SI
SI
discoversearch

 Strategies & Market Trends | VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Wharf Rat who wrote (50278)4/20/2002 9:04:04 PM
From: stockman_scott
   of 65207
 
Former President Jimmy Carter has a great perspective in The New York Times...

America Can Persuade Israel to Make a Just Peace
By JIMMY CARTER
The New York Times
Editorial / Op-Ed
April 21, 2002
nytimes.com 

<<...Ariel Sharon is a strong and forceful man and has never equivocated in his public declarations nor deviated from his ultimate purpose. His rejection of all peace agreements that included Israeli withdrawal from Arab lands, his invasion of Lebanon, his provocative visit to the Temple Mount, the destruction of villages and homes, the arrests of thousands of Palestinians and his open defiance of President George W. Bush's demand that he comply with international law have all been orchestrated to accomplish his ultimate goals: to establish Israeli settlements as widely as possible throughout occupied territories and to deny Palestinians a cohesive political existence...>>

<<...There is adequate blame on the other side. Even when he was free and enjoying the full trappings of political power, Yasir Arafat never exerted control over Hamas and other radical Palestinians who reject the concept of a peaceful Israeli existence and adopt any means to accomplish their goal. Mr. Arafat's all-too-rare denunciations of violence have been spasmodic, often expressed only in English and likely insincere. He may well see the suicide attacks as one of the few ways to retaliate against his tormentors, to dramatize the suffering of his people, or as a means for him, vicariously, to be a martyr...>>

<<...I understand the extreme political sensitivity in America of using persuasion on the Israelis, but it is important to remember that none of the actions toward peace would involve an encroachment on the sovereign territory of Israel. They all involve lands of the Egyptians, Lebanese and Palestinians, as recognized by international law...>>

<<...The existing situation is tragic and likely to get worse. Normal diplomatic efforts have failed. It is time for the United States, as the sole recognized intermediary, to consider more forceful action for peace. The rest of the world will welcome this leadership...>>

______________

Jimmy Carter, the former president, is chairman of the Carter Center, which works worldwide to advance peace and human health.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: marginmike who wrote (50297)4/20/2002 9:37:12 PM
From: stockman_scott
   of 65207
 
A former IDF tank commander describes how he imagines Jews and Arabs could coexist in a democratic Holyland...

freep.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (50289)4/20/2002 10:06:13 PM
From: stockman_scott
   of 65207
 
Wall Street's Den of Thieves

If you follow the trail of deceit from Enron to its natural lair, it only leads to one destination: Wall Street. Here's why.

by John Ellis
illustrations by Brian Cronin
from FC issue 58, page 116

fastcompany.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (50269)4/20/2002 10:11:00 PM
From: stockman_scott
   of 65207
 
Don Coxe for this week...
Real Media:
207.61.47.20:8080 

The worries list
DONALD COXE

The U.S. economy is stronger than anyone predicted last autumn, without any pickup in inflation. The global economy is also stronger than anyone predicted. Inflation rates worldwide continue to decline. U.S. short-term interest rates are the lowest in four decades, and rates across the Group of Seven industrial nations are close to four-decade lows.

For stock market investing, it doesn't get better than this -- strong economies, weak inflation, and bargain interest rates. So why is the stock market so dull, stale, flat and unprofitable?

The U.S. stock market started 2002 with a bang. January is traditionally a great month for stocks, and investors eagerly rushed into equity mutual funds. The horrors of 9/11 were fading into memory and the war on terror had been going well.

The first index to roll over was, of course, Nasdaq, dominated by technology stocks. The Dow industrials and the Standard & Poor's 500 rallied in March, but started sulking with the arrival of spring.

Most major indices abroad have traded sideways this year. The exception (as usual) is Japan, where the Nikkei has been the strongest index in recent weeks. Most analysts have given up trying to explain the Nikkei's behaviour. The only unabashedly bullish indexes have been emerging ones, led by the ebullient Kospi in South Korea.

If economic conditions are the stuff of investment bliss, why hasn't the U.S. market led major world indices into a new bull run? Worries come in company:

1. The sickening deterioration in the Arab-Israeli dispute alarms investors. It could lead to a widening war in the Mideast and . . .

2. It has been a big factor in driving oil prices sharply higher, a big negative for consumer spending, a leap which also meant that . . .

3. Gold has revived from its torpor. When oil and gold prices rise together . . .

4. Bondholders get scared that inflation may finally revive after a two-decade retreat. Even a whiff of inflation is enough to spook the skittish. The bond sell-off came as many corporations were rushing to issue them. Result: market interest rates have risen significantly, particularly for . . .

