On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 12:10:32 AM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 8:42:02 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 10:52:59 PM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:11:07 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy
recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you better check the last 1 year performance.Oh, you mean where a full third of that paper gain has been wiped out in just two weeks?
In any event, the past is the past and you've not been making any "buy today!"
or "sell today!" posts to show your prowess. That's why I've noted that you
might try to gamble to catch the current falling knife again.
Of course, NASDAQ's tech sector generally is disfavored in a rising interest
rate environment, so one shouldn't be too surprised if 2022 has less potential
upside (or more losses) than during the 2020/21 era of QE expansions. As
such, is TQQQ currently a "buy"? Likewise, what are your predictions for
someone who's has TQQQ from 2021 from at/hear its high for how long they're
likely have to wait until they're no longer underwater? Days? Weeks? Months?
Longer?
Or are you 'bravely' going to be silent on tangible stuff, so as to not have your
pretend stock trader claims get completely blown up in your face again?
No, that's not what it has been.This is an exercise to see WHO's buy recommendation was better - yoursor mine.
You'd tried to brag for years about how you're so savvy and profitable/etc, but
you just never showed that by publicly committing to a trade where you explicitly telegraphed in advance, to prove that you weren't BS'ing after-the-fact.
Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame.Oh, you've allegedly done a few short sprints - - never documented, per above,
but let's actually go check the archives to see if there ever was an dick-waiving
contest:
Back to Sep 12, 2019 [8:04:42 PM]
For example, let’s hear your investment prognosis on another pharma, ARNA.
Would not touch ARNA - no products for sale, missed last two
earnings estimates, stock chart looks horrible, and analysts
mostly have SELL ratings on it.
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/o_1lm_vmAAAJ>
So what was my comment? Here it is, later in the same thread:
"Oh, you’ve already made it obvious that you don’t hold. I find it interesting
that the stock has such consistent buy recommendations despite what looks like nothing much, and has a lot of institutionals holding it. The question seems to be if they go on a tear of product approvals to sell and it pops to $500. Even so, a +300% (paper) gain over the past three years isn’t too shabby..."
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/ZEQ6mj_ZAQAJ>
So revisiting Tom's current claim:
"Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame" Well, at that date it was at $51 and now its at $94, so that's a +84% gain over ~3.3 years without any fees. But more significantly, the observation that institutionals were following its potential was spot-on, as illustrated by PFE's buyout offer.
Now YMMV on what constitutes a "reasonable" time frame, but for investing and not gambling, that's longer term, so considering the cited buy 3 years prior, that would have been at ~$16 which goes to ~$100 via PFE and
assuming a stock swap (this AM: $56.50 w/ 2.84% dividend), that means
that on per $10K basis, $01K/$16 = 62.5 shares *$100 = $62,500; divided $56.5 buys 1106 shares of PFE, whose dividends are $1.60/share-year
for $1,769.60/yr.
So based on an original investment of just $10K, that's an effective +17.696%
dividend rate of return ... and dividends from a blue chip are safe & passive,
as well as have zero monthly expense fees.
Also, I am in a holding pattern right now. With the Fed announcing rate hikesTech tends to carry more debt which will be downward pressure on
I see more volatility ahead, although I did buy INTC recently.
that sector as interest rates rise; looking at debt ratios can provide insight too; looks like INTC is a bit better than QCOM (~2.1 vs 1.6)
for example.
My own moves have been to change out some of bond funds to
reduce exposure to higher rates depressing them, as well as shop
for dividend stocks for in a Roth, plus some other things. A higher
risk move was to buy $5K of AT&T (T) short term @ $24.906 for its
presently very high dividend (8%), as the Market's expecting them to
cut their dividend as they've been selling off assets/etc. Others on
the table with a goal of diversification, stability and income generation currently include: BCE, BBY, CVX, ED, ENB, JNJ, LMT, NVS, VTRS.
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 8:28:35 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 12:10:32 AM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 8:42:02 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 10:52:59 PM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:11:07 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy
recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you better check the last 1 year performance.Oh, you mean where a full third of that paper gain has been wiped out
in just two weeks?
In any event, the past is the past and you've not been making any "buy today!"
or "sell today!" posts to show your prowess. That's why I've noted that you
might try to gamble to catch the current falling knife again.
Of course, NASDAQ's tech sector generally is disfavored in a rising interest
rate environment, so one shouldn't be too surprised if 2022 has less potential
upside (or more losses) than during the 2020/21 era of QE expansions. As
such, is TQQQ currently a "buy"? Likewise, what are your predictions for
someone who's has TQQQ from 2021 from at/hear its high for how long they're
likely have to wait until they're no longer underwater? Days? Weeks? Months?
Longer?
Or are you 'bravely' going to be silent on tangible stuff, so as to not have your
pretend stock trader claims get completely blown up in your face again?
No, that's not what it has been.This is an exercise to see WHO's buy recommendation was better - yoursor mine.
You'd tried to brag for years about how you're so savvy and profitable/etc, but
you just never showed that by publicly committing to a trade where you explicitly telegraphed in advance, to prove that you weren't BS'ing after-the-fact.
Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame.Oh, you've allegedly done a few short sprints - - never documented, per above,
but let's actually go check the archives to see if there ever was an dick-waiving
contest:
Back to Sep 12, 2019 [8:04:42 PM]
For example, let’s hear your investment prognosis on another pharma, ARNA.
Would not touch ARNA - no products for sale, missed last two
earnings estimates, stock chart looks horrible, and analysts
mostly have SELL ratings on it.
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/o_1lm_vmAAAJ>
So what was my comment? Here it is, later in the same thread:
"Oh, you’ve already made it obvious that you don’t hold. I find it interesting
that the stock has such consistent buy recommendations despite what looks like nothing much, and has a lot of institutionals holding it. The question
seems to be if they go on a tear of product approvals to sell and it pops to
$500. Even so, a +300% (paper) gain over the past three years isn’t too shabby..."
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/ZEQ6mj_ZAQAJ>
So revisiting Tom's current claim:
"Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame"
Well, at that date it was at $51 and now its at $94, so that's a +84% gain over ~3.3 years without any fees. But more significantly, the observation that institutionals were following its potential was spot-on, as illustrated
by PFE's buyout offer.
Now YMMV on what constitutes a "reasonable" time frame, but for investing and not gambling, that's longer term, so considering the cited buy 3 years prior, that would have been at ~$16 which goes to ~$100 via PFE and assuming a stock swap (this AM: $56.50 w/ 2.84% dividend), that means
that on per $10K basis, $01K/$16 = 62.5 shares *$100 = $62,500; divided $56.5 buys 1106 shares of PFE, whose dividends are $1.60/share-year
for $1,769.60/yr.
So based on an original investment of just $10K, that's an effective +17.696%
dividend rate of return ... and dividends from a blue chip are safe & passive,
as well as have zero monthly expense fees.
Also, I am in a holding pattern right now. With the Fed announcing rate hikesTech tends to carry more debt which will be downward pressure on
I see more volatility ahead, although I did buy INTC recently.
that sector as interest rates rise; looking at debt ratios can provide insight too; looks like INTC is a bit better than QCOM (~2.1 vs 1.6)
for example.
My own moves have been to change out some of bond funds toWell, ARNA trading ended last week with Pfizer's buyout effective 3/11. Owners should be seeing the Pfizer cash out arrive his week, at "just" $100/share...roughly a +30% YoY gain.
reduce exposure to higher rates depressing them, as well as shop
for dividend stocks for in a Roth, plus some other things. A higher
risk move was to buy $5K of AT&T (T) short term @ $24.906 for its presently very high dividend (8%), as the Market's expecting them to
cut their dividend as they've been selling off assets/etc. Others on
the table with a goal of diversification, stability and income generation currently include: BCE, BBY, CVX, ED, ENB, JNJ, LMT, NVS, VTRS.
In the meantime, Tommy's daytrader pick of TQQQ is down YTD and YoY,
to the point where it has wiped out all of its 2021 gains (plus some).
Recalling back to when Tommy claimed that I supposedly was "tricking" him into buying ARNA, if he had done so & held, he'd now have had a +100% gain.
Oh well.
With TQQQ at $44 (down -40% YTD), wonder if Tommy considers it to be a
"buy" yet, or if there's still more downside pain expected for the NASDAQ?
-hh
On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 6:00:43 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 8:28:35 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 12:10:32 AM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 8:42:02 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 10:52:59 PM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:11:07 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy
recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you better check the last 1 year performance.Oh, you mean where a full third of that paper gain has been wiped out
in just two weeks?
