Citigroup, Inc. Message Board

Of the 315 million US citizens, 66 million voted for bonobo.

That means 20% of the population voted for bonobo.

And 80% of the population did NOT vote for bonobo.

The majority of Americans did make the right choice.

I take it English is not your first language.

Please explain how taking cash or issuing debt, buying back stock and then retiring that stock makes C money.

That kind of flies in the face of the cunning plan when on the verge of insolvency it issued 25 billion or so shares of stock and sold them in secondaries, when all it had to do was buyback the existing stock.

He didn't mean the upper 99% percentile.

Well if "I" means "you"

and

"you" means "me"

then

"you" must mean "milt"

and

"An investor YOU are NOT.... A BLOW-HARD YOU are"

must mean

"An investor MILT are NOT.... A BLOW-HARD MILT are"

Do I have that about right you little milt you?

"We can debate about this till the owls go to sleep, but I will take my chances, and ride out Citi to much higher highs. My cost is at about break even.."

You're in much better shape than milt. He's down 90% on C.

I think I see the problem. I thought we were debating until the cows come home. Actually, I'm just presenting the facts, some balance to those who think C can go back $580 (as if 6 fold dilution can just be erased).

I don't mind profiting off market irrational exuberance on the C or JPM calls myself. Or the puts when the time comes again.

Holding your C stock should be ok for the time being as long as the market in general is irrationally exuberant. Just be sure to take profits, not to ride it back down, when (not if) the market hits a bear cycle.

There is a difference. Unfortunately, ignorantly and in all round tard fashion, trade4brown is serious

Too much manufacturing has left the USA for cheap labour Countries......you will work at Wal- Mart, or flip burgers at micky D.

Pretty cliche if not just plain union dogma.

Except for more technically demanding products and positions, it doesn't take much more skill to work on a manufacturing line than it does to flip a burger. Imagine sitting on a production line manufacturing textiles, clothing, shoes,

Union workers are generally overpaid for the value they add and the bs they cost, ergo low tech manufacturing jobs go overseas or workers are replaced with a much more productive piece of capital equipment.

Acting like you came from the hood, not getting an education,... is a path to permanent citizenship in bonobo's welfare state. You want to succeed in the US, a technical education, innovation, starting a business,... that's the path to success.

You're comparing the wages in a 3rd world country to what was (until bonobo got elected) the richest most powerful country in the world.

No metric in the universe can be looked at in absolute terms. Everything has to be measured in relation to something else. In this case wages have to be compared to the cost of living.

In the US the average home costs about $150,000. In Bangladesh, the average hut probably goes for $100 bucks.

I love supporting these poor countries (and getting a good bargain for my trobles) by buying their products manufactured from their relatively cheap labor.

I wouldn't mind banging a good looking Ladesh or two either.

"Your view is of the most Pessimistic angle, due to your obvious dislike for Citi."

My view of C is from comparing its financials to JPM's. C is to a handicap person playing wheel chair basketball as JPM is to Michael Jordan.

Your view is the same as miltwit admits his is, pure emotion.

At a buyback rate of $1 billion per year (as C just announced), it would take 75 years for C to buyback enough shares for C to get to $100.

When I said it would see $42 and it only went to $43 you were screaming like a little girl I was wrong. Now you claim being close is close enough?

You and trade4brown shack up or what?

At $100/shr, C's market cap would be $300 Billion.

It would take a DOW of 30,000 to give C a $300 billion valuation relative to other good profitable companies

That was so gay.

Hey c11gay, generallywrong.miltz said the other day, fundamentals don't matter. That emotions make up 95% of his investments. And that he watches the ticker like a gay porn video everyday.

"That guy trew first blood! And I aint playin no race card!"

You played the race card with your accusation that my comment was racist, ya racistmoron.

My comment wasn't racist at all. Mine was simply an argument stating the diametrically opposed equivalent position based on actual demographics illustrating the fallacy of your argument.

ie if you think it's ok for the IRS to profile conservative groups when a clueless libtard is in power (because he can't fight the opposition with the success or lack thereof of his record) then by your logic, when a conservative gets back in power (regardless of his record), it would be fair for him (or some bureaucracy he controls) to profile and financially ruin libtards.

Would that not be fair?

Or are minorities so screwed up that they think they are excused from being fair? Perhaps they aren't able to sustain themselves in a fair vector field.

The saying in business is look at the financial statements,...the income statement, the balance sheet, their trends and comps to the competition.

You bring up revenues for example, between 2007 and the TBTF machinations leading up to TARP, contrary to reducing the TBTF risk, the big banks were forced into shot gun weddings with weaker financial institutions and made even larger TBTF.

However, if you compare revenues from 2007 to the present of the remaining banks, BAC's, C's and others haven't risen with the addition of these assets. In fact they have fallen. While JPM's have risen.

Look at earnings same thing. Look at capital raises and share dilution, same...

What the $580 bagholders mistakenly take as a stock 90% below what it was in 2007 and "one with a lot of upward potential" was merely a poorly undercapitalized, poorly managed company, that was critically damaged and is largely paralyzed as a result of the subprime mortgage crisis.

Once the FED signals it's turning off the spigot, ie not buying any more of the #$%$ mortgages and mortgage backed securities (the toxic assets) the weaker banks were stuck with during the housing bubble and the shot gun weddings, stock prices certainly won' t be going up. Even looking out 12 to 24 months C is already at 10 times 2014 projected earnings.

With bonobo running the country, that is very optimistic.

Yep itcouldn't have had anything to do with Fed comments today that all of this liquidation floating even sinking boats like C might be tapering off this summer.