5. Technology and telecom bonds, which are ailing in an epidemic of downgrades by rating services, parched by a drought of orders for equipment and telephone services, and savaged by bond investors who watch the stocks tumbling and fear the bonds could be headed for Enronland. Enronitis has become a day-to-day topic in the stock market as . . .

6. Numerous companies are forced to restate their prior years' earnings which were, it turns out, inflated by accounting practices that are now held in disfavour. The ongoing agony of Arthur Andersen is a daily reminder that . . .

7. The late 1990s were an era of unprecedented exaggeration, obfuscation and deceit in corporate America. Insiders got rich beyond the dreams of avarice while . . .

8. Retail investors lost heavily, particularly in their registered savings plans where technology stocks were, for many, the favoured vehicle. Although the economy is coming back strongly . . .

9. The excess capacity, excess inventory and excess hype in the technology industry keeps that sector and its investors in a slough of despond. As if Silicon Valley didn't have enough problems of its own making . . .

10. It is losing market share to the new powerhouses in East Asia, where costs are lower and stock options are almost nonexistent. To date, the tech companies haven't responded by . . .

11. Running to Washington to get emergency tariff protection -- the tactic of the steel and lumber industries. George W. Bush's capitulation to protectionism was a major shock to the stock market, which started wobbling the week that . . .

12. The U.S. announced steel tariffs; the European Union immediately said it would retaliate with its own levies; talk of trade wars figured heavily in the financial press worldwide; and . . .

13. Bush's approval ratings had declined significantly since their post-9/11 high. Many commentators noted that one big loser from the new trade wars would be . . .

14. The War on Terror, which entered a crucial phase as the U.S. publicly discussed plans to invade Iraq before Saddam Hussein acquires nuclear weapons. The continental Europeans had been somewhat unenthusiastic allies in the Afghanistan campaign, and had expressed great reservations about attacking Saddam. Now, they were so enraged by Bush's protectionism that the coalition looked to be in serious trouble. And all these problems came when . . .

15. The price-earnings and price-sales ratios on the S&P 500 were near an all-time high.

So the stock market struggles. The good news: most companies' earnings are growing again. Total fourth quarter U.S. profits will actually be restated upward because of retroactive tax cuts passed this year. Better days lie ahead.
__________________________________
Donald Coxe is chairman of Harris Investment Management in Chicago and of Toronto-based Jones Heward Investments.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: RR who wrote (50247)4/20/2002 10:21:00 PM
From: stockman_scott
   of 65207
 
SENTIMENT JOURNAL: Market Showing Signs of Internal Strength

Frederic Ruffy, Optionetics.com
Friday April 19, 9:30 pm Eastern Time


biz.yahoo.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (50269)4/20/2002 10:25:33 PM
From: stockman_scott
   of 65207
 
'Shame on Us Pesky Nitpickers'

By Bill Fleckenstein
Special to TheStreet.com
04/18/2002 06:07 PM EDT

March of the Toy Earnings: Today's Rap will
have a slightly different format since there's a lot
to cover in one day. (I won't be writing tomorrow
as well as next Tuesday because I will be
traveling to the Grant's Spring Investment
conference in New York.) So, ladies and
gentlemen, buckle up as we dive right into the
earnings news. Last night, software companies
Siebel (SEBL:Nasdaq - news - commentary -
research - analysis) and SAP (SAP:Nasdaq -
news - commentary - research - analysis)
demonstrated what a horror show software and IT
spending continues to be.

Siebel was particularly clear about the fact that if
Q2 matches its terrible March (which is
apparently what the company expects), there
won't be any growth to show for the quarter. As
for SAP, in the past the company had
supposedly been immune to what was going on,
so it's basically been a clean sweep for problems in the software arena.

Comfortable Blue Shoe-In Estimate: Disappointing guidance was also the story
for Apple (AAPL:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis) and
Broadcom (BRCM:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis). CDW
Computer Centers (CDWC:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis)
was forced to acknowledge a slow slide in software growth, but the stock exploded
anyway. Of course, IBM (IBM:NYSE - news - commentary - research - analysis)
made its new, lower number, saying it was comfortable with estimates. Lastly, and
in clear contravention of the yarn spun by Intel (INTC:Nasdaq - news - commentary
- research - analysis), Advanced Micro Devices (AMD:NYSE - news -
commentary - research - analysis) warned of a slump in revenue going forward.