In any event, the past is the past and you've not been making any "buy today!"
or "sell today!" posts to show your prowess. That's why I've noted that you
might try to gamble to catch the current falling knife again.
Of course, NASDAQ's tech sector generally is disfavored in a rising interest
rate environment, so one shouldn't be too surprised if 2022 has less potential
upside (or more losses) than during the 2020/21 era of QE expansions. As
such, is TQQQ currently a "buy"? Likewise, what are your predictions for
someone who's has TQQQ from 2021 from at/hear its high for how long they're
likely have to wait until they're no longer underwater? Days? Weeks? Months?
Longer?
Or are you 'bravely' going to be silent on tangible stuff, so as to not have your
pretend stock trader claims get completely blown up in your face again?
This is an exercise to see WHO's buy recommendation was better - yoursor mine.
No, that's not what it has been.
You'd tried to brag for years about how you're so savvy and profitable/etc, but
you just never showed that by publicly committing to a trade where you explicitly telegraphed in advance, to prove that you weren't BS'ing after-the-fact.
Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame.Oh, you've allegedly done a few short sprints - - never documented, per above,
but let's actually go check the archives to see if there ever was an dick-waiving
contest:
Back to Sep 12, 2019 [8:04:42 PM]
For example, let’s hear your investment prognosis on another pharma, ARNA.
Would not touch ARNA - no products for sale, missed last two earnings estimates, stock chart looks horrible, and analysts
mostly have SELL ratings on it.
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/o_1lm_vmAAAJ>
So what was my comment? Here it is, later in the same thread:
"Oh, you’ve already made it obvious that you don’t hold. I find it interesting
that the stock has such consistent buy recommendations despite what looks
like nothing much, and has a lot of institutionals holding it. The question
seems to be if they go on a tear of product approvals to sell and it pops to
$500. Even so, a +300% (paper) gain over the past three years isn’t too shabby..."
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/ZEQ6mj_ZAQAJ>
So revisiting Tom's current claim:
"Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame"
Well, at that date it was at $51 and now its at $94, so that's a +84% gain
over ~3.3 years without any fees. But more significantly, the observation
that institutionals were following its potential was spot-on, as illustrated
by PFE's buyout offer.
Now YMMV on what constitutes a "reasonable" time frame, but for investing
and not gambling, that's longer term, so considering the cited buy 3 years
prior, that would have been at ~$16 which goes to ~$100 via PFE and assuming a stock swap (this AM: $56.50 w/ 2.84% dividend), that means that on per $10K basis, $01K/$16 = 62.5 shares *$100 = $62,500; divided $56.5 buys 1106 shares of PFE, whose dividends are $1.60/share-year
for $1,769.60/yr.
So based on an original investment of just $10K, that's an effective +17.696%
dividend rate of return ... and dividends from a blue chip are safe & passive,
as well as have zero monthly expense fees.
Also, I am in a holding pattern right now. With the Fed announcing rate hikesTech tends to carry more debt which will be downward pressure on
I see more volatility ahead, although I did buy INTC recently.
that sector as interest rates rise; looking at debt ratios can provide insight too; looks like INTC is a bit better than QCOM (~2.1 vs 1.6)
for example.
My own moves have been to change out some of bond funds to
reduce exposure to higher rates depressing them, as well as shop
for dividend stocks for in a Roth, plus some other things. A higher
risk move was to buy $5K of AT&T (T) short term @ $24.906 for its presently very high dividend (8%), as the Market's expecting them to
cut their dividend as they've been selling off assets/etc. Others on
the table with a goal of diversification, stability and income generation
currently include: BCE, BBY, CVX, ED, ENB, JNJ, LMT, NVS, VTRS.
Well, ARNA trading ended last week with Pfizer's buyout effective 3/11. Owners should be seeing the Pfizer cash out arrive his week, at "just" $100/share...roughly a +30% YoY gain.
In the meantime, Tommy's daytrader pick of TQQQ is down YTD and YoY,
to the point where it has wiped out all of its 2021 gains (plus some).
Recalling back to when Tommy claimed that I supposedly was "tricking" him into buying ARNA, if he had done so & held, he'd now have had a +100% gain.
Oh well.
With TQQQ at $44 (down -40% YTD), wonder if Tommy considers it to be a "buy" yet, or if there's still more downside pain expected for the NASDAQ?
Smart investors made A LOT of money in TQQQ last year, nearly doubling there money.
It is ALL ABOUT having an exit strategy (who here talked about that?).
There WILL be a time to enter the market, but I don't think now is it.
Oil prices could go way up from here, which will hammer GDP growth
...and Lyin' Biden WANTS prices to go up....
Buying a bad stock like ARNA is a BAD IDEA, PERIOD!
The Lyin' Asshole was losing on it for a long time...
...and would have
been FAR BETTER OFF in TQQQ - as I documented.
On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 11:29:15 AM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 6:00:43 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 8:28:35 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 12:10:32 AM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 8:42:02 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 10:52:59 PM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:11:07 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy
recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you better check the last 1 year performance.Oh, you mean where a full third of that paper gain has been wiped out
in just two weeks?
In any event, the past is the past and you've not been making any "buy today!"
or "sell today!" posts to show your prowess. That's why I've noted that you
might try to gamble to catch the current falling knife again.
Of course, NASDAQ's tech sector generally is disfavored in a rising interest
rate environment, so one shouldn't be too surprised if 2022 has less potential
upside (or more losses) than during the 2020/21 era of QE expansions. As
such, is TQQQ currently a "buy"? Likewise, what are your predictions for
someone who's has TQQQ from 2021 from at/hear its high for how long they're
likely have to wait until they're no longer underwater? Days? Weeks? Months?
Longer?
Or are you 'bravely' going to be silent on tangible stuff, so as to not have your
pretend stock trader claims get completely blown up in your face again?
This is an exercise to see WHO's buy recommendation was better - yoursor mine.
No, that's not what it has been.
You'd tried to brag for years about how you're so savvy and profitable/etc, but
you just never showed that by publicly committing to a trade where you explicitly telegraphed in advance, to prove that you weren't BS'ing after-the-fact.
Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame.Oh, you've allegedly done a few short sprints - - never documented, per above,
but let's actually go check the archives to see if there ever was an dick-waiving
contest:
Back to Sep 12, 2019 [8:04:42 PM]
For example, let’s hear your investment prognosis on another pharma, ARNA.
Would not touch ARNA - no products for sale, missed last two earnings estimates, stock chart looks horrible, and analysts mostly have SELL ratings on it.
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/o_1lm_vmAAAJ>
So what was my comment? Here it is, later in the same thread:
"Oh, you’ve already made it obvious that you don’t hold. I find it interesting
that the stock has such consistent buy recommendations despite what looks
like nothing much, and has a lot of institutionals holding it. The question
seems to be if they go on a tear of product approvals to sell and it pops to
$500. Even so, a +300% (paper) gain over the past three years isn’t too shabby..."
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/ZEQ6mj_ZAQAJ>
So revisiting Tom's current claim:
"Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame"
Well, at that date it was at $51 and now its at $94, so that's a +84% gain
over ~3.3 years without any fees. But more significantly, the observation
that institutionals were following its potential was spot-on, as illustrated
by PFE's buyout offer.
Now YMMV on what constitutes a "reasonable" time frame, but for investing
and not gambling, that's longer term, so considering the cited buy 3 years
prior, that would have been at ~$16 which goes to ~$100 via PFE and assuming a stock swap (this AM: $56.50 w/ 2.84% dividend), that means that on per $10K basis, $01K/$16 = 62.5 shares *$100 = $62,500; divided
$56.5 buys 1106 shares of PFE, whose dividends are $1.60/share-year for $1,769.60/yr.
So based on an original investment of just $10K, that's an effective +17.696%
dividend rate of return ... and dividends from a blue chip are safe & passive,
as well as have zero monthly expense fees.
Also, I am in a holding pattern right now. With the Fed announcing rate hikesTech tends to carry more debt which will be downward pressure on
I see more volatility ahead, although I did buy INTC recently.
that sector as interest rates rise; looking at debt ratios can provide insight too; looks like INTC is a bit better than QCOM (~2.1 vs 1.6) for example.
My own moves have been to change out some of bond funds to
reduce exposure to higher rates depressing them, as well as shop
for dividend stocks for in a Roth, plus some other things. A higher risk move was to buy $5K of AT&T (T) short term @ $24.906 for its presently very high dividend (8%), as the Market's expecting them to cut their dividend as they've been selling off assets/etc. Others on the table with a goal of diversification, stability and income generation
currently include: BCE, BBY, CVX, ED, ENB, JNJ, LMT, NVS, VTRS.
