Seeing more reports of Obamacare "navigators" encouraging those who are trying to maximize their "Subsidy" with ObamaCare to minimize their reported earned-income...
... and claim they don't smoke, when in fact, they do.
Separately, Labor Unions are lobbying to be exempted from being forced to comply with Obamacare.
Reports are that if Big Labor is exempted, it will raise the "risk pool" and generate another surge in premiums next year for hard-working, Middle Class Americans who are not part of an Obama-favored, exempted group (eg: YOU).
Saw an article today saying that Colleges and Universities that have traditionally provided students with low cost coverage are cancelling their health insurance programs.
In general, the cost for Students was reported to be surging by 400% to as much as 1,500%...
... and forcing them to obtain coverage that is far more than they need or want.
Last year, Dr. Laffer of the University of Southern California Economics Dept. did a study.
He took a Single, mother of 2 children in New Jersey with no job, and added up the Social Welfare Benefits that she qualified for. The sum total was about $46,000 per year in benefits.
He then determined that if she got a job and started making money, that for every $1.00 that she earned, on average, she would lose about 80 cents of benefits.
She was, in effect, in an 80% marginal tax bracket. She would be INSANE to go out and get a job. If she worked at all, there would be a POWERFUL incentive to work "under the table", and contribute zero dollars to America's tax base.
Our New Jersey Mother can now get an Obamacare "Platinum" policy for less than $50 a month... whereas your average middle-class breadwinner working 2 jobs would be paying 10 TIMES that much for an inferior "bronze" Obamacare policy.
What does this mean for Dr. Laffer's analogy above? It means she would be even CRAZIER to go out and get a legitimate jobs, because when you factor in the Obamacare subsidy she would lose by making money at a job, she would then be losing over 90 CENTS in benefits for every $1.00 she earned working.
Hope this helps... we're Greece people, we just havn't hit the wall yet.
Appeared to mirror the market. I would postulate that it's normal beta.
Same with SCHYY... mostly mirrored the huge surge in the Hang Seng Index.
No reaction in US markets to the surge in Hong Kong's Hang Seng Index, or China's Shanghai Index.
The moves in Sands China Ltd. and LVS appeared to be pretty much aligned with normal beta.
... then it will lower the number of "payors" into the system while the number of "takers" remains the same...
... and jack up the premiums on the REST of us Middle Class Taxapayers even HIGHER.
... they don't want Obamacare any more than ANY Middle Class American does.
Because Big Labor helped Obama get elected, it's starting to look like they'll get "special treatment"... eg: an exemption from the horrors of Obamacare's sky-rocketing premiums.
The rest of you Middle Class Taxpayers will just have to do what Obamacare's "navigators" are telling people to do...
... lie about your income and smoking habits and snag a big, fat, government subsidy!
Oh, if our Grandparents can see America now! Greece in the Making.
Actually, I saw a channel check come out today for MTD November for the SAR.
They were showing a 20% YOY gain in GGR for macau so far.
Again, I'm willing to bet that Sands is doing better than the 20% share they got in Oct. for the reasons I've stated... but no mention of that in the Channel check.
Good news, given that early estimates were in the 17 to 18% range.
As I've postulated elsewhere, I believe the weaker months (eg: not holiday months) will play better to Sand's market share, because I think the hotel vacancies that are most likely during weaker months will mostly be downtown, non-gaming hotels...
... and NOT Cotai Strip hotel rooms.
For that reason, I don't anticipate Sand's market share to outperform when throngs arrive in macau during holidays and grab the only hotel accomodation available... downtown within blocks of non-Sands resorts.
But people coming during less busy periods will certainly be inclined to "stay where they play", and keep occupancies "consistently" higher on the Cotai Strip.
I'm betting that November is one of those months.
There is speculation that ACAS will spin off into 2 companies next year.
ObamaCare offers one more reason to do so.
The Affordable (sic) Care Act exempts companies with fewer than 50 employees, and the way it's looking now, the "employer mandate" that is set to take effect next fall has companies scrambling... mostly by reducing hours and classifying employees as "part time" (another way to get an exemption for some employees).
