Yeah I think they could make small raises on prices so long as they dont manage to go above what it would cost to buy at your local walmart with the shipping included. This has reminded me that I have like $100 in amazon gift cards from xmas I still need to use. I need to get on that.

7/31/2012 11:05:00 AM

amazon doesn't charge for shipping. That may change once all the local stores are out of business though.

7/31/2012 11:36:45 AM

Well I guess you have that option although you have to buy a certain amount and its like 5-9 days, unless you have amazon prime which is a whole other set of costs. Anything I actually want other than just good cheap movies or music I generally bump it up to at least regular shipping which in fact does cost I promise

7/31/2012 11:43:31 AM

Can't remember if this was already posted.

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-07-12/tech/tech_amazon-same-day-delivery_1_sales-tax-amazon-shoppers-physical-retailers

7/31/2012 12:15:51 PM

Quote :

"Anything I actually want other than just good cheap movies or music I generally bump it up to at least regular shipping which in fact does cost I promise"

yeah, they have shipping charges but not state sales taxes in all states (for the time being anyways). And on the topic of same day delivery http://allthingsd.com/20120726/amazon-says-it-cant-scale-same-day-delivery-economically/

7/31/2012 12:40:21 PM

Well you are supposed to report those sales when filing your taxes so it evens out right?

7/31/2012 12:53:48 PM

I just subscribe to Amazon prime. Free 2nd day shipping, and $4/item next-day shipping. It's awesome.

7/31/2012 12:54:27 PM

if you spend $25 the shipping is free. I'm not sure Ive ever bothered to shop for anything that isn't close to $25.

If you order anything that's not $25 just throw in a box of vitamins or razors or something that you'll use anyway that costs 40% of what it costs at food lion and bam you're there.

7/31/2012 1:46:09 PM

there's been a lot of Captain Obvious' of TV lately:

Sandy Weill last week says commercial and I-banking should be separate -- no shit!

today Bill Gross says the stock market's a Ponzi scheme -- really, just figured that out? insurance is a Ponzi scheme, taxation is a Ponzi scheme, waking up in the morning and doing any goddammn thing at all is a Ponzi scheme. living and passing on your genes is a fucking Ponzi scheme... as long as the universe doesn't implode, there's a reason to wake up in the morning, be productive, and joyfully participate in life and at worst the sorrows of the world...

7/31/2012 9:19:16 PM

jsncc587

Ready to admit Libor wasn't just Barclays???

Quote :