Well, ARNA trading ended last week with Pfizer's buyout effective 3/11. Owners should be seeing the Pfizer cash out arrive his week, at "just" $100/share...roughly a +30% YoY gain.
In the meantime, Tommy's daytrader pick of TQQQ is down YTD and YoY,
to the point where it has wiped out all of its 2021 gains (plus some).
Recalling back to when Tommy claimed that I supposedly was "tricking" him
into buying ARNA, if he had done so & held, he'd now have had a +100% gain.
Oh well.
With TQQQ at $44 (down -40% YTD), wonder if Tommy considers it to be a "buy" yet, or if there's still more downside pain expected for the NASDAQ?
Smart investors made A LOT of money in TQQQ last year, nearly doubling there money.Only if they cashed out. If they didn't, they're back to square one (flat).
It is ALL ABOUT having an exit strategy (who here talked about that?).Oh, you've talked, but you did not actually commit.
As the saying goes, "Talk is cheap."
There WILL be a time to enter the market, but I don't think now is it.Gosh, Tommy continues his unwillingness to commitment! /s
Oil prices could go way up from here, which will hammer GDP growth
...and Lyin' Biden WANTS prices to go up....
Depends on the timeline, which you've conveniently left very vague.
Buying a bad stock like ARNA is a BAD IDEA, PERIOD!Too late for you, Tommy: its been removed from trading, and
was paid out at $100/share.
The Lyin' Asshole was losing on it for a long time...
That claim requires knowing my cost basis. So how about you
show us how you know what my cost basis was? Afterall, you've
heard me mention 300% returns back when it was under $50.
Simply put, anyone who bought & held within the past decade
has ended up making money: the only room for you to complain
is rate of return .. but that isn't done outside of risk contexts.
...and would haveNot for 2022 it wouldn't: -40% YTD.
been FAR BETTER OFF in TQQQ - as I documented.
Plus a quality portfolio has investment diversity; since you don't
know my portfolio contents, you have no insight on if TQQQ would
have been a good fit, or if it would have been an unbalancing risk.
In the meantime, the performance of others I previously mentioned;
not quite YTD, but a ~week prior. Note that these weren't growth
prospects, but for a dividend revenue stream (as noted):
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +5%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) +2%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +37%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +7%
ENB (DIV 6%) +18%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +24%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) -0%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -21%
FYI, for most of these, they're even better than the initial impression,
as the Dividend rate shown is at the current price, not its purchase
price. The DIV vs PURCH is more like (CVX): (3.5%)/(1-.37) = 5.55%
-hh
On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 1:41:10 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 11:29:15 AM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 6:00:43 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 8:28:35 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 12:10:32 AM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 8:42:02 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 10:52:59 PM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:11:07 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy
recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you better check the last 1 year performance.Oh, you mean where a full third of that paper gain has been wiped out
in just two weeks?
In any event, the past is the past and you've not been making any "buy today!"
or "sell today!" posts to show your prowess. That's why I've noted that you
might try to gamble to catch the current falling knife again.
Of course, NASDAQ's tech sector generally is disfavored in a rising interest
rate environment, so one shouldn't be too surprised if 2022 has less potential
upside (or more losses) than during the 2020/21 era of QE expansions. As
such, is TQQQ currently a "buy"? Likewise, what are your predictions for
someone who's has TQQQ from 2021 from at/hear its high for how long they're
likely have to wait until they're no longer underwater? Days? Weeks? Months?
Longer?
Or are you 'bravely' going to be silent on tangible stuff, so as to not have your
pretend stock trader claims get completely blown up in your face again?
This is an exercise to see WHO's buy recommendation was better - yoursor mine.
No, that's not what it has been.
You'd tried to brag for years about how you're so savvy and profitable/etc, but
you just never showed that by publicly committing to a trade where you
explicitly telegraphed in advance, to prove that you weren't BS'ing after-the-fact.
Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame.Oh, you've allegedly done a few short sprints - - never documented, per above,
but let's actually go check the archives to see if there ever was an dick-waiving
contest:
Back to Sep 12, 2019 [8:04:42 PM]
For example, let’s hear your investment prognosis on another pharma, ARNA.
Would not touch ARNA - no products for sale, missed last two earnings estimates, stock chart looks horrible, and analysts mostly have SELL ratings on it.
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/o_1lm_vmAAAJ>
So what was my comment? Here it is, later in the same thread:
"Oh, you’ve already made it obvious that you don’t hold. I find it interesting
that the stock has such consistent buy recommendations despite what looks
like nothing much, and has a lot of institutionals holding it. The question
seems to be if they go on a tear of product approvals to sell and it pops to
$500. Even so, a +300% (paper) gain over the past three years isn’t too shabby..."
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/ZEQ6mj_ZAQAJ>
So revisiting Tom's current claim:
"Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame"
Well, at that date it was at $51 and now its at $94, so that's a +84% gain
over ~3.3 years without any fees. But more significantly, the observation
that institutionals were following its potential was spot-on, as illustrated
by PFE's buyout offer.
Now YMMV on what constitutes a "reasonable" time frame, but for investing
and not gambling, that's longer term, so considering the cited buy 3 years
prior, that would have been at ~$16 which goes to ~$100 via PFE and assuming a stock swap (this AM: $56.50 w/ 2.84% dividend), that means
that on per $10K basis, $01K/$16 = 62.5 shares *$100 = $62,500; divided
$56.5 buys 1106 shares of PFE, whose dividends are $1.60/share-year for $1,769.60/yr.
So based on an original investment of just $10K, that's an effective +17.696%
dividend rate of return ... and dividends from a blue chip are safe & passive,
as well as have zero monthly expense fees.
Also, I am in a holding pattern right now. With the Fed announcing rate hikesTech tends to carry more debt which will be downward pressure on that sector as interest rates rise; looking at debt ratios can provide
I see more volatility ahead, although I did buy INTC recently.
insight too; looks like INTC is a bit better than QCOM (~2.1 vs 1.6) for example.
My own moves have been to change out some of bond funds to
reduce exposure to higher rates depressing them, as well as shop
for dividend stocks for in a Roth, plus some other things. A higher risk move was to buy $5K of AT&T (T) short term @ $24.906 for its presently very high dividend (8%), as the Market's expecting them to cut their dividend as they've been selling off assets/etc. Others on the table with a goal of diversification, stability and income generation
currently include: BCE, BBY, CVX, ED, ENB, JNJ, LMT, NVS, VTRS.
Well, ARNA trading ended last week with Pfizer's buyout effective 3/11.
Owners should be seeing the Pfizer cash out arrive his week, at "just" $100/share...roughly a +30% YoY gain.
In the meantime, Tommy's daytrader pick of TQQQ is down YTD and YoY, to the point where it has wiped out all of its 2021 gains (plus some).
Recalling back to when Tommy claimed that I supposedly was "tricking" him
into buying ARNA, if he had done so & held, he'd now have had a +100% gain.
Oh well.
With TQQQ at $44 (down -40% YTD), wonder if Tommy considers it to be a "buy" yet, or if there's still more downside pain expected for the NASDAQ?
Smart investors made A LOT of money in TQQQ last year, nearly doubling there money.
Only if they cashed out. If they didn't, they're back to square one (flat).
"Only?" EVERYONE sells sooner or later - you DIDN'T bother to ask me back then.
If you had I would have told you to take profits - nothing runs up forever, asshole.
It is ALL ABOUT having an exit strategy (who here talked about that?).
Oh, you've talked, but you did not actually commit.
As the saying goes, "Talk is cheap."
LOL! You ASKED and I ANSWERED, Lyin' Asshole (this is why I call you that!!!).
There WILL be a time to enter the market, but I don't think now is it.
Gosh, Tommy continues his unwillingness to commitment! /s
Oil prices could go way up from here, which will hammer GDP growth ...and Lyin' Biden WANTS prices to go up....
Depends on the timeline, which you've conveniently left very vague.
The "timeline" is VERY definite: 1/20/2021 to NOW, Asshole!
Buying a bad stock like ARNA is a BAD IDEA, PERIOD!
Too late for you, Tommy: its been removed from trading, and
was paid out at $100/share.
I NEVER invested, and would NEVER invest, so it is immaterial to me.
The Lyin' Asshole was losing on it for a long time...
That claim requires knowing my cost basis. So how about you
show us how you know what my cost basis was? Afterall, you've
heard me mention 300% returns back when it was under $50.
Simply put, anyone who bought & held within the past decade
has ended up making money: the only room for you to complain
is rate of return .. but that isn't done outside of risk contexts.
I detailed how you were LOSING money on ARNA vs TQQQ several times: go look it up.
