Massive divestments will drive stock prices down. But here are few things you may consider.
First. Divestments won't happen overnight. These people would be crazy to dump everything in one shot and cause market crash. It will take years and years.
Second. Will divestments make the world stop using fossil fuels? Tomorrow? In 10 years? In 50 years? I don't think so. Will the price of fossil fuel go down? Don't think so either. Energy companies will go on.
Conclusion. There are going to be less investors in the energy market. So what. If you are in it for a long term, you will keep averaging your investment and you will see appreciation at lower levels. If you are a trader, then sell everything now and never touch energy stocks again.
Final note. These pledges to divest are nothing more but political stunts. I used to work for a bank whose client was a very large religious organization (won't mention which). Religious organizations don't t invest in gambling (Las Vegas Sands), alcohol (Diageo) and tobacco (Altria, Philipp Morris, etc.) companies. Or so they claim. They may not buy stuff directly, but it doesn't mean they can't do it through derivatieve products, such as equity swaps, or options, or futures. Comes to show, there are no saints out there.
Wow, you are so smart. This is so simple. Now that you said it's going to 20, then it must be true.
How about this. What if they wait until it goes to 10 cents a share and then buy it back. Imagine how many more shares you can buy at 10 cents a share.
I am not a market maker. I just know a lot about market, certainly more than you, since the very first thing you said proved that you don't know anything about market makers. You just read something negative about them on Google or Market Watch or Seeking Alpha, and voila, instant opinion and harsh judgement.
Market makers absolutely do service to the retail client. They provide liquidity to the market. Without them, you would place your order in the morning and then wait for half a day to find a match while the price of the stock fluctuated million times in every direction.
Should market makers see people's stops? No, they shouldn't. But you are a sophisticated investor, aren't you? Why don't you use alerts and just sell your stocks manually. Actually, you are not really an investor. Investors rarely use stops. I don't. I hold my stocks for decades through all kinds of markets and I average and I reinvest dividends, and I only sell when I lose faith in the company and always at market price. You are more of a trader than investor. It kind of explains why you are so irate about market manipulation.
Naked shorts? Yes, I agree that this is a real problem. It was one of the things that killed Lehman in 2008. However, market makers never do naked or borrowed shorts. They are market makers, not traders. Big institutions don't do naked shorts either. Their business is delta neutral, mostly in services. And even majority of hedge funds don't do it, only those that use high frequency algorithmic trading. In 2008, the culprit was mostly them and some sophisticated retail traders.
There are many things that are unfair in this world. You are not supposed to jaywalk, but you do. You shouldn't drive above the speed limit, but you do.
I would learn a little more about markets before I start passing judgement and I would definitely take opinions expressed in the articles on the internet with a grain of salt. Everyone without exception has an agenda.
I am not naive. I am knowledgeable. I say this because I do work on Wall Street and I know plenty about how things are done here, good and bad. I "protesteth" nothing. You rant and rave about injustice on Wall Street. You throw little terms here and there, like naked shorting and stops. But you really know nothing about market maker's business, how they make money, how they get KILLED (this is the only time I am going to capitalize a whole word) when market crashes, how they have to constantly scramble and hedge their buys to survice big market drop.
You learn things from Google? Good for you. Makes you less ignorant. I do that too and I learn constantly. But unlike you, I don't call people crooks just because I just happened to read something negative about them on Google. Quick to judgement, aren't you? Ready to throw first stone?
I also don't condemn people for doing something that is perfectly legal.
I was going to reply to this post but then I thought about and found it sooooo stupid, I just .....
Well, why don't we prohibit market makers and high frequency trading and, like China, ban shorting of the stock. Why don't we prohibit market altogether. After all, it's run by market maker. Do you know what market maker is?
How about you become one and use your own high frequency formulas and get super rich. No? This is not for you? You would rather stay poor and be outraged at someone who is doing something that is perfectly legal in this country, who is clever enough to use his proprietary formulas to make money trading both up and down trends of the market.
Re-read your own post. Maybe you will realize how you sound.