Mama PC's Smoked-Chip Recipe: So, what does all that mean? Basically, the
net of everything I listened to and read was that things just aren't too great, which
should not come as any surprise to regular readers. While the chip companies
chirp as they proclaim a bottom -- citing the trickle of a few orders for various
reasons -- the people out there selling things say that there's a problem. So, you
can choose to believe Intel, or all the rest of the data. Although it might not happen
immediately, Intel is my vote for the Dow stock most likely to get smoked next.

Victimization 101 with Professor Joyce: Segueing to another outfit with
credibility issues, IBM (IBM:NYSE - news - commentary - research - analysis)
gave a conference call whose ample insight into the pathetic state of the dead-fish
community and the company it panders to more than made up for the lean news
actually reported. Basically, CFO John Joyce professed hurt feelings and righteous
indignation about Big Blue's being the object of all these negative stories, though
he did find his way clear to acknowledging no sign of a pickup. (That said, he
expressed some hope for a second-half story, while not making any promises.)

Blue-Lice Special: In any case, after he was done emoting, I heard a staggering
comment from the first dead fish polled that nearly made me fall out of my chair: "I
guess you've had it with all the nitpickers. You seem to be addressing them." And
then, so as to clearly place himself in the opposite camp, he proceeded to ask a
puffball question. So, rather than being embarrassed that he was too dumb to figure
out what was going on, or rather than being upset with the company for bagging
him, this fellow basically said, "Shame on all those dirty rotten nitpickers who saw
this coming and said so."

Live-Fish Fillets Fairytale : This is a perfect example of what the dead-fish
community does over and over and over again. They don't try to find any problems,
and when problems surface, they try to come up with a reason to explain them
away. This is the quintessential example of dead fish on parade. Of the eight
"analysts" allowed on the call, there was one whose great question truly earned
him the name. He asked, in so many words, "How come your backlog for services
continues to run at three times what it's reported as every quarter -- which would
basically imply that business is going to explode -- and yet for the last two
quarters, the services revenues have been down?"

Quibble with the Dribble: The ensuing answer was formed out of both sides of
the company's mouth: The consulting business, which really contributes its fees, is
down; and outsourcing, which is essentially a lot of arm-waving of orders, doesn't
get translated to revenues. In other words, it's basically impossible to try to ferret
out what will come next, given how IBM describes the backlog for the services
business.

The Mother of All Other Income: Turning to the company's affinity for "other
income," it's important to note that out of the $1.7 billion it made, approximately
$500 million was other income treated as a reduction of SG&A, which this time
was broken out. Had it not been for the flap caused by Pulitzer-Prize-winning
journalist Gretchen Morgenson at The New York Times and the ensuing stories, I
doubt we would have gotten that information. So, one can see that even the new,
lower numbers aren't from operations. Of course, IBM wants you to believe that it
will be able to keep producing this other income all the time. In any case, to get a
feel for how the company orchestrates its reporting, I urge people to try to listen to
the call or read the transcript. This big, visible company is just a perfect example of
the farce that is still being played out, despite the uproar over analyst and
corporate shenanigans.

Tone-Deaf Instrumentalist: As for the particulars of the early going, IBM was up a
few dollars, which I can understand. Given the pre-existing level of angst and the
absence of any new bombs in its revelations, I don't find it surprising that the stock
would bounce. But I did find an attempt at a bounce by Texas Instruments
(TXN:NYSE - news - commentary - research - analysis) to be amazing, considering
what Nokia (NOK:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis) (which was
clocked today for 10%) and Motorola (MOT:NYSE - news - commentary -
research - analysis) said.

It's just stunning that people persist in believing the chip companies (the same
case I just made about Intel) as long as they say good things, rather than
triangulating on all the other plentiful information to find out what's really going on.

Red Polka-Dot Five-Spot: With the evening's results apparently not awful enough
(kind of just in-line awful), we initially had a rally driven by the glass-half-full crowd.
But then the tape turned red after KLA-Tencor (KLAC:Nasdaq - news -
commentary - research - analysis) couldn't paint a rosy-enough picture about what
it saw going forward. The stock was down almost $5 after the first couple of hours,
and that weighed on its mother index, the Nasdaq, which was down 1%, while the
S&P and the Dow were both down just under 0.5%. (More about KLA-Tencor in a
minute.)