...and would haveNot for 2022 it wouldn't: -40% YTD.
been FAR BETTER OFF in TQQQ - as I documented.
Plus a quality portfolio has investment diversity; since you don't
know my portfolio contents, you have no insight on if TQQQ would
have been a good fit, or if it would have been an unbalancing risk.
Irrelevant.
In the meantime, the performance of others I previously mentioned;
not quite YTD, but a ~week prior. Note that these weren't growth prospects, but for a dividend revenue stream (as noted):
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +5%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) +2%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +37%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +7%
ENB (DIV 6%) +18%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +24%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) -0%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -21%
Off topic, asshole.
FYI, for most of these, they're even better than the initial impression, as the Dividend rate shown is at the current price, not its purchase price. The DIV vs PURCH is more like (CVX): (3.5%)/(1-.37) = 5.55%
Ditto.
Buying a bad stock like ARNA is a BAD IDEA, PERIOD! The Lyin' Asshole
was losing on it for a long time and would have been FAR BETTER OFF
in TQQQ - as I documented.
TomS wrote:
Buying a bad stock like ARNA is a BAD IDEA, PERIOD! The Lyin' Asshole
was losing on it for a long time and would have been FAR BETTER OFF
in TQQQ - as I documented.
"...was losing on it for a long time..."
One of those dumb statements which expose lack of knowledge,
experience and comprehension.
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
-hh
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 12:11:07 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Time to check my move from ATT to Chevron that you poo-pooed as "oil stocks are too volatile".
July 2, 2000
ATT 30.08
Chevron 88.31
March 18, 2002
ATT 23.22
Chevron 161.73
I'm bought Chevron for the 6% dividend yield that has dropped as the stock price increased.
The point? Don't listen to stock advice from people who live in small New Jersey houses.
If they were any good at it they would not be in a small house or New Jersey.
I listen to my broker. He lives in a $1~ million 5,000+ square foot home...
Did I tell you that just I traded the 2019 Insight for a new Accord Hybrid Touring? Paid cash. :)
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 10:56:39 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 12:11:07 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Time to check my move from ATT to Chevron that you poo-pooed as "oil stocks are too volatile".
At times it has been, because ya know ... market conditions do change. Especially over a 20 year period.
So just when was that comment made? Got cite?
Meantime, the recommendation for portfolio adjustments for a higher inflation period have been trending towards energy, commodities, etc: here's just one such SME calling this out from an interview last week, which literally was just
first aired yesterday (i.e., later than this thread):
<https://wealthtrack.com/how-to-reposition-your-portfolio-for-a-new-higher-inflation-era-with-top-strategist-rich-bernstein/>
FYI, the person calling for this is Richard Bernstein ... perhaps you've heard of him?
July 2, 2000
ATT 30.08
Chevron 88.31
March 18, 2002
ATT 23.22
Chevron 161.73
Think you probably mean 2020 & 2022, not 2000 & 2002.
I'm bought Chevron for the 6% dividend yield that has dropped as the stock price increased.
Got cite? Because the relevant prior mention of CVX was from Sep 15, 2019, when
you claimed you were buying it at $124 because the attack on Saudi. It failed to pan out
as you had hoped .. which you were reminded of. No mentions of "CVX" in 2020 by anyone.
The point? Don't listen to stock advice from people who live in small New Jersey houses.
If they were any good at it they would not be in a small house or New Jersey.
Because Tommy can only 'pick on' the one property that he's aware of that we own?
I listen to my broker. He lives in a $1~ million 5,000+ square foot home...
Paid for by the fees he charges you ... too bad you don't live in a $1M 5K house yourself.
Did I tell you that just I traded the 2019 Insight for a new Accord Hybrid Touring? Paid cash. :)
Is that supposed to be more impressive than claiming that all of one's Porsche purchases
were done as cash, and also also without any trade-in to reduce the outlay? /s
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 10:56:39 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 12:11:07 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Time to check my move from ATT to Chevron that you poo-pooed as "oil stocks are too volatile".At times it has been, because ya know ... market conditions do change. Especially over a 20 year period.
So just when was that comment made? Got cite?
Meantime, the recommendation for portfolio adjustments for a higher inflation
period have been trending towards energy, commodities, etc: here's just one such SME calling this out from an interview last week, which literally was just
first aired yesterday (i.e., later than this thread):
<https://wealthtrack.com/how-to-reposition-your-portfolio-for-a-new-higher-inflation-era-with-top-strategist-rich-bernstein/>
FYI, the person calling for this is Richard Bernstein ... perhaps you've heard of him?
July 2, 2000
ATT 30.08
Chevron 88.31
March 18, 2002Think you probably mean 2020 & 2022, not 2000 & 2002.
ATT 23.22
Chevron 161.73
I'm bought Chevron for the 6% dividend yield that has dropped as the stock price increased.Got cite? Because the relevant prior mention of CVX was from Sep 15, 2019, when
you claimed you were buying it at $124 because the attack on Saudi. It failed to pan out
as you had hoped .. which you were reminded of. No mentions of "CVX" in 2020 by anyone.
The point? Don't listen to stock advice from people who live in small New Jersey houses.Because Tommy can only 'pick on' the one property that he's aware of that we own?
If they were any good at it they would not be in a small house or New Jersey.
I listen to my broker. He lives in a $1~ million 5,000+ square foot home...
Paid for by the fees he charges you ... too bad you don't live in a $1M 5K house yourself.
Did I tell you that just I traded the 2019 Insight for a new Accord Hybrid Touring? Paid cash. :)Is that supposed to be more impressive than claiming that all of one's Porsche purchases
were done as cash, and also also without any trade-in to reduce the outlay? /s
-hh
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 11:30:53 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 10:56:39 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 12:11:07 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Time to check my move from ATT to Chevron that you poo-pooed as "oil stocks are too volatile".
At times it has been, because ya know ... market conditions do change. Especially over a 20 year period.
So just when was that comment made? Got cite?Gosh, golly ... no response from old Tom.
BTW, even checking on 'hh' and 'oil', there were only three hits, one of which
was barely relevant at all, which noted that with the onset of CoVid and lockdowns
that oil dropped.
Meantime, the recommendation for portfolio adjustments for a higher inflation
period have been trending towards energy, commodities, etc: here's just one such SME calling this out from an interview last week, which literally was just
first aired yesterday (i.e., later than this thread):
<https://wealthtrack.com/how-to-reposition-your-portfolio-for-a-new-higher-inflation-era-with-top-strategist-rich-bernstein/>
FYI, the person calling for this is Richard Bernstein ... perhaps you've heard of him?Maybe Tom would be more interested in hearing about his FL hero, DeSantis: his reported
net worth in 2018 was $283,604 and then $291,449 at the end of 2019, and then $348,832
at the end of 2020 ... but has suddenly zoomed to be reportedly worth $52M today, just 15
months later: his official 2021 EoY filing should be quite interesting...stay tuned.
<https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-nsf-desantis-net-worth-20210621-xxqfzxbt5zeufkluweusvgwuny-story.html>
July 2, 2000
ATT 30.08
Chevron 88.31
March 18, 2002
ATT 23.22
Chevron 161.73
Think you probably mean 2020 & 2022, not 2000 & 2002.
I'm bought Chevron for the 6% dividend yield that has dropped as the stock price increased.
Got cite? Because the relevant prior mention of CVX was from Sep 15, 2019, whenEven a very broad search on just 'Chevron' instead of 'CVX' doesn't show any posts prior to this
you claimed you were buying it at $124 because the attack on Saudi. It failed to pan out
as you had hoped .. which you were reminded of. No mentions of "CVX" in 2020 by anyone.
one since in 2021 or 2020. Next most recent one was from August 2015, and was about a
shooting of a police officer at a Chevron gas station:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/search?q=Chevron>
The point? Don't listen to stock advice from people who live in small New Jersey houses.
If they were any good at it they would not be in a small house or New Jersey.
Because Tommy can only 'pick on' the one property that he's aware of that we own?
I listen to my broker. He lives in a $1~ million 5,000+ square foot home...
Paid for by the fees he charges you ... too bad you don't live in a $1M 5K house yourself.
Did I tell you that just I traded the 2019 Insight for a new Accord Hybrid Touring? Paid cash. :)
Is that supposed to be more impressive than claiming that all of one's Porsche purchases
were done as cash, and also also without any trade-in to reduce the outlay? /s
-hh
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 11:30:53 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 10:56:39 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 12:11:07 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Time to check my move from ATT to Chevron that you poo-pooed as "oil stocks are too volatile".
At times it has been, because ya know ... market conditions do change. Especially over a 20 year period.
