Thu, Apr 17, 2014, 11:48 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

TORM A/S Message Board

h5n1eric 20 posts  |  Last Activity: Feb 24, 2014 11:15 AM Member since: Jan 15, 2009
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • I was looking at their website and could not find any tax treatment info on the preferred dividends for 2013 - i.e. whether the dividends have any 'return of capital' as part of the dividends, deferred from taxes? It's not something either good or bad...I was just wondering...I went ahead and bought some LTS-A today...seems like a decent 8.75% FIXED return, at today's price. I have other preferreds in NRF / RSO and have been happy with the cash flows...I just desired to spread some money into some others. (ps...I hold mine within an IRA so I don't have issues with "roc", but others I know who operate outside an IRA have to handle the 'roc' issues...but nothing major. thanks

  • Reply to

    YIPPEE!!!!--all common = ROC

    by dar200 Feb 21, 2014 1:24 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Feb 23, 2014 2:18 PM Flag

    thanks for the reminder...I'm within an IRA, so I don't tend to need that info...but my dad needed things. I don't know if his USAA breaks down 'what's subject to tax...and what's tax deferred, via 'roc'...Anyway, I looked up the websites of 3 companies (and tax treatements of preferred divys)...NRF , as you said, has about 83% deferred from being taxed....RAS was about 50:50...taxable/deferred...and RSO was 100% taxable, it appeared....I guess I worry about my dad's handling of his taxes...he's 93...but still sharp . As someone did say tho, you do have to adjust the cost basis on your shares for the tax deferred portion (if not in an IRA)...but then there's the step-up rule...on inheritance...which is sweet, as long as the company does not expiure them before you expire ! My son wants the step-up rule !!

  • h5n1eric h5n1eric Feb 11, 2014 1:49 PM Flag

    and who made it EVEN WORSE?...taking it back to multi-decade lows, not seen since the 1970's...to today? ouch (O...THE LOSER)

  • "House Republicans voted early Sunday morning in favor of a temporary spending bill that includes a one-year delay for ObamaCare, a move that increases the chance of a government shutdown with Senate Democrats and the White House vowing to reject the measure ahead of a Monday night deadline.

    "To be absolutely clear, the Senate will reject the one-year delay of the Affordable Care Act ," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

    Within minutes, the White House vowed President Obama would veto the plan, resulting in the federal government technically running out of money Monday night and forcing a partial shutdown.

    Failure to pass a short-term funding bill – also known as continuing resolution -- would mean the first partial government shutdown in almost 20 years.



    “ObamaCare is not ready, and the delay is essential,” California GOP Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Affairs, said.

    ***and after 17 days of a govt shutdown over "this", Obama comes out NOW and 'agrees' with what the Republicans had passed in the House six months ago??...This is crazy. Seems like the Republicans were correct....right?

    ps - this is why I really try to watch less TV and try to ignore things...do gardening, etc...The world has gone 'mad'...I get the idea it's some sort of organic brain syndrome caused by plasticizer in plastic bottles...or maybe aluminum cans?...or perhaps cell phone usage is 'frying' brains? This is like watching some bad comedy....and sadly, people still vote for the idiots. (you decide...I'm a Libertarian)

  • "House Republicans voted early Sunday morning in favor of a temporary spending bill that includes a one-year delay for ObamaCare, a move that increases the chance of a government shutdown with Senate Democrats and the White House vowing to reject the measure ahead of a Monday night deadline.

    "To be absolutely clear, the Senate will reject the one-year delay of the Affordable Care Act ," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

    Within minutes, the White House vowed President Obama would veto the plan, resulting in the federal government technically running out of money Monday night and forcing a partial shutdown.

    Failure to pass a short-term funding bill – also known as continuing resolution -- would mean the first partial government shutdown in almost 20 years.



    “ObamaCare is not ready, and the delay is essential,” California GOP Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Affairs, said.