" There have been plenty of banking scandals, but none quite like this: Investigators and political leaders believe that the manipulation of the Libor benchmark interest rate was the result of organized fraud. Institutions that participated could face billions in fines and penalties. SPIEGEL: The Cartel Emerges In 2005, a young trader with Moroccan roots came to Barclays: Philippe Moryoussef, who is now 44... Moryoussef traded in interest rate derivatives during his time at Barclays. He and his fellow traders knew exactly how much money they stood to lose or gain if the Libor or Euribor changed by only a fraction of a percentage point in one direction or the other. And they apparently did everything they could to eliminate happenstance. Moryoussef communicated by phone or email with colleagues inside and outside the bank almost daily to steer interest rates in the right direction. To do so, they sent inquiries to the people who were responsible for inputting the Libor rates: the money market traders. In the glitzy world of investment banking, money market traders were at the bottom of the pecking order before the financial crisis. They were not involved in major deals, and they could only dream of the kinds of bonuses stock and bond traders received. "They were always at the bottom of the food chain," says a former investment banker. It was a conspiratorial group of underdogs who worked for various banks and met at least once a month for a beer or a mojito in New York, London or Frankfurt. By the middle of the last decade, when there seemed to be a surplus of money at the banks, they all had the same problem: They were derided or, worse yet, ignored by their colleagues in the trading rooms of major banks. But what if it were possible to know where interest rates were headed at the end of the day, or even in the next hour? What if a few traders could manipulate the ups and downs of interest rates? By 2005 at the latest, the traders would seem to have begun realizing just how much power they had were they able to collaborate within their small group. There was no need for formal contracts between large institutions, merely agreements among friends. A pointer here, a few traders meeting for lunch there, and soon the group had formed a global cartel that, according to investigators, reached from Japan to Europe to Canada. "Come on over; I'll open a bottle of Bollinger," a trader, inebriated with his success, wrote to a colleague after the Libor rate had been set. Adair Turner of the British regulatory agency quotes the email as evidence of "a culture of cynical greed in the trading rooms." The Organized Fraud "If the rate remains unchanged, I'm a dead man," a trader emailed to a colleague who was responsible for Libor in October 2006. The traders sent at least 173 inquiries of this nature between 2005 and May 2009 for the dollar Libor alone. They were often successful. "The trick is that you can't do it alone," he bragged to outside colleagues at HSBC, Société Générale and Deutsche Bank, who allegedly cooperated with him. While the traders were initially out to increase their bonuses, the manipulation took on a different dimension during the crisis. When the first banks began to wobble in 2007, it became more difficult for many financial companies to borrow money -- a problem that would normally be reflected in higher Libor rates. Now even top managers at Barclays, alarmed by media reports, were instructing the Libor men to input lower rates. In October 2008, the manipulation became a question of survival for Barclays. On Oct. 29, a concerned Paul Tucker, now the deputy governor of the Bank of England, contacted Barclays CEO Diamond. Tucker wanted to know why the bank was consistently inputting such high interest rates into the daily Libor report. Diamond told a parliamentary committee that Tucker had suggested to report lower interest rates for the Libor, which Tucker staunchly denies. Diamond, for his part, prepared a transcript of the telephone conversation he had had with Tucker on that day, in which he had mentioned political pressure. After that, his chief operating officer spoke with the money market traders. The underdogs were suddenly being heard on the executive board, and had become the bank's potential saviors. Barclays wasn't the only bank that was having trouble gaining access to money in the fall of 2008. UBS, Citigroup and the Royal Bank of Scotland, now prime suspects in addition to Barclays, had to be bailed out by their respective governments. Germany's WestLB, which was involved in the Libor calculation at the time, was also seen as a problem case, although this wasn't reflected in the Libor rates it was reporting. ... The Failure of the Regulators On April 11, 2008, a member of the Barclays money market team called Fabiola Ravazzolo, an employee of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Barclays employee: "LIBORs do not reflect where the market is trading, which is, you know, the same as a lot of other people have said." Ravazzolo: "Mm hmm." A few moments later, the Barclays man, according to the transcript of the conversation released by the bank, said: "We're not posting, um, an honest Libor." Ravazzolo: "Okay." Barclays-Mann: "We are doing it, because, um, if we didn't do it it draws, um, unwanted attention on ourselves." Ravazzolo: "Okay." There was no sense of outrage, nor did Ravazzolo question the Barclays employee about the details. A similar conversation transpired with another Fed employee a few months later. These are transcripts of failure... Meanwhile, the US Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) had been investigating the issue since 2008, and its efforts eventually led to a worldwide investigation. The Episode Is Blown Wide Open "Mechanisms are now taking effect that I only knew of from mafia films," a shaken financial regulator said recently. Since investigations have gone into high gear in New York, London, Brussels and elsewhere, suspected bank executives have been coming clean. They are under great pressure. Last year, the European Commission filed several antitrust suits against various banks. Antitrust suits are considered to be the sharpest weapons in business law because they allow Brussels to impose stiff penalties on cartel participants. "In our investigations, we concentrate on suspicious cartel agreements that include derivatives. This includes possible secret agreements about the determination of these lending rates," says European Competition Commissioner Joaquín Almunia. In other words, the investigators are interested in more than the manipulation of global interest rates to benefit specific parties. It's also possible that the enormous market for derivatives was manipulated. "Derivatives traders are also believed to have agreed upon the difference between the buy and sell prices (spreads) of derivatives, thereby selling these financial instruments to customers under conditions that were not customary in the market," says the Swiss Competition Commission, which is also investigating possible cartels. It is difficult to find clear evidence, such as a written cartel agreement. But in Brussels alone, more than 40 banks have contacted authorities to report what they know about years of manipulation... What the Banks Could Now Face German banks must have pricked up their ears when BaFin President Elke König recently spoke about the Libor scandal. "Basically, banks must establish suitable reserves for possible losses," König concluded. Investors, like Vienna hedge fund FTC Capital, have made it clear that they do not intend to let up. They feel obligated to their customers to file claims for damages, explains FTC executive Majcen... There are already 20 lawsuits in the United States, some of which have been combined into class action suits. The plaintiffs range from the City of Baltimore to police and firefighter's pension funds, the City of Dania Beach, Florida, and Russian oligarch Vladimir Gusinsky. They feel encouraged by the actions of regulators. "Both the American CFTC and the FSA have done excellent investigative work," says Majcen. Bank analysts expect that other institutions could face fines similar to the one imposed on Barclays. In fact, it ought to be in the banks' best interest to quickly settle their cases. "But they're afraid, because since Barclays, they know that it isn't just about money, but also about making heads roll," says a major shareholder of Deutsche Bank. German attorneys are also lining up to represent potential clients. "A few institutional investors have already contacted us," says Marc Schiefer of the law firm TILP in the southern German city of Tübingen. Years could go by before damage suits are ruled on... Possible Libor-related liabilities would cause serious problems at WestLB, or its successor company Portigon. The once-proud state-owned bank is in the process of being liquidated, at a cost of billions to its former owners, the western German state of North Rhine-Westphalia and savings banks. The Libor scandal could further increase the burden on taxpayers. ... The call for stricter regulation is also getting louder in politics once again... "cheap populism." "This is a real zinger," says an insider. In the past, bank manager lapses resulted from their stupidity for having bought securities without understanding them. "Now that was bad enough. But manipulating a market rate is criminal." A portion of the industry, adds the insider, apparently doesn't realize that the writing is on the wall. The parties involved, including Deutsche Bank and its new co-CEO Jain, cannot expect leniency when charges are investigated. "We can't make any allowances for high-profile names," say officials in the capital."

