Tue, Sep 30, 2014, 2:28 PM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 1 hr 32 mins

Recent

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

Linn Energy, LLC (LINE) Message Board

ronharv 136 posts  |  Last Activity: Sep 29, 2014 12:43 PM Member since: May 31, 1998
  • Reply to

    Execution

    by rrb1981 Sep 28, 2014 8:28 AM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 29, 2014 12:43 PM Flag

    Nice post, RRB. I can't understand why anyone but a bear on LINE could give you a red thumb. (I know that I always get a red thumb or two simply because I'm me. Perhaps you have the same fan or two.) Anyway, the Nov. and Feb. CCs could have a salutary impact on LINE's SP. I hope.

  • Reply to

    Trading

    by ronharv Sep 25, 2014 6:28 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 26, 2014 11:00 AM Flag

    Well, I took a meaningless profit just to get out, as I'm not exactly happy about the trading. I expected better this morning. Sometimes side-bets work; sometimes they don't. Meanwhile I have lots of 2016 calls in LINE and a few 2017s. Those are clearly a long-term gamble.

  • ronharv by ronharv Sep 25, 2014 6:28 PM Flag

    While I hold a large core position in LNCO, I also like to make side bets for short-term-trading fun. However, sometimes it's not such fun at all, especially when the broad market morphs into King Kong and begins tossing whoever he can get his mitts on (particularly the innocent) off of skyscrapers. For an s-t trade I had bought, a few days ago, several K of LNCO and then averaged down, so my overall purchase price was 29.50. Looked good yesterday near day's end, but the big gorilla got to work today. I took a loss at 29.33, thinking to get back in at what I expected would be an end-of-day slide. Later I was back in the trading shares at 29.11 and 29.12. Unfortunately, the broad market ended on a sour note. So will LNCO's 10% dividend act as a sort of safety net now that Linn Energy seems to have escaped the darkness of the DCF forest? Will I have some fun tomorrow or simply feel stupid? . . . Mrs. Kong, for heaven's sake, call your husband home!

  • ronharv ronharv Sep 25, 2014 5:35 PM Flag

    Financially, I think, it would be dumb, dumb, dumb ....!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Reply to

    Ideas??? Today cannot all be about oil being down

    by hillsdale89 Sep 22, 2014 10:19 AM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 24, 2014 2:19 PM Flag

    The sum of money needed to influence the stock price so far outweighs the comparatively small amount involved in your option scenario that I can't believe that a conspiracy of traders are playing that game. Right now LNCO (29.53 on the bid as I write this) remains oversold and was way oversold when I added earlier to my short-term trade at 29.13. LinnCo is a stock, and stocks do fluctuate for inexplicable reasons because there are so many unknowable reasons (news excepted) behind umpteen individual trades.

  • Reply to

    more stock

    by cubherb Sep 22, 2014 5:26 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 23, 2014 8:40 AM Flag

    MLPs basically spend money (or units) for new assets (and also do some drilling) while non-MLPs basically spend spend money for new drilling, hoping to develop new assets (and also do some asset buying for stock and/or cash). Perhaps partnerships and C-corps are more alike than different. Of course, depletion is another commonality.

  • The fifth (UBS, I think, gives LINE a Hold). The 5 are:

    •GOLDMAN SACHS
    •RAYMOND JAMES
    •STIFEL NICOLAUS
    •UBS
    •WELLS FARGO SEC

    Haven't had this for quite a while.

  • Reply to

    Barron's Loves LINN

    by sarah32604 Sep 22, 2014 12:00 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 22, 2014 4:40 PM Flag

    Snarky? Wow! "No surprise" seems quite positive to me. It simply means that there should be no surprise that a company demonstrably getting its act together is receiving upbeat recommendations from a number of brokerages. Moreover, it's not Barron's reporting news but a blogger named Ben Levisohn. And note that he's not a columnist for Barron's nor a reporter. He's simply a blogger, and when you search for Linn Energy on Barron's' home page, the numerous articles about Linn are clearly identified as blogs. Finally, Levisohn is no more Barron's than you or I are Yahoo.

    (I don't understand why you're so negative about some encouraging reportage unless you're either short LINE/LNCO or are disinclined to be objective.)

  • Reply to

    Barron's Loves LINN

    by sarah32604 Sep 22, 2014 12:00 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 22, 2014 1:06 PM Flag

    It'll be positive for the PPS as the blog gradually disseminates.

  • Yet another positive article about Linn, as a number of brokers become bullish about the company . Check out Barron's home page, search for Linn Energy, and see how many successive blogs there have been that are positive about LINE/LNCO. One would almost think that there's a pro-Linn bias at Barron's. . . . Oh, wait! That can't be.