If ACAS splits into 2 companies, it gets the resulting 2 companies each MUCH closer to the 50-employee threshhold for ACA exemption...
... and when a few more employees are spun off into the operating companies in the portfolios, plus a few more that are let go and hired back as "independent contractors", and voila!... Liberation.
Problem is, that just raises the cost of the insurable-pool for the rest of us Middle Class Americans buying health insurance on the ACA mandated exchanges, and another big surge in our premiums in 2015 that will likely rival the skyrocketing costs we're absorbing for 2014.
Without going into a lot of detail, I might toss out Transocean (RIG).
Transocean is cheap, like ACAS, but it's income is surging and it's drilling backlog is rising nicely. It also pays a dividend over 5%.
ACAS is also cheap, but both it's NOI and NAV are flat-lining, it pays no dividend, and it's been sitting at a 20 to 30% discount to NAV seemingly forever.
Maybe Big Shot Investors can give you some Guidance here...
... John Paulson bailed out of ACAS, whereas Carl Icahn has been doubling-down on Transocean.
Hope this helps,
It still baffles me:
I work 2 jobs, and my insurance company is telling me that I'll have to pay about $570 a month for my Obamacare "bronze" policy... whereas, my brother in law, who quit his job last year, is able to snag an Obamacare "gold" policy for about $60 a month.
My reward for working hard and paying lots of income taxes... is a WORST policy for almost 10 times the cost!
The reason for this is because of Socialism's primary creed: "equal outcomes"... not "equal opportunity".
Obama's primary goal is to help the poor enough to dis-incentivize them from the need to go out and get ahead. A cheap, Obamacare "gold" policy would become out of reach if someone made too much money to get the subsidy. The same dis-incentives are evident with a high minimum wage... if you can make $9.19 an hour doing mindless labor, why put in twice the effort and job stress to make $13 or $14 when that will start hammering your free money from the Earned Income Tax Credit, your food stamps, and now it's also going to cut substantially into the cost of your superior health insurance too...
... and maybe even force you to move to the "inferior" health insurance that is the only health insurance that hard-working, middle class Americans can afford to buy.
Hope this helps,
If they raise down payment requirements in the impacted cities, and lower them in the Ghost cities, then what will the Shanghai home-buyer-wanna-be do if he can't afford the down payment in Shanghai, Doesn't want to move to a Ghost city, and the Shanghai Stock Index is still under 2300?
As encroaching socialism continues the slow, methodical trend toward a more impoverished America...
... then gasoline prices will continue to increase their impact on the wherewithal for americans to spend money on anything else, since they'll be increasingly living paycheck-to-paycheck...
... or, in the case of the Middle Class... health-insurance-premium-to health-insurance-premium.
Back in the days that we could post links in our posts, I would sometimes post a link to a graph on the yahoo site for a specific company that would include comparison graphics overlayed as you are trying to do.
Alas, such functionality was destroyed by Yahoo's "improvements" (sic).
CP, I would use a 3-month moving average to more accurately establish the trend, for starters.
Secondly, I believe Sand's 22.8% share for August and Sept. combined is a post-recession high for ANY 2 month period, by quite a margin.
Finally, I think October worked against Sands because I think their Cotai occupancy was pretty high in Sept/Oct. and it was hard to improve on that much at 100% occupancy given the throngs that accompanied Golden Week.
What I mean by that is that if the Golden Week throngs couldn't get a room on Cotai, they would rent rooms outside of the resorts downtown instead, which is where the only vacancies EXIST during such events...
... and, of course, staying downtown means playing there more as well, boosting downtown share near those otherwise high-vacancy accommodations.
Bottom line: I think the every day desirability of Cotai, combined with Sand's huge hotel inventory there, is going to do FAR more to establish a high, minimum level of patronage during slow times, than it is to establish outsized market share during the SAR's busiest times. The more we see Sand's occupancy maintain high percentages through thick and thin, the more that's going to hold true... and I think we're approaching that this fall.