Tue, Mar 3, 2015, 8:08 AM EST - U.S. Markets open in 1 hr 22 mins

Recent

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

Vanguard Precious Metals and Mining Inv Message Board

mmichaelr 70 posts  |  Last Activity: Feb 17, 2015 4:04 PM Member since: Sep 22, 2011
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Backin up the truck

    by purely_evil Feb 4, 2015 2:26 PM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Feb 9, 2015 9:32 PM Flag

    I am so 'GLAD' u shared that position report___like anybody cares__or wld value that info!!!

  • Reply to

    mREITs totally tanking the past couple of days.

    by nickspinner Dec 31, 2014 1:44 PM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Dec 31, 2014 5:19 PM Flag

    TAX LOSS SELLING!!

  • "5 successive monthly increases." after referencing an at will statement

    Back to 1971 there hv never bn 5 successive monthly increases. I did not look further back because if you know anything about FED history__until Greenspan the concept of transparency with post FED mtg releases was non existent. One would hv to wait until the actual mtg minutes release to attempt interpretation.

    Besides the last time chumps posted about the FED he totally missed the mark again__I went back into the 1950s and he/shes representation for % increases never happened. This loon just wings posting thoughts out probably after consuming most of a handle of cheap whiskey!

  • Reply to

    Did Anyone Buy AGNC in $32 - 36 Range ?

    by dr_klumps Jan 7, 2015 12:46 PM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Jan 7, 2015 8:01 PM Flag

    "I believe rates are going up this time no matter what"

    Jeese after 2 1/2 years posting wrong directional views on rates__you may finally be overdue. That does not change the facts backed by ur posting history that u r an economic/finacial moron!

  • mmichaelr mmichaelr Feb 11, 2015 7:50 PM Flag

    It is continously interesting how individuals will search fo a scapegoat to justify their own poor decisions__once a scapegoat is found__they pile/on group together with lawyers and initiate 'class action' suits.

  • mmichaelr by mmichaelr Dec 23, 2014 6:01 PM Flag

    Christmas's to herhear/flame/DrChumps because that is at least how many posting IDs the buffoon has created.

  • Reply to

    Klumlys dead cat bounce..

    by general.miltz Jan 8, 2015 7:31 PM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Jan 10, 2015 5:45 PM Flag

    So again that post just cerifies u r herehear/flame with all ur 100s of IDs. I bet u have more IDs than $1000s

  • Reply to

    Did Anyone Buy AGNC in $32 - 36 Range ?

    by dr_klumps Jan 7, 2015 12:46 PM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Jan 7, 2015 8:06 PM Flag

    By the way u still do not understand the application of 'Convexity' over a portfolio(s) duration curve. Again we would be glad to teach u this in our classes if u wld agree to shut ur piehole and learn 4 a chg!

  • Reply to

    This board is one guy with 10 sock puppet aliases

    by herexhear Jan 17, 2015 8:19 AM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Jan 17, 2015 3:02 PM Flag

    What the #$%$__that guy or r u a girl? is YOU. One only has to follow the flow and ur particular style of posting (also having some real brain matter helps) to understand this. You hv posted under your various (as Dr Phil coined) 'Flame' IDs verbatim character for character to Dr. Klumps.

    As Michael Jackson sang in his released song "Man In The Mirror"__'If you want to affect a change start with the man in the mirror'!!!!

  • Reply to

    AGNC should buy its own shares at .84 per dollar

    by mikeinfwtx Jan 22, 2015 9:55 AM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Jan 24, 2015 6:39 PM Flag

    "A REIT must annually distribute dividends (other than capital gain
    dividends) to its stockholders in an amount at least equal to the
    sum of:
    „.90% of its “REIT taxable income.”
    „.90% of its after-tax net income, if any, from foreclosure
    property.
    minus the excess of the sum of certain items of non-cash
    income over 5% of its REIT taxable income (known as the 90%
    distribution requirement) (see IRC § 857(a)(1))."

    ____________________
    How does leave "less money" for distributions___the only way would be if they would otherwise__had distributed greater than the 90% minimum!

  • mmichaelr by mmichaelr Dec 23, 2014 8:21 PM Flag

    This will be the 1st annv for ur mom passing__raise a toast to her memory__my post just did.