BTW. Zacks really has nothing else to do but to intentionally write negative articles to manipulate the market. Why would they do it? To profit from it? Well, that is illegal, isn't it?
People always go crazy when Fed starts raising interest rates. The problem is that the whole world is lowering rates right now because the whole world is not doing so well and US is the only one raising them. The hysteria I understand. Big firms are too used to borrowing money for nothing. Hike also disrupts business, and not in a good way, especially for mReits. When rates go up their long term investments lose value which forces them to buy a hedge. That costs money.
This stock used to be such a simple investment, but now it's keeping me on edge. I am watching it like a hawk.
I think somebody is realizing that interest rate hike may actually not happen and now mortgage reits are moving up. I will be very happy to see it go to 13, as some people project, but at that point I will trim my position.
It think throwing tantrums is silly. Yes, BP can shut down their operations (will never happen) and that will cause a huge disruption in the US (the consumers will be hurt the most). But this will just make competitors to step in and take BP's place and in the end PB will punish itself because it will not be so easy for them to get back into the US market. Does this sound like winning strategy?
The government always blackmails companies because no company can ever operate without a glitch. Financial institutions walk a thin line between legal and illegal (always trying to squeeze more profit), oil companies have spills (you deal with human error and machinery that eventually breaks), railroad companies have train derailments (some idiot leaves his car on the track or someone falls asleep at the wheel and runs the train a little too fast). The government always fines everyone for one reason or another. This is what they call business as usual. Everyone pays and moves on.
What nonsense. First he says the price of oil is going to hit 90-100. I actually saw that interview on CNBC. He now says 70 by year end and 80-90 in 12-18 months. Though I do agree with him that oil demand like everything else goes through cycles, he never really gives a logical explanation (besides telling people how experienced he is and that they should trust him) why he thinks price of oil is going to go up.
I am trying to use common sense and find the reason why the price of oil should go back up and I just don't see it.
China. The demand is down, not a lot, but it's definitely down.
Iran. The deal with Iran may not go through, with Republicans threatening to kill it, but what if it does go through. More oil will flood the world and then what, Pickens will once again adjujst his estimate, now to $50-60 by year end and 70-80 in 12-18 months?
I think we should all listen to predictions of people like Pickens but we should also use common sense and make our own decisions when investing.
I like BP for 2 reasons. It pays a killer dividend (I hope they can sustain it but I won't be surprised if they cut it next quarter) and because it performed relatively well despite spill penalties and low oil prices. I bought it at 40 and now it's 36. I think 10% loss is not too bad considering that price of oil is half of what it was a year ago and rig companies like Ensco and Transocean are down as much as 60% and Schlumberger and Halliburton are down 30-50%.
If you lost money because of Cramer - YOU DESERVED IT!!!!
Next time beat up a homeless guy who is screaming "Doomsday Is Cometh!!!" If he assures you that doomsday is here, well, he better deliver on his promise.
Learn to make your own decisions and stop listening to Cramer.
No, it is probably not a fake. Apple hit 121.99 this morning, so this call could be worth $3.95 then.
The more important question is, does anyone really care what some guy had paid for his trade? I don't, that's for sure.
When you walk down the street and see one of those doom and gloom people screaming, the end of the world is coming, what do you do? Do you go home and start building a fallout shelter? I watched Cramer and I never heard him say, "I WANT COMMON PEOPLE TO GO AND BUY THIS STOCK OR THAT STOCK.". He only tells you what he likes and what he doesn't like, and if you are buying stocks on someone's advice, anyone's advice in fact, you should stop. Listen to them but be responsible for your own buys and sells.
It's not a problem looking at your stocks all the time. The problem is when you go crazy over each tick up or down. If you don't watch it you might miss good news when you might consider selling or bad news when you might want to buy more. If you go crazy over it, maybe you should have a professional managing your money for you.
It's only nice if you were buying yesterday. If you bought when sndk was 108, this is nothing more than a drop in a bucket. Still. Let's hope it reaches 108 again.