So just when was that comment made? Got cite?Gosh, golly ... no response from old Tom.
BTW, even checking on 'hh' and 'oil', there were only three hits, one of which
was barely relevant at all, which noted that with the onset of CoVid and lockdowns
that oil dropped.
Meantime, the recommendation for portfolio adjustments for a higher inflation
period have been trending towards energy, commodities, etc: here's just one such SME calling this out from an interview last week, which literally was just
first aired yesterday (i.e., later than this thread):
<https://wealthtrack.com/how-to-reposition-your-portfolio-for-a-new-higher-inflation-era-with-top-strategist-rich-bernstein/>
FYI, the person calling for this is Richard Bernstein ... perhaps you've heard of him?Maybe Tom would be more interested in hearing about his FL hero, DeSantis: his reported
net worth in 2018 was $283,604 and then $291,449 at the end of 2019, and then $348,832
at the end of 2020 ... but has suddenly zoomed to be reportedly worth $52M today, just 15
months later: his official 2021 EoY filing should be quite interesting...stay tuned.
<https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-nsf-desantis-net-worth-20210621-xxqfzxbt5zeufkluweusvgwuny-story.html>
July 2, 2000
ATT 30.08
Chevron 88.31
March 18, 2002
ATT 23.22
Chevron 161.73
Think you probably mean 2020 & 2022, not 2000 & 2002.
I'm bought Chevron for the 6% dividend yield that has dropped as the stock price increased.
Got cite? Because the relevant prior mention of CVX was from Sep 15, 2019, whenEven a very broad search on just 'Chevron' instead of 'CVX' doesn't show any posts prior to this
you claimed you were buying it at $124 because the attack on Saudi. It failed to pan out
as you had hoped .. which you were reminded of. No mentions of "CVX" in 2020 by anyone.
one since in 2021 or 2020. Next most recent one was from August 2015, and was about a
shooting of a police officer at a Chevron gas station:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/search?q=Chevron>
The point? Don't listen to stock advice from people who live in small New Jersey houses.
If they were any good at it they would not be in a small house or New Jersey.
Because Tommy can only 'pick on' the one property that he's aware of that we own?
I listen to my broker. He lives in a $1~ million 5,000+ square foot home...
Paid for by the fees he charges you ... too bad you don't live in a $1M 5K house yourself.
Did I tell you that just I traded the 2019 Insight for a new Accord Hybrid Touring? Paid cash. :)
Is that supposed to be more impressive than claiming that all of one's Porsche purchases
were done as cash, and also also without any trade-in to reduce the outlay? /s
-hh
I have a dividend account with AT&T and Chevron, yield about 6.5% of cost. Chevron not especially for current yield but a solid record of dividend increases.
On Sunday, March 20, 2022 at 4:20:27 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 11:30:53 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 10:56:39 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 12:11:07 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Time to check my move from ATT to Chevron that you poo-pooed as "oil stocks are too volatile".
At times it has been, because ya know ... market conditions do change. Especially over a 20 year period.
So just when was that comment made? Got cite?Gosh, golly ... no response from old Tom.
BTW, even checking on 'hh' and 'oil', there were only three hits, one of which
was barely relevant at all, which noted that with the onset of CoVid and lockdowns
that oil dropped.
Meantime, the recommendation for portfolio adjustments for a higher inflation
period have been trending towards energy, commodities, etc: here's just one
such SME calling this out from an interview last week, which literally was just
first aired yesterday (i.e., later than this thread):
<https://wealthtrack.com/how-to-reposition-your-portfolio-for-a-new-higher-inflation-era-with-top-strategist-rich-bernstein/>
FYI, the person calling for this is Richard Bernstein ... perhaps you've heard of him?Maybe Tom would be more interested in hearing about his FL hero, DeSantis: his reported
net worth in 2018 was $283,604 and then $291,449 at the end of 2019, and then $348,832
at the end of 2020 ... but has suddenly zoomed to be reportedly worth $52M today, just 15
months later: his official 2021 EoY filing should be quite interesting...stay tuned.
<https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-nsf-desantis-net-worth-20210621-xxqfzxbt5zeufkluweusvgwuny-story.html>
July 2, 2000
ATT 30.08
Chevron 88.31
March 18, 2002
ATT 23.22
Chevron 161.73
Think you probably mean 2020 & 2022, not 2000 & 2002.
I'm bought Chevron for the 6% dividend yield that has dropped as the stock price increased.
Got cite? Because the relevant prior mention of CVX was from Sep 15, 2019, whenEven a very broad search on just 'Chevron' instead of 'CVX' doesn't show any posts prior to this
you claimed you were buying it at $124 because the attack on Saudi. It failed to pan out
as you had hoped .. which you were reminded of. No mentions of "CVX" in 2020 by anyone.
one since in 2021 or 2020. Next most recent one was from August 2015, and was about a
shooting of a police officer at a Chevron gas station:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/search?q=Chevron>
The point? Don't listen to stock advice from people who live in small New Jersey houses.
If they were any good at it they would not be in a small house or New Jersey.
Because Tommy can only 'pick on' the one property that he's aware of that we own?
I listen to my broker. He lives in a $1~ million 5,000+ square foot home...
Paid for by the fees he charges you ... too bad you don't live in a $1M 5K house yourself.
Did I tell you that just I traded the 2019 Insight for a new Accord Hybrid Touring? Paid cash. :)
Is that supposed to be more impressive than claiming that all of one's Porsche purchases
were done as cash, and also also without any trade-in to reduce the outlay? /s
Your search failed. From July 26, 2020:
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/c/Skn3VVQ2Hoc/m/BTj676jcDQAJ
Me:
That's pretty much my plan. We have about 12 months of cash in the bank.
I have a dividend account with AT&T and Chevron, yield about 6.5% of cost. Chevron not especially for current yield but a solid record of dividend increases.
You:
Energy stocks are vulnerable to a lot of the Market uncertainty risk, although
much of that should be passed. I've been debating utilities as a "sufficiently boring"
flight to safety....
On Sunday, March 20, 2022 at 4:20:27 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 11:30:53 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 10:56:39 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 12:11:07 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Time to check my move from ATT to Chevron that you poo-pooed as "oil stocks are too volatile".
At times it has been, because ya know ... market conditions do change. Especially over a 20 year period.
So just when was that comment made? Got cite?Gosh, golly ... no response from old Tom.
BTW, even checking on 'hh' and 'oil', there were only three hits, one of which
was barely relevant at all, which noted that with the onset of CoVid and lockdowns
that oil dropped.
Meantime, the recommendation for portfolio adjustments for a higher inflation
period have been trending towards energy, commodities, etc: here's just one
such SME calling this out from an interview last week, which literally was just
first aired yesterday (i.e., later than this thread):
<https://wealthtrack.com/how-to-reposition-your-portfolio-for-a-new-higher-inflation-era-with-top-strategist-rich-bernstein/>
FYI, the person calling for this is Richard Bernstein ... perhaps you've heard of him?Maybe Tom would be more interested in hearing about his FL hero, DeSantis: his reported
net worth in 2018 was $283,604 and then $291,449 at the end of 2019, and then $348,832
at the end of 2020 ... but has suddenly zoomed to be reportedly worth $52M today, just 15
months later: his official 2021 EoY filing should be quite interesting...stay tuned.
<https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-nsf-desantis-net-worth-20210621-xxqfzxbt5zeufkluweusvgwuny-story.html>
July 2, 2000
ATT 30.08
Chevron 88.31
March 18, 2002
ATT 23.22
Chevron 161.73
Think you probably mean 2020 & 2022, not 2000 & 2002.
I'm bought Chevron for the 6% dividend yield that has dropped as the stock price increased.
Got cite? Because the relevant prior mention of CVX was from Sep 15, 2019, whenEven a very broad search on just 'Chevron' instead of 'CVX' doesn't show any posts prior to this
you claimed you were buying it at $124 because the attack on Saudi. It failed to pan out
as you had hoped .. which you were reminded of. No mentions of "CVX" in 2020 by anyone.
one since in 2021 or 2020. Next most recent one was from August 2015, and was about a
shooting of a police officer at a Chevron gas station:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/search?q=Chevron>
The point? Don't listen to stock advice from people who live in small New Jersey houses.
If they were any good at it they would not be in a small house or New Jersey.
Because Tommy can only 'pick on' the one property that he's aware of that we own?
I listen to my broker. He lives in a $1~ million 5,000+ square foot home...
Paid for by the fees he charges you ... too bad you don't live in a $1M 5K house yourself.