  • Reply to

    BULL TRAP?

    by fred357mag2000 Dec 16, 2014 1:29 PM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Dec 17, 2014 9:08 PM Flag

    The causal relationship is one of over supply vs demand draw. We can see from the relaeses of 'Commodity Trader’s Commitment Report' which entities are buying down and making hedges. If it was not for buying pressure from India and Seatheast Asia countries (obviously stock piling) world crude prices wld b even lower.

    There is little doubt in my thinking that OPEC is currently trying to flush out higher leveraged fracking and maybe even South American entities.

    What is nonsensical is the wide brush for pricing, applied to everything related. The demand draw has not bn decreasing__so if I am correct about over supply/demand draw then why are refiners equities being hit so hard?_____my answer is an overreaction and recaps for institutional funds.

  • Reply to

    WHAT IF ?

    by dr_klumps Jan 5, 2015 3:15 PM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Jan 5, 2015 7:24 PM Flag

    Only a total LOON (you) wld think that one cld be posting forecasts for a crash for now 2 1/2 yrs and believe u cld b 100% correct___after missing +30% index moves in 2013 and +13% w/divids in 2014 while incuuring tax loss carry forwards. Maybe LOON is not severe enough__MORON is more appropriate!!

  • October 13 -15 presented a great entry point for sector portfolio adjustments. Selected sector funds still are positive by 8 to 17% versus those entry dates. The future opportunity I posted about on Nov 1 in ‘Closed End Funds’ related to tax selling is here for investors needing to adjust asset allocations (especially for sectors within index allocations). If one is getting tempted by the sale in selected sectors; CEFs will offer further discounted prices from NAVs.

    For those unfamiliar with obtaining info for CEFs__be leary of the accuracy for generic search engines, such as yayhoo. Barron’s is a good starting point for ferreting candidates and the most accurate NAV pricings will be found with major brokerages, such as, Fidelity and the CEF overwriter/management websites themselves. One should be cognizant of expense ratios (for positioning beyond a short term trade) and interpret discounts relative to historical cycle swings.

    Historically the 1st qtr narrowing of spread btwn NAV to mkt price can be surprisingly opportunistic.

  • mmichaelr mmichaelr Dec 13, 2014 6:13 PM Flag

    I essentailly doubled my position. I assume some of thid downside is related to tax loss selling__however, obviously the market believes the preferred may go in2 arrears.

  • Reply to

    FED MAY RAISE RATES SOONER !

    by dr_klumps Dec 15, 2014 3:45 PM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Dec 15, 2014 5:14 PM Flag

    Their is no causal effect relationship btwn the early 80s and present. The early 80s reflected the political machinations attempts from Central Banks and government fiscal policies (additional taxation for imported oil__wage and price controls) to squish rising inflationary pressures. The oil enviornment was a demand draw vs. a 'Oligopoly' under supply.

    Since oil is a world traded commodity (even more exchanges now than then the 80s) pricing has become more efficient__reducing arbitrage opportunities.

    The causal relationship is one of over supply vs demand draw. We can see from the relaeses of 'Commodity Trader’s Commitment Report' which entities are buying down and making hedges. If it was not for buying pressure from Inida and Seatheast Asia countries (obviously stock piling) world crude prices wld b even lower.

    There is little doubt in my thinking that OPEC is currently trying to flush out higher leveraged fracking and maybe even South American entities.

    What is nonsensical is the wide brush being pricing applied to everything related. If I am correct about over supply/demand draw then why are refiners eqities being hit so hard.

  • mmichaelr mmichaelr Feb 12, 2015 8:03 PM Flag

    The codified IRS regulations define that a REIT "must distribute at least 90% of its annual net taxable income (excluding capital gains) to shareholders". The three important concepts are 'at least 90%', 'taxable income' (not EPS) and 'annual' (not quarterly or semiannual but the annual amount). For a 'pass through entity', such as a REIT; the only relationship EPS has to the dividend is the relationship to taxable income. These considerations are why even though they can payout more than 90% they usually hold back to allow some flexibility for the annual total.