  • Reply to

    Any Ideas Why Line/Lnco Is Down So Much

    by sandra888us Sep 22, 2014 10:28 AM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 22, 2014 11:23 AM Flag

    One of the reasons for LINE's PPS is that management's "promises" are regarded as untrustworthy

  • Reply to

    Any Ideas Why Line/Lnco Is Down So Much

    by sandra888us Sep 22, 2014 10:28 AM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 22, 2014 10:57 AM Flag

    Well, Crus, it does depend on what's underneath and how much it costs to get it out.

  • Reply to

    Any Ideas Why Line/Lnco Is Down So Much

    by sandra888us Sep 22, 2014 10:28 AM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 22, 2014 10:55 AM Flag

    It was okay news, Sandra, but a couple of SA articles felt that Linn got the worse of the deal in the long run but will still benefit. Nevertheless, both writers still like Linn and are referring to this small deal only. Also, I think that those who bought into the deal expected a bigger reaction than occurred and began bailing, which caused others to panic some and sell. I'm in for about 5K of LNCO at 29.51. I think we'll see a recovery as so often has happened in the past. LINE/LNCO have provided a few nice trading opportunities recently, and I hope that this is another one. Anyway, I think it is.

  • Reply to

    What's the real benefit of the Exxon deal?

    by bzzzzbeeee Sep 21, 2014 1:33 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 21, 2014 7:55 PM Flag

    So far Linn is in the process of executing, but I'm not yet ready to declare that they'll remain on that path. And considering Linn's PPS, the market is far less confident than I am. But I think that 2015 will be a rewarding year for longs (barring a general stock-market collapse), as another strategy change would be tantamount to an open declaration that they don't know what they're doing. Even Ellis doesn't want to be in that position.

  • Reply to

    What's the real benefit of the Exxon deal?

    by bzzzzbeeee Sep 21, 2014 1:33 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 21, 2014 7:44 PM Flag

    In light of the income and what you could receive from, say, a CD, I'd say Linn is a homerun (and much more than an understated "nice income play") for the earlier income investors or those who bought in at the current price or less. Investors looking for capital gains shouldn't have chosen a partnership like Linn to begin with.

  • Reply to

    Re Barron's

    by ronharv Sep 18, 2014 4:34 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 20, 2014 5:32 PM Flag

    Go5shawk, I should have also mentioned that your ascribing the phrase "a positive step" to Levisohn's bias (which I think is a stretch even if he said it) was simply a statement by Abhiram Rajendran of Credit Suisse, not Levisohn. This misapprehension (and I am not being accusatory) is what happens when a predisposition (in this case a belief that those associated with Barron's are inevitably biased) interferes with reading objectivity. So now it seems that we're both surprised at each other.

  • Reply to

    Re Barron's

    by ronharv Sep 18, 2014 4:34 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 20, 2014 9:37 AM Flag

    I agree about the uptick rule. I also think that the SEC needs to be much tougher re naked shorting. And, finally, the retail investor not only needs more protection from the unscrupulous but also from the scrupulous. Note how in everyday trading the NASD trading houses can front-run the little guys with prices going out to four decimal places while we're allowed only two. Then there's flash trading and the huge dark market. Lots of rigging against retail investors is legally incorporated into the system. At least, though, the trading in fractions only was curtailed some years back, and that has been a boon to little guys, especially those who trade.

  • Reply to

    Re Barron's

    by ronharv Sep 18, 2014 4:34 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 19, 2014 8:57 PM Flag

    Well, I don't read Barron's so I have no way to determine if or how they're biased. I'm assuming that you mean that they editorially dislike a given company, as opposed to stocks in general, and make sure that articles project that slant. I don't plan to read Barron's, but it would make an interesting study, albeit a complex and lengthy one, starting with a series of objective signifiers. Lord, it would be like one of those bad dreams that I'm back in grad school with my thesis due in three days without my having begun the research. (Dunno why these still pop up when the ones with gunfire disappeared years ago.)

  • Reply to

    LINE Options

    by ronharv Sep 16, 2014 3:20 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 19, 2014 8:40 PM Flag

    I hadn't known that about the VIX. I do use the CBOE's site calculator to determine fair market value. At the moment they've got the volatility at 24.08% and the value of the call option at 3.995, which is like stating that an $.80 premium over intrinsic value is okay. With 854 days remaining till expiry, I suppose it is okay.

  • Reply to

    Market Snooze

    by rrb1981 Sep 19, 2014 12:47 PM
    ronharv ronharv Sep 19, 2014 8:25 PM Flag

    The last boutique I was in had lots of skimpy ladies lingerie. That was probably energy-focused too..

LINE
30.0601-0.2299(-0.76%)2:28 PMEDT

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.