8/1/2012 4:19:16 PM

Holy shit! You read zero hedge?

8/1/2012 4:23:14 PM

Have I ever said I don't? Is there a better source of finance information in the world? Please point me to one if there is.

[Edited on August 1, 2012 at 4:34 PM. Reason : a]

8/1/2012 4:33:07 PM

Nah, just keep reading your gold buying newsletter.

8/1/2012 4:50:14 PM

I forget Face, do you just buy GLD or something else?

8/1/2012 5:37:11 PM

Never said it was limited to Barclays

Face you (Zero Hedge) said that a minimum of 8 banks would have to collude in order to move LIBOR.

That part isnt true. Havent seen where this was a cross-bank coordinated attack on LIBOR.

8/2/2012 1:01:09 PM

i know how libor is calculated and it would take 8 banks to collude. That is a fact. With one cheater the rate would be unaffected.

8/3/2012 7:05:04 PM

just mind-boggling to me:



The growth of high-frequency trading on various stock markets

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/08/chart-day-algobot-wars-now-rule-wall-street

Am I the only one creeped out by it?

8/6/2012 9:48:30 PM

Surely you aren't serious? Everyone is creeped out except the SEC. They've been bribed to look the other way and just keep watching their porn. Can't be bothered to enforce their own rules against frontrunning and posting fake bids.

It's almost as though the banks have a lot of political power....

There's no such thing as a retail investor or day trader anymore. The retail investors disappeared and the daytraders all quit or got wiped out.

[Edited on August 7, 2012 at 8:00 AM. Reason : a]

8/7/2012 7:59:30 AM

This is why I am almost afraid to even set a stop loss anymore. I would say 90% of the time when I set one all that happens is the market manages to dip just low enough to pick off my shares then shoots right back up leaving me wondering what the fuck happened. After enough times it became pretty obvious it wasnt coincidence.

8/7/2012 10:10:46 AM

Putting in a stop loss is really dumb. The machines can see your stop loss and they are programmed to wipe them out then buy the stock back cheaply.

In the old days the people on the market floor conspired to do the same thing though. Stop losses are horribly rigged.

8/7/2012 12:03:05 PM

Yep the only stop I use now is the occasional trailing stop when something has reached a level Im comfortable with selling but figure I will let it ride further if it wants to.

8/8/2012 9:18:11 AM

^^^^whats most amazing isn't the fact the SEC allows it to happen, its how that .gif shows the volume of HFT exploding within the last three years.

and my understanding is that not every instance of a HFT is cut and dry frontrunning, although the value of these trades should still be questioned.

8/8/2012 9:18:55 PM

I work for a company that is an owner/operator of towers for your cellular devices. A huge cash cow and growth story this last year comes from financial services companies building out these point to point HFT networks. Theyve pretty much completed the link from NYC to Chicago where they can get pretty much instant data, and eventually the network will make a circle around the US in phase 2+.... and it will go through all major coastal cities. Either way... about 20 companies building this high speed point to point network for this sole reason, then selling the bandwidth to the investment firms, brokerages, hedge funds, etc.

Unless the SEC does something to take away its profitibility, its only getting started... id say that network is maybe 20% completed, tops, and its sole purpose is getting wall street data milliseconds before your competition.

8/8/2012 9:45:02 PM

Sold my FLR this week. Made 18% off of it this time. Not too bad. Wish I put more in this last time. I had put more in a few times prior for some slightly smaller gains.

Oh well, hindsight.