    ***and after 17 days of a govt shutdown over "this", Obama comes out NOW and 'agrees' with what the Republicans had passed in the House six months ago??...This is crazy. Seems like the Republicans were correct....right?

    ps - this is why I really try to watch less TV and try to ignore things...do gardening, etc...The world has gone 'mad'...I get the idea it's some sort of organic brain syndrome caused by plasticizer in plastic bottles...or maybe aluminum cans?...or perhaps cell phone usage is 'frying' brains? This is like watching some bad comedy....and sadly, people still vote for the idiots. (you decide...I'm a Libertarian)

  • Reply to

    keep me posted on the speech tonight

    by h5n1eric Jan 28, 2014 3:02 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Feb 5, 2014 10:34 AM Flag

    As NASA, NOAA, and the UN were busy defending their theories in the face of an increasingly skeptical public and vast amounts of evidence suggesting that their claims are wrong, a growing number of independent experts were starting to publicly predict global cooling. Citing declining solar activity, more and more scientists now say that the Earth is entering what may prove to be a long period of declining temperatures — with potentially devastating consequences for humanity.

    Indeed, some leading climate researchers say the cooling is already here, and that global temperatures could eventually sink back down to “Little Ice Age” levels last seen in the 1870s. For now, then, humanity might be wise to at least hold off on destroying the global economy and creating a planetary carbon budget in the name of fighting “global warming” — especially since the latest data confirms that it has been stopped for almost two decades.

  • Reply to

    keep me posted on the speech tonight

    by h5n1eric Jan 28, 2014 3:02 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Feb 5, 2014 10:32 AM Flag

    to continue:

    “Statistically speaking there has been no significant trend in global temperatures over
    this period ,” Whitehouse explained in a statement posted on the Global Warming Policy Foundation’s website. “All these years fall within the error bars of 0.1 degree Celsius. The trend is less than this and is statistically insignificant. There is no statistical case for representing the post-1997 data as anything other than a constant line. The graphs presented at the press conference omitted those error bars."

    As usual, when confronted with the fact that global temperatures have not been increasing as all 73 of the UN “climate models” forecasted, global-warming theorists at NASA and NOAA sought to pin the blame on a wide range of supposed causes....“In other words, they don’t know,” Dr. Whitehouse explained bluntly.

    Indeed, the brazen denial has become a pattern in recent years among alarmists confronted with the implosion of UN “climate” models, predictions, and theories. In essence: Blame anything and everything for the lack of warming that was predicted by every single one of the UN models rather than finally admitting that the alarmist predictions, and therefore the theories underpinning them, were simply wrong.

    The UN and governments around the world, which are now spending more than $1 billion of taxpayer money per day on “climate” schemes, have been at the forefront of the frantic search for explanations. The Obama administration, for example, was exposed in leaked documents last year trying to prod the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) into attributing the near-universally acknowledged “pause” in temperature increases to what critics ridicule as “The Theory of the Ocean Ate My Global Warming.”

    Dr. Whitehouse did the math. “Given that the IPCC estimates that the a

  • Reply to

    keep me posted on the speech tonight

    by h5n1eric Jan 28, 2014 3:02 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Feb 5, 2014 10:28 AM Flag

    (what you will not see on the lamestream media) Perhaps the most broadly overlooked element in the latest data presented by NOAA and NASA is the fact that, as The New American has been reporting for months, Antarctic sea ice extent was at never-before-seen highs throughout much of 2013. In March of last year, meanwhile, ice coverage was the second largest on record. The previous record highs were set in 2012, only to be overtaken in 2013.

    Of course, virtually all of the UN and government-funded “climate experts” predicted drastically decreasing levels of sea ice, so the latest data proved to be deeply embarrassing. It also went virtually ignored by the establishment press, which has consistently tried to avoid reporting on the growing chasm between reality and the doomsday forecasts presented by man-made global-warming theorists. After all, the media’s credibility is on the line now, too.

    Arctic sea ice coverage.... also grew significantly in 2013 over the previous three years, the latest data from NASA and NOAA showed. Despite predictions of an “ice-free” Arctic in the summer of 2013 made by NASA-linked “climate scientists” and Al Gore, polar sea ice in the Northern Hemisphere grew by more than 50
    percent over 2012 levels. More than a few experts now predicting global cooling expect those trends to
    continue.