Slow-Roasted Sea Gullible: Also roughed up in the early going were all the
equipment stocks, and some of the chip stocks came in, too. That said, an
optimism-fed disconnect was in full swing, with AMD down almost 20% while at the
same time, Intel was barely down. It just goes to show that if you put on a brave
face, people will believe you. The fact is that they will wait for accidents to occur,
i.e., companies have to actually admit it before their stocks get slammed. Of
course, that lesson has been demonstrated by watching how slowly people
responded to IBM's warning signs, dredged up by the "nitpickers."

Hill Mans the Good Sloop Sell: Returning to KLA-Tencor, I think people had their
expectations set too high because of all the things Novellus (NVLS:Nasdaq -
news - commentary - research - analysis) said. Incidentally, in today's "Heard on
the Street" column in The Wall Street Journal, the LYONS issue we talked about a
few days ago is discussed. It also reprised the point we made a while back about
the company's midquarter conference call: If everything was so great, how come
CEO Rick Hill blew out so much stock?

Banging the Conundrum: In any case, maybe the equipment stocks were
mauled in the early going today on the back of expectations being too high, and
KLA-Tencor's skunk-in-the-garden-party report. Not that they didn't deserve it --
because of high valuations and because the thesis is so preposterous -- but it was
an interesting contrast to see the most-loved sector getting beat up when they
didn't announce bad news, and to see stocks that issued bad news not going down
because it wasn't bad enough. Maybe it has to do with the hotness of the money in
the semiconductor equipment stocks, as opposed to some of the other names.

SOX-Less Claws: After the early morning slide, the market attempted to grind
higher and then met with resistance when it was reported that a plane had flown
into a building in Milan, Italy. People were initially concerned that it might be a
terrorist act. After falling out of bed, the market promptly regained its feet, returning
to its level prior to the incident, and spent the rest of the day trying to claw its way
higher. For all intents and purposes, it managed to get back to the opening levels.
The SOX was the index du jour on the downside, led by the equipment stocks, as I
have already described.

Say Limburger Cheese: Other than that, the day was just one giant mishmash,
in which anyone who had a position got shaken. Longs were shaken out of certain
chip-equipment stocks, and shorts were shaken out of stocks like IBM and CDW
Computer Centers. Tonight we'll hear from a bevy of technology titans, and that will
influence tomorrow's action, as will the option expiration. I think I will go out on a
limb and predict volatility, because not writing the Rap tomorrow means I won't
have to deal with my own faulty prediction.

A Piece of Golden Apple Pie (Make That a la
Mode): Away from stocks, the metals were higher
again, up roughly 1% apiece. The dollar was down
against the yen. The euro was back and forth across
unchanged, finally closing up a hair, as did fixed
income.

Of Hopeful Heifers and Waning Zephyrs: Away
from earnings numbers, this morning we had some
economic numbers that I think were basically ignored, though less bullish than the
bulls wanted. The leading indicators were up one-tenth instead of three-tenths, and
initial jobless claims squirted a bunch relative to expectations. I point this out
because I have been trying to make the case that a lot of the good economic news
we had was manufactured via strong seasonals, which of course relate to the
incredibly warm winter we had.

And now, without that tailwind to help the numbers, they're starting to sag. This,
combined with what's really going on in corporate America, is the reason why I
continue to say that the economic fantasy is going to run out of gas sometime in
the next quarter. And that will of course pose big problems for the stock market as
well. So, believers in the fantasy are living on borrowed time.

Bull-Bulging Green Sleeves: Now for some comments on a story in this
morning's Financial Times titled "Greenspan or Greenhorn, the Choice Is Simple."
In it, Gerard Baker basically claims that Greenspan is the greatest and we ought to
have him back. The thrust of the argument is that the people who are critics of
Greenspan, like myself, are wrong, because if we were right about him precipitating
such a big bubble, how come we've had such minimal consequences? This is in
fact the bull case, that we had this great party and the hangover's been so tiny that
it all goes to prove how great he is, and why stocks should be bought at such silly
prices.

Fault Lines in Bully Fan Club: But this case makes the assumption that
whatever bad stuff is going to happen is done. In 1991, the Japanese probably
didn't think things were so bad after their bubble, either. The fact of the matter is
that the jury is still out, which is why I keep saying that by the time we get through
2002, there will be a massive change in psychology. If I'm right, it will be proven
that Greenspan wasn't able to save the day, and the damage that ought to have
come from the bubble was just postponed for a variety of reasons, which I have
described in the past. It's almost as though people have fallen off a 1,000-foot
building. Instead of being scared at the halfway-down point, they're emboldened
because they haven't hit yet, and now they think they can fly.