8/10/2012 9:17:56 PM

I am glad I bought those GRPN 7.00 Aug puts at the bell yesterday. Looks like I'm gonna nearly double up in under 10 minutes market time. Also bought the 20.00 Sep FB puts on Friday with the flood of shares coming free at the end of this week, expecting that to work out well too.

8/14/2012 8:13:51 AM

my long on GTAT is finally turning into something

8/16/2012 4:02:24 PM

^Same here

8/16/2012 4:22:28 PM

New record market cap for aapl today. +77% in the past 12mths

8/20/2012 6:04:10 PM

Wonder how hard it is to beat +77% via trading.

8/20/2012 7:00:09 PM

I did over 10% last week so just 7 more weeks of that and I'm golden... Today didn't start off so well though

8/20/2012 7:08:53 PM

Do you guys just day trade every week?
I'm still relying on buy and hold. :-/

8/20/2012 7:41:32 PM

Depends I make a few day trades, and have a few long holds but the majority of my stuff I hold for a week or two tops. Market is run by computers now so if you don't think like one then you are whose money they are taking. I'm still trying to recover from the crash several years ago buy and hold didn't work out well then at all. The market is at a level right now that any major news is gonna send it one way or the other and likely very quickly. I can't justify holding things for very long right now for fear it goes the other direction on me. I still don't claim to have it figured out but I've found some things that work for me lately and are making money so I'm just going with it till it stops haha

8/20/2012 8:22:49 PM

What about in your 401k?

8/20/2012 8:24:25 PM

Buy and hold is a still a viable strategy depending on what you want out of the stock. For example, my grandfather lives off his dividends and hasn't really sold anything in quite some time. Unrealized loss isn't really a loss.

For me, I try to readjust/reallocate my 401k every month or so, sometimes more often depending on what my company stock is doing. I'm in it for the long haul there though. Honestly, with individual stocks I'm looking for long term value, I don't need the money right now or I wouldn't be investing it, so who cares if I "lose" some of it this week. I'm not in the market for a quick buck, though it's there to be had if you know what you're doing and have the time to do it.

8/20/2012 8:57:58 PM

I balance quarterly, but don't adjust the allocation very often. I buy company stock through our stock purchase program at a discount, but don't dare put that kool-aid in my 401k.

8/20/2012 11:00:36 PM

401k is the best place to buy company stock because of the potential tax benefits.



Retail stocks getting hammered. Nothing to see here folks. Retailers are all screwed. Too much leverage, too much retail space in a world that needs warehouses not storefronts.

8/23/2012 11:05:27 AM

But I'm already maxing out my 401K and I get a discount if I buy it through ESPP.

8/23/2012 11:08:31 AM

What kind of discount do you get on your ESPP?

we get 15% discount to the lowest price at the start and end of each 6 month period. so at minimum that's a ~17% return. Can buy up to 10% of your income's worth. it boggles my mind how many people don't take advantage of it.

8/23/2012 11:11:31 AM

Ours used to be 15%, but the IRS got pissy a while back, so now it's 5% discount up to 10% of your salary. I was throwing in 10% when I first started, but backed down to 1% after work started offering a roth 401k, plus my exposure was kind of high. I've debated putting it back to 10% and just selling off old stock every 6 months.

8/23/2012 11:18:57 AM

^^ that's pretty freaking sweet.


^ If you're going to be at the company awhile the tax break on buying company stock (as opposed to mutual funds) in a 401k can easily hit six figures though when you retire.

But you're obviously taking on more risk too because if you sell the stock at any point you lose your cost basis and the potential tax benefits are lost.

[Edited on August 23, 2012 at 12:11 PM. Reason : a]

8/23/2012 12:11:03 PM

Yeah, I need to get a job at csco.
I'd def be putting it in my 401K if I wasn't maxing it out, but since I am....

8/23/2012 12:56:32 PM

huh? You can do whatever % you want in company stock in your 401k.

8/23/2012 1:55:51 PM

Depends on the company.

some allow it, others don't.

we have a self directed option where we can invest our 401k money in anything, stocks, bonds, ETFs, mutual funds, etc. The only restriction with the self-directed option is we can't buy and sell CSCO within the 401k.

8/23/2012 2:24:20 PM

Quote :

"huh? You can do whatever % you want in company stock in your 401k."

Since I'm already maxing out my 401K I can't invest any additional money in it without stopping contributions elsewhere.

8/23/2012 2:26:02 PM

^ Yes, but you could allocate any portion of your 401k contributions to the company stock.