  • Reply to

    keep me posted on the speech tonight

    by h5n1eric Jan 28, 2014 3:02 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Jan 30, 2014 9:47 PM Flag

    I just face the fact that we're probably gonna have to wait 3 more years...but maybe if the Repubs take the Senate, we can marginalize 'him'...or impeach him (doubtful)...I was sort of amazed tho, at the last election....In the past, someone like Romney would have been a shoe-in...Like Reagan over his 2 opponents...That was a tipping point moment for me - actually got a bit sad...i.e. to face the fact that over 1/2 the population was 'clueless' about how economies function, etc...Seems like they just want a Robin Hood President - chicken in every pot ("and we'll pay later...when I'm retired"). The sad part is that the lower and middle classes would have a much better chance for better jobs, in the future, with a different econ. strategy...but people seem to be 'one-move' checker players...people are not long term thinkers...But I cannot change people's minds...and the education system has cranked out ...well, let's say things don't look good...So, I for one feel we'll have to go thru a MAJOR ECON CRISIS before people wake up...Not predicting one (yet)...Maybe we'll just 'inflate' and carry on that way, as the deficits/debt pile up...probably can go on for quite awhile...And given the deflationary forces, I'd expect they can 'print away' without consequences, for awhile....I'll stop here
    (got 3 red, liberal thumbs-down...wow)...but I found one thumbs-up guy...You must be older, when the ed. system was better?

    I got 3 red thumbs down...I wear them with pride)

  • h5n1eric h5n1eric Jan 30, 2014 11:02 AM Flag

    the final ranking of energy sources on actual costs to produce a trillion kWhrs over their lifespan is 3.3¢/kWhr for hydro, 3.5 ¢/kWhr for nuclear, 3.7 ¢/kWhr for natural gas @ $2.60/mcf, 4.1 ¢/kWhr for coal, 4.3 ¢/kWhr for wind, 5.1 ¢/kWhr for natural gas @ 4/mcf, and 7.7 ¢/kWhr for solar.

  • h5n1eric h5n1eric Jan 30, 2014 11:01 AM Flag

    Have no investments in either 'coal' or 'solar' (i.e.I'm neutral). But I found it hard to believe that solar was cheaper than coal, right now...so, I checked it out....All the google sites stating that solar was cheaper, were sites that promote 'solar industry' in some fashion....Then there were some other sites with different views than the 'solar touts'...so, I searched some industry figures to find out what the TRUE costs actually are today

    "...the final ranking of energy sources on actual costs to produce a trillion kWhrs over their lifespan is 3.3¢/kWhr for hydro, 3.5 ¢/kWhr for nuclear, 3.7 ¢/kWhr for natural gas @ $2.60/mcf, 4.1 ¢/kWhr for coal, 4.3 ¢/kWhr for wind, 5.1 ¢/kWhr for natural gas @ 4/mcf, and 7.7 ¢/kWhr for solar."

    I have no idea of the future of either coal or solar with respect to their future %ages within 'the mix'...but I'd say coal will be "bashed" until Obama is OUT OF OFFICE....3 MORE YEARS (If he's replaced with a non-greenie...then coal would look like a decent investment...but nat gas seems like the 'bridge fuel' to count on)
    No, I have no nat gas investments either...(but) Just trying to keep the 'greenies' honest....

  • (i.e. I won't watch the "dividing" drivel)...but when "O" gets to climate change, I think his speechwriters will nix the words "temperature" (as in 'rising') & "warming" (as in 'global')...With people freezing to death right now, I think he'll avoid those 2 words...and go with something 'softer' like "long term climate change".

  • h5n1eric h5n1eric Jan 27, 2014 7:41 PM Flag

    well, there was a study done...He scored 47% (of his 'picks' were correct)...So, my penny flipping beats him....But he's making big bucks keeping the masses smiling. Sometimes I wonder if CNBC is paid by the govt to keep the masses 'happy'...seems like some Roman Circus stuff...Just a casino...."he's got his"

  • Reply to

    RSO & NRF

    by h5n1eric Jan 22, 2014 12:10 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Jan 27, 2014 5:04 PM Flag

    you were probably responding to 'stan's query...i.e. why more people don't buy preferreds...and I suppose your point was that in the past super recession, they did take hits...Sure did...So, yeah, everything can be taken out to the woodshed...I suppose that was your point - that people are afraid of a repeat. To which I say...i'll take lower prices and higher yields on new money...I was buying DDR preferreds in 2008-2009...had been killed...yields were super...was a good time to buy both the common and preferreds. Anyway, I think I get what you were saying...i.e. that stocks can get killed (but we know that). Actually, I hope the markets get KILLED once again....I want the

  • Reply to

    RSO & NRF

    by h5n1eric Jan 22, 2014 12:10 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Jan 27, 2014 4:58 PM Flag