Sink-Holistic Medicine: This is why 2002 is such an important year. Stock prices
are still silly, expectations are way too high, and if those expectations are not met,
people will have to reassess what the whole last five to seven years have been
about. When reality finally sinks in, we will have a huge mess on our hands, which
is why it's important to be prepared.

__________________________
William Fleckenstein is the president of Fleckenstein Capital, which manages a
hedge fund based in Seattle. Outside contributing columnists for TheStreet.com
and RealMoney, including Mr. Fleckenstein, may, from time to time, write about
securities in which they have a position. In such cases, appropriate disclosure is
made. At time of publication, Fleckenstein Capital was short Broadcom, short
CDW Computer Centers, long CDW Computer Centers puts, long IBM puts and
long Intel puts, although positions can change at any time. Under no
circumstances does the information in this column represent a recommendation to
buy, sell or hold any security. The views and opinions expressed in Mr.
Fleckenstein's columns are his own and not necessarily those of TheStreet.com.
While Mr. Fleckenstein cannot provide personalized investment advice or
recommendations, he invites you to send comments on his column to
bfleckenstein@realmoney.com."

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: Mannie who wrote (50202)4/20/2002 10:49:09 PM
From: stockman_scott
   of 65207
 
Generally Un-Electrifying

GE’s response to the Times is a huge whiff
------------------------------------------------------------
Article date: 04/18/02

Thomas Brown
Director, bankstocks.com
tbrown@secondcurve.com

One word comes to mind to describe General Electric’s response to that negative article about it in Sunday’s New York Times: Incoherent. What to make of such a lame document, from a company said to be run by the smartest people in the world?

On many key points, for instance, GE “refutes” the Times’s writer, Gretchen Morgenson, by…agreeing with her! When the Times observes that GE Capital Services’ revenues dropped by 6% in the first quarter, for instance, GE’s blistering retort is that: “the facts of the revenue declines at GECS were articulated on the conference call, as they have been each quarter by analysts that follow the company.”

Say, what? GECS’s revenues fell last year; Gretchen Morgenson said so, and GE says so, too. What exactly is the controversy? Just because GE had already disclosed the decline doesn’t mean that it’s not material evidence that GE isn’t the growth thoroughbred it once was. Actually, it’s compelling evidence of just that.

Similarly, the Times points out that $326 million of GE’s first quarter earnings came from cancellation payments on terminated Power Systems contracts. GE thunders back that “CFO Keith Sherin clearly stated on the earnings conference call that the contribution to earnings from termination payments was 2 cents per share in the quarter. That is the after tax equivalent to $326 million net of costs associated with the terminations.” But regardless of what Sherin said, and when, collecting cancellation payments is no growth business. It is the just opposite—exactly Morgenson’s point.

Morgenson argues that if first-quarter earnings were adjusted to reflect the change in goodwill accounting, GE’s reported 17% earnings rise turns into a 2.7% earnings decline. GE’s response: “These are exactly the results that GE communicated.” Is there nothing in the article the company actually disputes?

Actually, there is; they’re the points the Times makes that GE seems to simply not understand. When the paper cites an S&P analyst’s observation that the company inflates its returns by using leverage, GE’s response is that “GECS return on equity was 21.8% in 2001 and 21.7% for the first quarter of 2002.” Okaaaay. So the company earns a relatively high ROE—just like the Times and the fellow at S&P said! As to whether that high ROE comes about from smart capital allocation or is the result of simpleminded borrowing is left unanswered. The man at S&P is said to have done the work that shows GE’s debt-adjusted returns are only so-so; GE offers no evidence to show that he’s wrong.

It gets worse. For example, GE is shocked that Morgenson points out that GE uses special purpose entities that are held off balance sheet. “GE follows the accounting instructions of the FASB for special purpose entities,” the company huffs, “and of course will continue to do so if the accounting treatment for these entities changes.” How reassuring. What the company doesn’t point out (presumably because it knows it won’t help its case) is that the Enron fiasco proved that the FASB’s rules for SPE accounting are inadequate.

It is almost embarrassing to watch the company flail. Morgenson points out that 25 cents per share of first-quarter earnings came from non-recurring sources such as capital gains. A sensible concern. GE’s response? The company says she’s engaging in “cherry-picking.” “All these items were fully disclosed and highlighted,” the company says (yeah, yeah . . . ). It then adds that the gains were offset by a laundry list of non-recurring expenses, including a restructuring charge, lower gains on investment securities (how’s that a positive?) and “losses associated with the events of September 11.”

