You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
The Business and Financial ForumTHIS SPACE OPEN FOR ADVERTISEMENT. YOU SHOULD BE ADVERTISING HERE! Revscene Wall Street.
Consolidating debt? Good business tips? Buying stock? How's our economy doing? Discuss and share advice and tools on everyday banking, investing, wealth management and insurance.
My boss told me about tck before Christmas, so I got in when it was at its low point. Since I sit 15 feet away he try to tell me what to look for, but I'm brand spanking new to this. This was one of the names he had brought up while talking. Since my recent start I've been looking at all the recent posts, reading up on each company, watching them etc.. Little by little I'm learning
If you want to do your own due dilliegence of a few Canadian companies that I like: tck, eca, enb. All solid and arguably value. My opinion only.
Thanks for pointing out ECA. On that note; what are your thoughts on CVE? They're a spin off of ECA as i'm sure you know. They seem like they have touched the bottom and are poised for a decent rebound.
It's been a good week for all commodities. I definitely missed the boat on BTE. Prices are still at discount but hard to say if the bottom is over or not
I don't want to talk about bte. I was a pussy and worry it was gonna bottom lower and sold to cut my loses. But always easier to say this retrospectively. I would sing a different tune if it had bottom some more.
^Don't beat your self up over it, I feel the same way about not jumping in on TCK and TSLA when I posted about it a couple weeks ago. You can never predict the way things go with these individual holdings...
Just make sure your well vested in broad based ETFs so you don't miss big general market gains that we saw last week overall.
No one can make a good guess when the stock has increased in price this drastically since it's low point/when I mentioned it. I only buy at lows, and after a 100+% surge, I wouldn't personally consider it low anymore...
This is all chart trading btw, no fundamental analysis or anything (not that there is evidence fundamental analysis has worked out well)
My 1st personal target for TCK is in the 9 dollars (US). The next one is very high... lol.
Long rambling post (my own speculation):
My reasoning is reflected based on where I think the market sentiment is. If you have been actively trading the past 2 months, you can see the powerful influence of the Central Banks (Draghi, Kuroda, Yellen). They're so much better equipped now to fight recession than they were 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago.
2016, every time the market is about to plunge, there is immediately something happened to take it right back up. They have effectively manipulated the market (in a good way) using the following tools:
- The US dollar (USD/JPY)
- Treasury Bond (TLT)
- Crude (USO)
- News
The direction of the sentiment is quite clear if you look at the last week. Heavy heavy WTI inventory build but USO slightly dump and then ramped right back up, taking market up. Players are positioning for another rate hike. And why not? Economic data is good (slightly) and market has recovered somewhat.
How does this affect stock like TCK? Crude has been taken out back and beaten down. This put a damp on a lot of crude company stock (solid names like SU). This has obliterated beta names like TCK, CHK (2 weeks ago, I was sure CHK will file for Chapter 11), etc. Now that the sentiment is for crude to recover, you can see massive squeeze in those name. For example: TCK, CHK, RIG last week. Keep in mind, the coalition is aiming to FREEZE production. They will never cut. This means no 100 crude. This means crude can trade in a range (likely above 30s). This is also true for other beaten down sectors. I'm sure guys who played steel (X) last week knew this.
Always however, manage your own risk.
PS: If you're interested, you can go down the rabbit hole of theories about why the coalition will freeze but not cut. Lots of history and politics involve.
Market has not been "free" for a while. It has been under great control by the central banks. See how they burst the bubble in 2015 and is on track to inflate it again with the latest move. Market will make new high. So if you are shorting, you better be controlling size.
I would not touch any biotech. This relates to today's move by FOMC. Money and politics go hands in hands. Below is why:
As said before, market will be making new high. This paves the way for Hillary. Economy is good, everyone is happy, fewer reason go for the controversial candidates like Trump and Sanders? Hillary is market-friendly (Fed-friendly). People heard the media that if Trump win, market will dump 50%. Connect the dots and see how everyone is working together for a Hillary win.
What this means:
- If you are short, you better manage risk (control size).
- If you are long biotech, rethink strategy as Hillary has vowed to go after corrupted biotech. If she wins, biotech will enter the greatest bear market.
As for Valeant, you should not touch, long or short. Too many bombs in both direction, nobody knows what the fuck is going on. Remember the lowest option strike was 40 the day before. Nobody anticipated such a drop. Yes, nobody knows what's going on. Stay out, there are other way to make money.
^Hillary is a corrupt politician, she'll go with wherever the money goes. She'll be market friendly all the way to the next crash. When media (or some author) writes about a major 50% crash... don't buy it. Regardless of whether or not its Trump, there will be at least a dozen "smart" economic advisors surrounding him. Even if it is Carl Icahn, there would at least be a few other ivy league business school grads there. One man can't take the entire country down. I don't see how Bernie is controversial for the economy at all?
Regarding Trump, it's not about whether it will be true, is true or not. It's about public perception. What do people read? The news. As for Sanders, read his tax reform. Bad for investors, he cut a lot of tax exemption and double capital gain tax. Trump and Sanders will reform the Fed's practice (something the Fed don't want). Anyways enough of politics.
Also I disagree on "all the way to the next crash". As said before, Feds have become a lot more preventive in protecting any plunge. They have been experimenting with a lot of things (manipulating gold, crude, treasury bond, USD/JPY, news) to lessen the impact of a correction. So long as they succeed, we will get mild correction, but no crash. Of course, there's always a chance of them fucking up but believe it or not, central banks have become a lot more sophisticated than say 7 years ago. Lots of measurement are in place to protect against a worldwide recession.
Regarding Trump, it's not about whether it will be true, is true or not. It's about public perception. What do people read? The news. As for Sanders, read his tax reform. Bad for investors, he cut a lot of tax exemption and double capital gain tax. Trump and Sanders will reform the Fed's practice (something the Fed don't want). Anyways enough of politics.
Also I disagree on "all the way to the next crash". As said before, Feds have become a lot more preventive in protecting any plunge. They have been experimenting with a lot of things (manipulating gold, crude, treasury bond, USD/JPY, news) to lessen the impact of a correction. So long as they succeed, we will get mild correction, but no crash. Of course, there's always a chance of them fucking up but believe it or not, central banks have become a lot more sophisticated than say 7 years ago. Lots of measurement are in place to protect against a worldwide recession.
These are my speculation, of course.
Politics is huge. The man made sophistication is basically a way for fraudsters (banks et al.) to make sophisticated loop holes. For relatively poor schmucks like us, we will be riding wave after wave of recession every 10 years or so if Glass-Steagall isn't reinstated - something Sanders wants to do.
After the 'roaring 20s', leading to the great depression, Glass-Steagall was passed in 1933 resulting in very FEW recessions, and nothing close to the magnitude of 2008 over the next 65 years. However, since it was repealed in 1999, fraud became rampant, and you end up with the dot-com crash in 2000/1, and a housing crash in 2008, and who knows what in the next few years. Sure, finance is regulated, but NOT to the same extent that they should be/have been in the past. Kind of like Breaking Bad, Bernie wants to put in effect "FULL measures" to prevent major events from happening again, whereas Hillary and all the other establishment candidates only want to bring in "HALF measures".
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