    Well, I'm doing 1/2 of what you recommend...I do try to buy at the lowest prices...but I'm not into selling out of them just before the x dates, to take the appreciation gain & pass up the divys...But generally, if they fall more than % amt of the divvy, after they go x (oh, say 3-4% pullback)...then I look to buy more, and cost avg that way...I'm just in the 'accumulating/holding' mode...But in the past, I did do some of what you subscribed...but those games don't add or save that much, even if you're lucky enough to know where the highs and lows are...it's a long game. (but yeah, I was well aware they could drop more in a rising rate environment...I accepted that eventuality...But as they fall / if they fall, the rates rise...so, get better yields on new money, should that occur...But I have no intention of selling them...don't need to...So, it's more of a 'bond' strategy. thanks

  • Reply to

    RSO & NRF

    by h5n1eric Jan 22, 2014 12:10 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Jan 27, 2014 4:52 PM Flag

    and...ahhhh...today...jan 27, 2014...it's at 25.20...I don't see your point? I'm not being sarcastic...but this ain't 2008... So, what are you saying?...wait to go back to lower prices? Hey ...just have a good day. (i.e. currently, it's not down 75% from par value...it's a tad over par)

  • Reply to

    10 yr bond in corrected 25 basis already

    by wholemole Jan 24, 2014 3:27 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Jan 24, 2014 4:20 PM Flag

    but...but EVERYONE said rates had to go higher !! what happened?...hahaha...was everyone wrong? surprise !!...Well, it was my feeling that this economy (fed driven) is sorta fake....like Wizard of Oz stuff...You go cold turkey on QE and see what happens to the economy and the stock market...i.e. DOWN...and people will park in bonds....RATES DROP
    So, no, I was not one for believing that rates would zoom...this DEM economy ain't gonna be decent....and need a faster growing economy to get rates up...ps...Jeff Gundlach actually called for a 2.5% 10-yr as well...short term. Just depends on the economy tho - but I'm not optimistic...The ONLY DRIVER of this economy has been the FED....and that's pretty sad, to be providing cover for those fools in DC...esp in the Senate and WH....

  • Reply to

    RSO & NRF

    by h5n1eric Jan 22, 2014 12:10 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Jan 24, 2014 11:58 AM Flag

    I almost wish you were correct...what great yields they'd have. I remember back in 2009 when the DDR preferreds got hammered...in the recession...prices dropped and yields soared...16% on your money....So, actually, it's a 'funny game'...Part of me sorta likes when the preferred prices do drop (like last year, on taper fears)...pushes up the yield on new money put in - so actually, I'd probably like the prices on preferreds to drop for now, while I'm still reinvesting the dividends...As for the lower prices, if they come...fine with me. I have no intention of selling them...To me, they're just "bonds"...I hold em' for cash flows.

  • Reply to

    RSO & NRF

    by h5n1eric Jan 22, 2014 12:10 PM
    h5n1eric h5n1eric Jan 24, 2014 11:52 AM Flag

    Yeah...I only own preferreds...it's just a 'cash flow' thingee...fixed income (for old people). I think the angst about rising rates was way overblown - you'd need super strong economies and inflation expectations to push up rates (I cannot see that happening for now...maybe later on). So, rates have now pulled back....99% of people were on 'the other side of the boat'. Ain't that always the way...So, I've had one down day in 2014...yesterday. But my goal now is not to play for appreciation...just 'cash flow' with dividend reinvestments. But yeah, I did well in stocks since 2003...but hung it up...and started changing my focus - more on retirement plans. Not greedy.
    (NRF-C&D & RSO-B)...ps what's alf talking about...down 75%? odd...whatever...Never let the truth get in the way of a good story...Hillary and Bill never have...nor the big O.

  • h5n1eric by h5n1eric Jan 22, 2014 12:10 PM Flag

    I remember months ago, my Fidelity site had a 0.9 rating on NRF...very bearish...Then it dropped to 0.7 rating...very very bearish (on scale of 0-10)...RSO's rating was 4 or so...neutral, but a much better rating than NRF...Yet, over the past few months, NRF has ZOOMED higher and higher...while RSO "sits"....I guess it's like my past observations - if everyone hates something, buy it? Just strange /thoughts?....All I can say is that I'm sorta amazed at the diff. between the 2 stocks....but maybe they have different business ops?...( I just invest in the preferreds...whatever)

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Weibo Corporation
NasdaqGSThu, Apr 17, 2014 4:00 PM EDT
SandRidge Energy, Inc.
NYSEThu, Apr 17, 2014 4:01 PM EDT