Did I tell you that just I traded the 2019 Insight for a new Accord Hybrid Touring? Paid cash. :)
Is that supposed to be more impressive than claiming that all of one's Porsche purchases
were done as cash, and also also without any trade-in to reduce the outlay? /s
Got a cite for that supposed 2019 post? I have purchased 3 lots of CVX: 7/21/20,
6/2/21 and 8/27/21. None in 2019 and all 3 well below $124. One was $92 and
another $99, the third $107.
On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 12:30:25 AM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 1:41:10 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 11:29:15 AM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 6:00:43 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 8:28:35 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 12:10:32 AM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 8:42:02 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 10:52:59 PM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:11:07 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy
recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you better check the last 1 year performance.Oh, you mean where a full third of that paper gain has been wiped out
in just two weeks?
In any event, the past is the past and you've not been making any "buy today!"
or "sell today!" posts to show your prowess. That's why I've noted that you
might try to gamble to catch the current falling knife again.
Of course, NASDAQ's tech sector generally is disfavored in a rising interest
rate environment, so one shouldn't be too surprised if 2022 has less potential
upside (or more losses) than during the 2020/21 era of QE expansions. As
such, is TQQQ currently a "buy"? Likewise, what are your predictions for
someone who's has TQQQ from 2021 from at/hear its high for how long they're
likely have to wait until they're no longer underwater? Days? Weeks? Months?
Longer?
Or are you 'bravely' going to be silent on tangible stuff, so as to not have your
pretend stock trader claims get completely blown up in your face again?
This is an exercise to see WHO's buy recommendation was better - yoursor mine.
No, that's not what it has been.
You'd tried to brag for years about how you're so savvy and profitable/etc, but
you just never showed that by publicly committing to a trade where you
explicitly telegraphed in advance, to prove that you weren't BS'ing after-the-fact.
Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame.Oh, you've allegedly done a few short sprints - - never documented, per above,
but let's actually go check the archives to see if there ever was an dick-waiving
contest:
Back to Sep 12, 2019 [8:04:42 PM]
For example, let’s hear your investment prognosis on another pharma, ARNA.
Would not touch ARNA - no products for sale, missed last two earnings estimates, stock chart looks horrible, and analysts mostly have SELL ratings on it.
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/o_1lm_vmAAAJ>
So what was my comment? Here it is, later in the same thread:
"Oh, you’ve already made it obvious that you don’t hold. I find it interesting
that the stock has such consistent buy recommendations despite what looks
like nothing much, and has a lot of institutionals holding it. The question
seems to be if they go on a tear of product approvals to sell and it pops to
$500. Even so, a +300% (paper) gain over the past three years isn’t too shabby..."
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/yhHlqMZnqVs/m/ZEQ6mj_ZAQAJ>
So revisiting Tom's current claim:
"Clearly, mine was better, and has been better on any reasonable time frame"
Well, at that date it was at $51 and now its at $94, so that's a +84% gain
over ~3.3 years without any fees. But more significantly, the observation
that institutionals were following its potential was spot-on, as illustrated
by PFE's buyout offer.
Now YMMV on what constitutes a "reasonable" time frame, but for investing
and not gambling, that's longer term, so considering the cited buy 3 years
prior, that would have been at ~$16 which goes to ~$100 via PFE and
assuming a stock swap (this AM: $56.50 w/ 2.84% dividend), that means
that on per $10K basis, $01K/$16 = 62.5 shares *$100 = $62,500; divided
$56.5 buys 1106 shares of PFE, whose dividends are $1.60/share-year
for $1,769.60/yr.
So based on an original investment of just $10K, that's an effective +17.696%
dividend rate of return ... and dividends from a blue chip are safe & passive,
as well as have zero monthly expense fees.
Also, I am in a holding pattern right now. With the Fed announcing rate hikesTech tends to carry more debt which will be downward pressure on that sector as interest rates rise; looking at debt ratios can provide
I see more volatility ahead, although I did buy INTC recently.
insight too; looks like INTC is a bit better than QCOM (~2.1 vs 1.6)
for example.
My own moves have been to change out some of bond funds to
reduce exposure to higher rates depressing them, as well as shop for dividend stocks for in a Roth, plus some other things. A higher
risk move was to buy $5K of AT&T (T) short term @ $24.906 for its presently very high dividend (8%), as the Market's expecting them to
cut their dividend as they've been selling off assets/etc. Others on
the table with a goal of diversification, stability and income generation
currently include: BCE, BBY, CVX, ED, ENB, JNJ, LMT, NVS, VTRS.
Well, ARNA trading ended last week with Pfizer's buyout effective 3/11.
Owners should be seeing the Pfizer cash out arrive his week, at "just"
$100/share...roughly a +30% YoY gain.
In the meantime, Tommy's daytrader pick of TQQQ is down YTD and YoY, to the point where it has wiped out all of its 2021 gains (plus some).
Recalling back to when Tommy claimed that I supposedly was "tricking" him
into buying ARNA, if he had done so & held, he'd now have had a +100% gain.
Oh well.
With TQQQ at $44 (down -40% YTD), wonder if Tommy considers it to be a
"buy" yet, or if there's still more downside pain expected for the NASDAQ?
Smart investors made A LOT of money in TQQQ last year, nearly doubling there money.
Only if they cashed out. If they didn't, they're back to square one (flat).
"Only?" EVERYONE sells sooner or later - you DIDN'T bother to ask me back then.Nonsense: I've often mocked you for not having prepublished what your exist criteria is ... don't you remember how mad you got when you finally said +10%
but then missed it by a few dollars?
If you had I would have told you to take profits - nothing runs up forever, asshole.But isn't this "run up forever" precisely the point of the TQQQ leveraged fund?
Just like how its evil twin SQQQ is the "short forever"?
It is ALL ABOUT having an exit strategy (who here talked about that?).
Oh, you've talked, but you did not actually commit.
As the saying goes, "Talk is cheap."
LOL! You ASKED and I ANSWERED, Lyin' Asshole (this is why I call you that!!!).Sorry, nope: you've never committed to saying "I"m buying TQQQ tomorrow at $A and my strategy is to hold it for B days or $C, whichever comes first.
The closest you've come to that is the above "10% gain" that you mentioned in
midstream, but then slightly missed.
There WILL be a time to enter the market, but I don't think now is it.
Gosh, Tommy continues his unwillingness to commitment! /s
Silence from Tommy!
Oil prices could go way up from here, which will hammer GDP growth ...and Lyin' Biden WANTS prices to go up....
Depends on the timeline, which you've conveniently left very vague.
The "timeline" is VERY definite: 1/20/2021 to NOW, Asshole!Nope, that's in the past: we cannot make investments retroactively.
Buying a bad stock like ARNA is a BAD IDEA, PERIOD!
Too late for you, Tommy: its been removed from trading, and
was paid out at $100/share.
I NEVER invested, and would NEVER invest, so it is immaterial to me.Oh, you've been quite heavily invested in ARNA ... but it was emotional, not fiscal.
That's why you were pounding away at your keyboard for this post.
The Lyin' Asshole was losing on it for a long time...
That claim requires knowing my cost basis. So how about you
show us how you know what my cost basis was? Afterall, you've
heard me mention 300% returns back when it was under $50.
Simply put, anyone who bought & held within the past decade
has ended up making money: the only room for you to complain
is rate of return .. but that isn't done outside of risk contexts.
I detailed how you were LOSING money on ARNA vs TQQQ several times: go look it up.That was your retrospective attempt, and the problem that you have
with it is that in applying the same retrospect for 2021 to date, the opposite
is true.
By the same token I could say "but Tommy, you should have bought AAPL at $7".
...and would haveNot for 2022 it wouldn't: -40% YTD.
been FAR BETTER OFF in TQQQ - as I documented.
Plus a quality portfolio has investment diversity; since you don't
know my portfolio contents, you have no insight on if TQQQ would
have been a good fit, or if it would have been an unbalancing risk.
Irrelevant.Diversification may be unimportant to gamblers, but I'm talking of investing.
In the meantime, the performance of others I previously mentioned;
not quite YTD, but a ~week prior. Note that these weren't growth prospects, but for a dividend revenue stream (as noted):
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +5%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) +2%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +37%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +7%
ENB (DIV 6%) +18%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +24%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) -0%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -21%
Off topic, asshole.Incorrect, for this list was included way back in January for a reason, which was to not be afraid to publicly show picks. These aren't on the
block to be traded but are a medium period hold; above is their first
~90 days performance. You're free to check on them quarterly too.
FYI, for most of these, they're even better than the initial impression, as the Dividend rate shown is at the current price, not its purchase price. The DIV vs PURCH is more like (CVX): (3.5%)/(1-.37) = 5.55%
Ditto.Nah, its merely noting the effective yields because this package was
picked based upon dividend yields (in lieu of CDs/Bonds) while also
seeking relative price stability similar to same.