    That said; consider these Treasury (IRS) Regulations:
    Under §Section 858, a real estate investment trust may elect to treat certain dividends that are distributed within a specified period after the close of a taxable year as having been paid during the taxable year.

    Now consider/consume this:

    1) §Section 857(b)(9) provides that dividends declared and payable during the last three months of a calendar year and actually paid during January of the following calendar year
    are deemed paid on December 31 of that calendar year or,
    if earlier, as provided by section 858).

    2) §Section 858(a) provides that if a REIT declares a dividend before its return due date, and distributes the dividend within 12 months of year end (but not later than its first regular dividend payment), the REIT may elect in the return to treat the dividend as paid for the year covered by
    the return.

    3) §Section 860 allows for the deduction of deficiency dividends. The definition of a deficiency dividend includes additional amounts required to be paid, as determined by the REIT prior to any controversy with the IRS. Section 860(e)(4).
    -------------

    Has the concept of distribution flexibility ‘fallen’ on u yet? There is no need to adjust a one month payout__towards a yearly. If that were 2 happen_it wld (probably) reflect a decrease trend in forward distributions.

  • Reply to

    Is this a good time to short the 10 year !

    by dr_klumps Jan 7, 2015 1:01 PM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Jan 24, 2015 5:31 PM Flag

    Since when did Schwab start offering brokering in "Financial Futures"?? Because that is the only way one can 'short' the "Treasury". With all ur continued posting__you might obtain at least a minimum of credibility if you were to post the correct terminology and post accurate info.

    Since I know ur amatuer history__u r thinking of using an ETP (Exchange Traded Product); such as, 'TBX' or ‘TYNS’. The correct 'terminology' is "I am tempted to back up my brinks truck at Schwab and go long an inverse 10 year exchange traded product". Do not ever think those products are an actual 'Short' or an efficient method to accomplish that. Anyone who does__does not understand 1). the creation and dissolution of 'ETP Baskets' and 2). tracking error between the 'target to be accomplished' and the ETP product marketers' manufactured comparable.

    For example: u wish to short the 10 Year Treasury. There 18 currently offered inverse ‘Bond/Treasury’ ETPs. The only non leveraged offerings are the two I posted above. They attempt to target 7-10 year range. That is not equivalent to shorting the 10 yr. The reason they create these false indexes and targeting range is due to (again) the creation/dissolution of baskets and the fact that only a novice or a restricted account would use these ETPs instead of the actual Futures and Futures Options.

    There are professional ‘IRS’ work around(s)__for those in an account restricted from “Series Three” brokerage access. However, an ETP may be the only access vehicle. Unless a 1 to 3 day ‘Swing Trade’____avoiding a leveraged product is prudent.

  • mmichaelr mmichaelr Dec 28, 2014 8:07 PM Flag

    Yes and they r from the he/she herehear/flame/dr_chumps__M/B 300+ IDs. They combined offer nothing but 'idiocy analysis' in 90 some % of the postings. Most r never historically factual and always skew to the 'sky is falling idiocy'. The collective postings of the 'he/she herehear/flame/dr_chumps' has only resulted in missing yr_over_yr possibly (still 2 b determined) the greastest of "Index" multiples.

    We hv not even yet begin to experience PE and Cash flow muliple expansion___a health restoring correction is needed. It will hit in the 1st qtr__m/b early 2nd. After that we will be off 2 the races again__but the advance will (US) based become more selected to sectors. That cld be the top__if Asian/S. America/Europe does not pick up the momentun_____I believe they will.

    I hv posted here multiple times that this 'BULL' we not run its course until the Nasdaq and the Dax post new HIs__________I stick with that view!

  • Reply to

    This board is one guy with 10 sock puppet aliases

    by herexhear Jan 17, 2015 8:19 AM
    mmichaelr mmichaelr Jan 17, 2015 5:33 PM Flag

    yayhoo doe not want to display my reply!

VGPMX
9.55-0.16(-1.65%)Mar 2 6:25 PMEST

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.
JD.com, Inc.
NASDAQMon, Mar 2, 2015 4:00 PM EST
NXP Semiconductors NV
NASDAQMon, Mar 2, 2015 4:00 PM EST