Why not invest in mutual funds in the IRA instead since the 401k has potential huge tax benefits for stocks (but not for mutual funds)?

[Edited on August 23, 2012 at 5:20 PM. Reason : a]

8/23/2012 5:19:31 PM

People aren't educated enough on 401k's. Here's a brief example Just to illustrate how much $ you could be leaving on the table by not buying company stock in your 401k. Please don't construe this as "advice" as obviously there's more risk here since individual stocks are typically not very diversified (unless you work for a huge conglomerate and even then there's risk like with what happened at GE).


Let's just say for example I move $100k of my 401k into my company stock now and you leave $100k in your mutual funds. Several assumptions here, but this is just an example. We both earn 8% rate of return. I'm going to assume we're both 30 because for most people $100k is realistic by the time you turn 30 if you are saving in your 401k. We'll both retire at 65.

At the end of 35 years we'll both have ~$1.5 million under these assumptions. (I'm ignoring the $ you save after you turn 30 for the purpose of this example).

The difference is you're going to pay ordinary income taxes on $1.4 million. Let's say taxes are 35% federal and 5% state because your wife won't let you move to Florida because of the grandkids.

That's $560k worth of taxes!!! And that's if tax brackets stay where they are. (Hint: They won't.)

In the meantime I'm only paying 15% taxes on my $1.4 million which is "only" $210,000.

I just saved $350k more than you did. That gives you a pretty big window of savings so that even if your company stock doesn't match the market you still come out ahead.

And realistically, $1.5 million is probably only going to end up being ~20% of your assets at retirement so it's not THAT risky. Just do all your savings after 30 in more diversifed and safer investments...

8/23/2012 5:57:00 PM

Wait, I pay income tax on mutual funds in my 401K, but long term cap gain taxes on company stock in the 401k?

8/23/2012 10:55:06 PM

Not quite. You pay income tax on the cost basis of the stock, you pay capital gains on the difference between cost basis and sale price.

From 401kafe.com:

Quote :

" Employers offer company stock in a 401(k) plan for several reasons. Some believe that making employees part-owners of the company will give them incentive to work harder to make the company succeed, and a greater feeling of satisfaction when it does. Also, when employers use company stock to make matching contributions it is less expensive for them than using cash, for tax reasons. There might also be tax advantages for you, the employee, if you withdraw the company stock when you retire rather than rolling it over into an IRA. But this can be tricky to calculate so it's a good idea to consult with a tax professional on your specific situation. Here's why. When you retire, if you take a distribution of your company stock, you will pay income tax on the cost basis of the stock - that is, what it was worth when you acquired it, not what it is worth when you withdraw it. Say you have 1,000 shares at a cost basis of $15. When you withdraw it, the market price is $40 a share. You will pay tax on $15,000 rather than $40,000. If you sell the stock, you will pay capital gains tax on the difference between the cost basis and the sales price. Now, say that you rolled those shares into an IRA instead of withdrawing them. You wouldn't pay any tax when you made the rollover. However, when you sold the stock you would have to pay income tax on the full value of the stock. Keep in mind that capital gains tax, at 20%, is probably going to be lower than your income tax. If you roll the stock into an IRA, you don't pay tax right away so you'll have use of that (tax) money for a longer time. If you don't plan on selling the stock soon (at which point you'll have to pay tax), this could be an advantage. On the other hand, if you don't roll the stock into an IRA you may also have an advantage if you hold the stock for a longer time, if it continues to appreciate, because you benefit from the lower capital gains tax on the appreciation. Yes, it is complicated. We warned you! Read more: 401Kafe.com: Company Stock in Your 401(k) Plan: Keep It Balanced! http://www.infoplease.com/finance/commentary/feature/feature_091099.html#ixzz24T6ik6HL "

So, depending on what price you get it at and how it performs, you could see some tax advantages.

[Edited on August 24, 2012 at 9:09 AM. Reason : asdfsf]

8/24/2012 9:08:03 AM

But if I buy a mutual fund I pay ordinary income tax on the entire amount, not just the cost basis?
Not that it matters a ton at this current juncture. All new contributions go in my roth 401K, although I suppose I could move some of the older non taxed assets into company stock for an advantage.

[Edited on August 24, 2012 at 10:17 AM. Reason : roth]

8/24/2012 10:09:06 AM

I max my 401k and right now I'm doing 5% in my company stock and the other 95% in various mutual funds. I was doing 10% company for years but I backed off a bit. Even though our stock has typically performed well and we are pretty diversified in our work I still was hesitant to keep a huge % of it in a single stock.

8/24/2012 11:37:45 AM