FYI, others in this camp could be AT&T (T), but it has higher instability risks for a variety of reasons, including debts and because of their now-announced dividend cut (from 8% to 4%); holding T depends on
how much exposure one wants to the telecom sector and deciding
on who, such as if BCE (above) is a better/worse fit for one's criteria; ditto VZ (Verizon), etc, etc.
-hh
On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 4:04:05 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 12:30:25 AM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 1:41:10 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 11:29:15 AM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 6:00:43 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 8:28:35 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 11, 2022 at 12:10:32 AM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 8:42:02 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 10:52:59 PM UTC-5, TomS wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 9:11:07 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy
recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you better check the last 1 year performance.
Oh, you mean where a full third of that paper gain has been wiped out
in just two weeks?
Smart investors made A LOT of money in TQQQ last year, nearly doubling there money.
Only if they cashed out. If they didn't, they're back to square one (flat).
"Only?" EVERYONE sells sooner or later - you DIDN'T bother to ask me back then.
Nonsense: I've often mocked you for not having prepublished what your exist criteria is ... don't you remember how mad you got when you finally said +10%
but then missed it by a few dollars?
It is ALL ABOUT having an exit strategy (who here talked about that?).
Oh, you've talked, but you did not actually commit.
As the saying goes, "Talk is cheap."
LOL! You ASKED and I ANSWERED, Lyin' Asshole (this is why I call you that!!!).
Sorry, nope: you've never committed to saying "I"m buying TQQQ tomorrow at $A and my strategy is to hold it for B days or $C, whichever comes first.
The closest you've come to that is the above "10% gain" that you mentioned in
midstream, but then slightly missed.
There WILL be a time to enter the market, but I don't think now is it.
Gosh, Tommy continues his unwillingness to commitment! /s
Silence from Tommy!
Nope, that's in the past: we cannot make investments retroactively.
...and would have
been FAR BETTER OFF in TQQQ - as I documented.
Not for 2022 it wouldn't: -40% YTD.
[...]Plus a quality portfolio has investment diversity; since you don't
know my portfolio contents, you have no insight on if TQQQ would
have been a good fit, or if it would have been an unbalancing risk.
Irrelevant.
Diversification may be unimportant to gamblers, but I'm talking of investing.
In the meantime, the performance of others I previously mentioned;
not quite YTD, but a ~week prior. Note that these weren't growth prospects, but for a dividend revenue stream (as noted):
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +5%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) +2%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +37%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +7%
ENB (DIV 6%) +18%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +24%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) -0%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -21%
Off topic, asshole.
Incorrect, for this list was included way back in January for a reason, which was to not be afraid to publicly show picks. These aren't on the block to be traded but are a medium period hold; above is their first
~90 days performance. You're free to check on them quarterly too.
...[plus consider] the effective yields because this package was
picked based upon dividend yields (in lieu of CDs/Bonds) while also
seeking relative price stability similar to same.
FYI, others in this camp could be AT&T (T), but it has higher instability risks for a variety of reasons, including debts and because of their now-announced dividend cut (from 8% to 4%); holding T depends on
how much exposure one wants to the telecom sector and deciding
on who, such as if BCE (above) is a better/worse fit for one's criteria; ditto VZ (Verizon), etc, etc.
It's pretty funny how you libtards excuse not taking my advice - at YOUR LOSS!
On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 10:30:44 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, March 20, 2022 at 4:20:27 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 11:30:53 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 10:56:39 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 12:11:07 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
Time to check the performance of ARNA relative to TQQQ, which Tommy
recommended instead of ARNA...
YTD / ARNA: unch. ($93.2 to $93.2 interday)
YTD / TQQQ: -20% ($170 to $135 interday)
Next up: "catch a falling knife" recommendations!
Time to check my move from ATT to Chevron that you poo-pooed as "oil stocks are too volatile".
At times it has been, because ya know ... market conditions do change. Especially over a 20 year period.
So just when was that comment made? Got cite?Gosh, golly ... no response from old Tom.
BTW, even checking on 'hh' and 'oil', there were only three hits, one of which
was barely relevant at all, which noted that with the onset of CoVid and lockdowns
that oil dropped.
Meantime, the recommendation for portfolio adjustments for a higher inflation
period have been trending towards energy, commodities, etc: here's just one
such SME calling this out from an interview last week, which literally was just
first aired yesterday (i.e., later than this thread):
<https://wealthtrack.com/how-to-reposition-your-portfolio-for-a-new-higher-inflation-era-with-top-strategist-rich-bernstein/>
FYI, the person calling for this is Richard Bernstein ... perhaps you've heard of him?Maybe Tom would be more interested in hearing about his FL hero, DeSantis: his reported
net worth in 2018 was $283,604 and then $291,449 at the end of 2019, and then $348,832
at the end of 2020 ... but has suddenly zoomed to be reportedly worth $52M today, just 15
months later: his official 2021 EoY filing should be quite interesting...stay tuned.
<https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-nsf-desantis-net-worth-20210621-xxqfzxbt5zeufkluweusvgwuny-story.html>
July 2, 2000
ATT 30.08
Chevron 88.31
March 18, 2002
ATT 23.22
Chevron 161.73
Think you probably mean 2020 & 2022, not 2000 & 2002.
I'm bought Chevron for the 6% dividend yield that has dropped as the stock price increased.
Got cite? Because the relevant prior mention of CVX was from Sep 15, 2019, whenEven a very broad search on just 'Chevron' instead of 'CVX' doesn't show any posts prior to this
you claimed you were buying it at $124 because the attack on Saudi. It failed to pan out
as you had hoped .. which you were reminded of. No mentions of "CVX" in 2020 by anyone.
one since in 2021 or 2020. Next most recent one was from August 2015, and was about a
shooting of a police officer at a Chevron gas station:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/search?q=Chevron>
The point? Don't listen to stock advice from people who live in small New Jersey houses.
If they were any good at it they would not be in a small house or New Jersey.
Because Tommy can only 'pick on' the one property that he's aware of that we own?
I listen to my broker. He lives in a $1~ million 5,000+ square foot home...
Paid for by the fees he charges you ... too bad you don't live in a $1M 5K house yourself.
Did I tell you that just I traded the 2019 Insight for a new Accord Hybrid Touring? Paid cash. :)
Is that supposed to be more impressive than claiming that all of one's Porsche purchases
were done as cash, and also also without any trade-in to reduce the outlay? /s
Your search failed. From July 26, 2020:
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/c/Skn3VVQ2Hoc/m/BTj676jcDQAJNot really: I thought I was still replying to Tom Seim, not you, and as such,
was searching rec.sport.golf thusly:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/search?q=hh%20CVX>
Me:
That's pretty much my plan. We have about 12 months of cash in the bank.
I have a dividend account with AT&T and Chevron, yield about 6.5% of cost.
Chevron not especially for current yield but a solid record of dividend increases.
You:
Energy stocks are vulnerable to a lot of the Market uncertainty risk, although
much of that should be passed. I've been debating utilities as a "sufficiently boring"
flight to safety....
Sure, and that was from July 2020, when oil was at ~$40/barrel. Likewise, my previous post noted:
"IMO, the current concerns are:
a. "Double Dip" recession
b. High Inflation
c. Stagflation"
So then, how do you want to call it? Nailed (b) a good six months before
it became news, and likewise (c) with similar leadtime as well? Likewise, the "R" word has been bandied about too as an ongoing risk, so a case
can be made that this went "3 for 3" in contemporary risks identification, although I'd not really put the 2022 recession risk as still due to the same factors and delayed enough it shouldn't be considered to be a double-dip,
so I'll settle for just a 2/3 = .667 batting average.
-hh
On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 3:15:11 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
…
And as I pointed out I bought Chevron for the dividends.
On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 10:39:04 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 3:15:11 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
…
And as I pointed out I bought Chevron for the dividends.Not here in RSG you didn’t.
Even before noting that this conversation had been with the other Tom.
-hh
On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 8:19:26 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 10:39:04 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 3:15:11 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
…
And as I pointed out I bought Chevron for the dividends.Not here in RSG you didn’t.
Even before noting that this conversation had been with the other Tom.
-hh
Forget what these assholes have to say; if you tell them to buy XYZ they reply with "you didn't say the day, hour and minute you bought it and what you paid for it."
These assholes could have made HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
off of my recommendations, but they are TOO STUPID to act on them!
They know it, which is why they claim it is MY FAULT that my recommendation wasn't specific enough. Go figure...
