio this past weekend. I'm down approx 7% YTD but this is with 401k contributions, so it's higher losses. But TBH, I'm glad its not worse.

[Edward64]

Nice win for the S&P 500. Let's hope this follows the norm for some additional gains.

The S&P 500 index exited market-correction territory Tuesday, a move that has tended to point to near- and medium-term gains for the U.S. large-cap benchmark in the past.

[flere-imsaho]

I'm still not in love with the P:E ratio: S&P 500 PE Ratio

There's still a lot of very overvalued stuff out there. The question is going to be whether the overvaluations can correct (e.g. return to semblance of sanity) without taking everyone else out with them.

[Edward64]

Fugly Joe, really fugly.

Maybe proposed the BBB $1.9T bill again to spend us out of this?

[Edward64]

Don't own any Netflix and don't think any of my MF/ETFs had a significant portion. It's probably time to move on from FAANG, drop Netflix and Facebook. I don't see Netflix increasing subscribers with all the competition now. Facebook/Meta maybe if their VR plays out but that will take several more years.

Netflix on Tuesday reported a loss of 200,000 subscribers during the first quarter — its first decline in paid users in more than a decade — and warned of deepening trouble ahead.

The company’s shares cratered more than 25% in extended hours after the report on more than a full day’s worth of trading volume. Fellow streaming stocks Roku, Spotify and Disney also tumbled in the after-hours market after Netflix’s brutal update.

Netflix is forecasting a global paid subscriber loss of 2 million for the second quarter. The last time Netflix lost subscribers was October 2011.

“Our revenue growth has slowed considerably,” the company wrote in a letter to shareholders Tuesday. “Streaming is winning over linear, as we predicted, and Netflix titles are very popular globally. However, our relatively high household penetration — when including the large number of households sharing accounts — combined with competition, is creating revenue growth headwinds.”

Netflix previously told shareholders it expected to add 2.5 million net subscribers during the first quarter. Analysts had predicted that number would be closer to 2.7 million. During the same period a year ago, Netflix added 3.98 million paid users.

[Ksyrup]

I can only assume the Netflix news is going to accelerate their push to enforce household rules on PW sharing or maybe cutting down the number of users to 2 for a basic membership and charging more for multiple users. Not sure how they would differentiate between my kid logging in at college versus sharing my login info with remote extended family. Or, my older kid transitioning to adulthood and still sharing my account.

If they are going to charge $20 a month AND put ads in, there will be a revolt. Personally I don't use it enough to keep it. My kids can get their own subscription and pay for it themselves.

[Fidatelo]

I think Netflix is in a death spiral they won't get out of.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

If they are going to charge $20 a month AND put ads in, there will be a revolt. Personally I don't use it enough to keep it. My kids can get their own subscription and pay for it themselves.

I think ads would kill them (and pretty much every other streaming service).

Better to increase subscription fees a few dollars at a time. That is less noticeable than ads.

As it is, if I am watching ads on anything other than live sports, I want to punch a hole through the TV. And I grew up with ads. The younger generation simply won't tolerate them.

(Of course they are exposed to billion of online ads constantly, and they don't notice or care. I am talking about the traditional "listen to this guy try to sell you a car for 30 seconds before your show comes on" ads.)

[Ksyrup]

I wonder if they could get away with adding a premium subscription option for, say, $30-35 that eliminates ads, but includes them on the "basic" subscription.

Personally, I'd like to see some of these things fail. Not because the content isn't good, but this new exclusivity model sucks. There's cord cutting, which I totally get, and then there's all of these exclusive streaming packages which, when combined, are far worse than the old cable/satellite TV options.

I haven't cut the cord because I can't justify the hassle of managing 2-3 streaming services with unique channel lineups, number of screens, and DVR options to mirror what I can get from DirecTV right now. Last time I checked, I'd save maybe $25 a month, but that's not worth the trouble. However, regardless of whether you've got cable/satellite or one or more streaming services, having to then add multiple subscriptions for exclusive content absolutely sucks. I've only gotten ESPN+ because I get my money's worth out of that just for college sports. There is a lot of content I'd likely watch on Peacock, Disney+, Paramount+ and Discovery+ that I'm just ignoring because I'm not going to build an entirely separate "streaming package" that could cost upwards of $50-75 a month in addition to the "normal" channels I already pay for.

I feel like this is one area I'd love for consumers to unite on to make all of these streaming services have to change their models. A pipe dream, I know, but it's only going to get worse if we keep feeding the monster. Discovery has cable channels - put your freaking content on there, not behind a second paywall. So far, I've held firm.

[Pyser]

raising prices forever is not a strategy. thats how you end up like the movie theater model.

also, netflix isnt going to insert ads at the pricepoint they are at. they will add an offering with ads at a cheaper price point. no one is paying 30 a month (unless they keep raising no ad prices)

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I wonder if they could get away with adding a premium subscription option for, say, $30-35 that eliminates ads, but includes them on the "basic" subscription.

Personally, I'd like to see some of these things fail. Not because the content isn't good, but this new exclusivity model sucks. There's cord cutting, which I totally get, and then there's all of these exclusive streaming packages which, when combined, are far worse than the old cable/satellite TV options.

I haven't cut the cord because I can't justify the hassle of managing 2-3 streaming services with unique channel lineups, number of screens, and DVR options to mirror what I can get from DirecTV right now. Last time I checked, I'd save maybe $25 a month, but that's not worth the trouble. However, regardless of whether you've got cable/satellite or one or more streaming services, having to then add multiple subscriptions for exclusive content absolutely sucks. I've only gotten ESPN+ because I get my money's worth out of that just for college sports. There is a lot of content I'd likely watch on Peacock, Disney+, Paramount+ and Discovery+ that I'm just ignoring because I'm not going to build an entirely separate "streaming package" that could cost upwards of $50-75 a month in addition to the "normal" channels I already pay for.

I feel like this is one area I'd love for consumers to unite on to make all of these streaming services have to change their models. A pipe dream, I know, but it's only going to get worse if we keep feeding the monster. Discovery has cable channels - put your freaking content on there, not behind a second paywall. So far, I've held firm.

the market has become saturated enough that there are plenty of options and I think you're right on the money that the exclusivity kills everything. We still have cable, and keep our premiums and streaming services because it's our #1 family activity. But Hulu/Netflix/Amazon start pushing into cable rate range, and you'll see those models cut down substantially I think. you'll need to have some other partnerships and combinations to make the packages viable, like you see with cable. Then maybe you'll see things start to break down again after that into cheaper, and smaller bundles.

[Ksyrup]

It's like the XBox/Playstation game exclusivity on steroids. I suppose the companies get a net win when they crunch the numbers to make it worth it, but the customer experience is sacrificed.

Also somewhat like MLB - they've monetized so many new and different revenue streams that the game is financially sound (despite what they publicly claim), but there's no desire to improve the product on the field for the fan's enjoyment or attempt to push for new customers when they keep finding more ways to monetize the existing (and even shrinking) market share they have.