Please. This is precisely the sort of earnings-gaming that’s made investors so suspicious lately. And GE seems proud to be doing it! Why? Why should shareholders be reassured the company took a $656 million restructuring charge in its first quarter? If they’re smart, they’ll take it as a sign that operating expenses in future quarters will be artificially low, and those reported earnings suspect.

Likewise, the company seems pleased its first-quarter cash flow matched its earnings gains if adjusted for something called “progress payments.” It is odd that GE is crowing about is cash flow, inasmuch as the company doesn’t generate nearly enough of it to fund its business. Against the $2.2 billion of operating cash flow the company generated in its first quarter (ex-progress payments!), GE paid out $4.6 billion to keep its business going, for items such as dividends ($1.8 billion), stock buybacks (to offset option grants, $700 million), capital spending ($400 million), acquisitions (central to GE’s growth strategy, $1.7 billion). It’s of course no mark of shame for a company to chronically depend on outside financing. But it’s no mark of honor, either—particularly if the company in question is about to sell $50 billion of new paper simply to fund a rating-agency mandated restructuring of the liability side of its balance sheet! Creditors have their limits.

In all, it’s impossible to read GE’s response to the Times piece and not conclude that Gretchen Morgenson is on to something. Why, that mighty GE even spent the time and effort to respond at all can be taken as evidence that the folks up in Fairfield might be more antsy about the company’s outlook than they’re letting on.

And as long as the company has taken the time to make a point-by-point rebuttal, what are investors to make of the points in the Times piece that the company left unchallenged? Along that line, the GE response may be as notable for what it doesn’t discuss, as for what it does:

There is that mysterious $2 billion decline in GE Capital’s tangible net worth at the end of 2001, for instance. Morgenson reports that GE would only say that one reason for the decline was an $890 million mark-to-market loss on a derivative’s position. The rest is obscure. Then in GE’s subsequent response to the Times, not a word more. Perhaps investors can assume that something ominous is happening at GECS. From my experience as a financial services analyst who’s seen more than a few large, acquisition-driven financial services companies implode without warning, that would come as no surprise.

Similarly, Morgenson leaves the clear implication that the company is hiding credit losses at GE Capital. She points to a rise in uncollectible debts, to 2.9% of receivables at yearend, up from 2.3%. Morgenson adds that uncollectibles rose some more in the first quarter. “Losses have mounted at many banks and financing companies in recent quarters.” She notes with a tone of irony, “But GE Capital's earnings growth had held up remarkably well in the economic downturn that forced companies to curtail capital expenditures sharply.” Easy to refute, one would think. That GE refused to is telling.

Not so long ago General Electric was seen a paragon of can-do management that would do whatever it took create value for shareholders. Now they just seem like whiners. If GE doesn’t like what the media has to say about it, it should keep quiet, get its numbers up, and prove us doubters wrong. Instead, the company seems to be alternatively agreeing with its critics, distorting their objections, and stonewalling. This can’t be encouraging to the company’s bulls. This stock, in my view, is headed lower.

What do you think? Let me know!

/TKB/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The author is a Manager of a hedge fund and co-founder of bankstocks.com. His fund often buys and sells securities that are the subject of his articles, both before and after the articles are posted. Under no circumstances does this article represent a recommendation to buy or sell General Electric. This article is intended to provide insight into the financial services industry and is not a solicitation of any kind. Neither the author nor bankstocks.com can provide investment advice or respond to individual requests for recommendations. However, we encourage your feedback and welcome your comments on any of the articles on this site. Neither the author nor bankstocks.com has undertaken any responsibility to update any portion of this article in response to events which may transpire subsequent to its original publication date.

Key words and companies mentioned: General Electric, GE, Gretchen Morgenson, The New York Times

Copyright © 2002 by bankstocks.com. Email info@bankstocks.com.
View our Privacy Policy online at bankstocks.com 
200 Park Ave. Suite 3300, New York, NY 10166 · Ph: (212) 808-3550 · Fax: (212) 808-3545

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Dealer who wrote (50293)4/20/2002 10:57:55 PM
From: stockman_scott
   of 65207
 
Telecom may have bargains, after all

nytimes.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: stockman_scott who wrote (50305)4/21/2002 12:06:22 AM
From: T L Comiskey
   of 65207
 
scott re one destination...wall street....

I Doubt The Street was involved in Baxter's Murder...
T

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)


To: RR who wrote (50248)4/21/2002 2:03:01 AM
From: Cactus Jack
   of 65207
 
RR,

Hope all is well on the family front.

jpgill

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2014 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.