On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 10:39:04 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 3:15:11 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
…
And as I pointed out I bought Chevron for the dividends.Not here in RSG you didn’t.
Even before noting that this conversation had been with the other Tom.
-hh
On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 11:19:26 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 10:39:04 AM UTC-4, thomas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 3:15:11 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
…
And as I pointed out I bought Chevron for the dividends.Not here in RSG you didn’t.
Even before noting that this conversation had been with the other Tom.
I pointed it out TO YOU in CSMA.
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's chain
again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Meantime...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
-hh
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's chain
again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Meantime...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
The Lyin' Asshole doesn't even follow his own advice and have an exit strategy - so sad!
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... althoughBeen way too long since reporting back on this...
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
30 Jan update:Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.
Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly. TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...". Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 11:50:32 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.
Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.Plus today, the European Bank does a +0.5% rate hike, with a "more to come":
<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-02-02/ecb-interest-rate-hike-half-point-with-pledge-of-more-to-come>
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly. TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?Because paper gains aren't locked in (of course).
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...". Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Meantime, I've been pricing airline tickets this week, as we now have one trip now
slotted in. Maybe its time to spend more to travel in style? Debating also between
trips to Ireland vs Japan too...plus got notice that the lottery opened yesterday for
New Year's concert by the Vienna Philharmonic, so threw a hat into the ring to try
to score those tickets, which would necessitate another trip. Unlikely though, as
the last time we looked at doing that (pre-CoVid) the odds on a Category 1 was
in the 5%-10% range.
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly. TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.So? Does that mean that you sold today?
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...". Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
-hh
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly. TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...". Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly. TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is nearSo you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
-hh
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
-hh
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
-hh
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQNah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
-hh
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass doesn't deserve an education in that.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81% BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43% CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32% LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64% NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74% VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84 Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
-hh
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81% BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43% CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69% ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11% ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26% JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32% LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64% NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74% VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55% --------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84 Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11% ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26% JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84 Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of othersYA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
who have succeeded where you have failed.
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022] BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Yes, it is.
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
YA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter.
On the contrary, I have tried to pass the secret of my success to you libtards and have
been met with nothing but scorn and derision (which is why you dudes aren't successful).
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
You continually obliviate on it - that is ample evidence of jealousness.
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022] BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]Yes, it is.
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Shoot the messenger much?Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter.
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of othersYA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
who have succeeded where you have failed.
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 9:10:12 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022] BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Yes, it is.Nope: <https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
YA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter."...he vainly whined, so bitterly that his flecks of spittle tarnished the basement's linoleum floor." /s
On the contrary, I have tried to pass the secret of my success to you libtards and haveIncorrect: your so-called 'secrets' weren't secrets at all, nor even about how to be successful
been met with nothing but scorn and derision (which is why you dudes aren't successful).
in business. They were just a couple of already-known strategies for personal income taxes.
FYI, it is hard to honestly claim that the disinclination was scornful/derisive when it was explained
as due to individual circumstances (e.g. insufficient age for RMDs, employer benefits) which was
what made them de-optimal strategies to be employed at present.
Perhaps what you're thinking of as derision was in how it was noted that you had exaggerated
on your claimed magnitude of savings? Or how your misrepresenting a mere two tips as "many"?
Nope. Attention to Detail is a time-tested attribute for success in life & business: try it sometime.
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
You continually obliviate on it - that is ample evidence of jealousness.Nah, it has merely become sport to remind you of your "emperor has no clothes" personal failure.
Because no one forced you to make your 'multimillionaire' claim, yet you did so & repeated that
many times. Your attempt to rub that in the face of others has backfired on you because you've
not ever substantiated your allegation, which is why it, like you, rings empty and hollow.
-hh
On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 3:48:50 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 9:10:12 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Yes, it is.
Nope: <https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
YA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter.
"...he vainly whined, so bitterly that his flecks of spittle tarnished the basement's linoleum floor." /s
On the contrary, I have tried to pass the secret of my success to you libtards and have
been met with nothing but scorn and derision (which is why you dudes aren't successful).
Incorrect: your so-called 'secrets' weren't secrets at all, nor even about how to be successful
in business. They were just a couple of already-known strategies for personal income taxes.
FYI, it is hard to honestly claim that the disinclination was scornful/derisive when it was explained
as due to individual circumstances (e.g. insufficient age for RMDs, employer benefits) which was
what made them de-optimal strategies to be employed at present.
Perhaps what you're thinking of as derision was in how it was noted that you had exaggerated
on your claimed magnitude of savings? Or how your misrepresenting a mere two tips as "many"?
Nope. Attention to Detail is a time-tested attribute for success in life & business: try it sometime.
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is
supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
You continually obliviate on it - that is ample evidence of jealousness.
Nah, it has merely become sport to remind you of your "emperor has no clothes" personal failure.
Because no one forced you to make your 'multimillionaire' claim, yet you did so & repeated that
many times. Your attempt to rub that in the face of others has backfired on you because you've
not ever substantiated your allegation, which is why it, like you, rings empty and hollow.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you present a PHONY E-Trade transaction and you QUESTION my veracity???
Go back to the drawing board, bozo.
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 1:23:10 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 3:48:50 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 9:10:12 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Yes, it is.
Nope: <https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
YA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter.
"...he vainly whined, so bitterly that his flecks of spittle tarnished the basement's linoleum floor." /s
On the contrary, I have tried to pass the secret of my success to you libtards and have
been met with nothing but scorn and derision (which is why you dudes aren't successful).
Incorrect: your so-called 'secrets' weren't secrets at all, nor even about how to be successful
in business. They were just a couple of already-known strategies for personal income taxes.
FYI, it is hard to honestly claim that the disinclination was scornful/derisive when it was explained
as due to individual circumstances (e.g. insufficient age for RMDs, employer benefits) which was
what made them de-optimal strategies to be employed at present.
Perhaps what you're thinking of as derision was in how it was noted that you had exaggerated
on your claimed magnitude of savings? Or how your misrepresenting a mere two tips as "many"?
Nope. Attention to Detail is a time-tested attribute for success in life & business: try it sometime.
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is
supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
You continually obliviate on it - that is ample evidence of jealousness.
Nah, it has merely become sport to remind you of your "emperor has no clothes" personal failure.
Because no one forced you to make your 'multimillionaire' claim, yet you did so & repeated that
many times. Your attempt to rub that in the face of others has backfired on you because you've
not ever substantiated your allegation, which is why it, like you, rings empty and hollow.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you present a PHONY E-Trade transaction and you QUESTION my veracity???Oh, look: Tommy is back to that old diversion attempt again, only this time he's tried to move from
Go back to the drawing board, bozo.
claiming it was a "very suspicious trade confirmation" to now alleging it was a "PHONY" one.
No proof again, of course.
As Tommy's been told:
"Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough, but do so by leading by example, by posting your own
purchase order record of CVX to show what the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see."
Instead of leading by example, Tommy vainly just posts bitter another "Grandpa Simpson" rant.
-hh
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 3:24:44 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 1:23:10 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 3:48:50 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 9:10:12 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Yes, it is.
Nope: <https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
YA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter.
"...he vainly whined, so bitterly that his flecks of spittle tarnished the basement's linoleum floor." /s
On the contrary, I have tried to pass the secret of my success to you libtards and have
been met with nothing but scorn and derision (which is why you dudes aren't successful).
Incorrect: your so-called 'secrets' weren't secrets at all, nor even about how to be successful
in business. They were just a couple of already-known strategies for personal income taxes.
FYI, it is hard to honestly claim that the disinclination was scornful/derisive when it was explained
as due to individual circumstances (e.g. insufficient age for RMDs, employer benefits) which was
what made them de-optimal strategies to be employed at present.
Perhaps what you're thinking of as derision was in how it was noted that you had exaggerated
on your claimed magnitude of savings? Or how your misrepresenting a mere two tips as "many"?
Nope. Attention to Detail is a time-tested attribute for success in life & business: try it sometime.
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is
supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
You continually obliviate on it - that is ample evidence of jealousness.
Nah, it has merely become sport to remind you of your "emperor has no clothes" personal failure.
Because no one forced you to make your 'multimillionaire' claim, yet you did so & repeated that
many times. Your attempt to rub that in the face of others has backfired on you because you've
not ever substantiated your allegation, which is why it, like you, rings empty and hollow.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you present a PHONY E-Trade transaction and you QUESTION my veracity???Oh, look: Tommy is back to that old diversion attempt again, only this time he's tried to move from
Go back to the drawing board, bozo.
claiming it was a "very suspicious trade confirmation" to now alleging it was a "PHONY" one.
No proof again, of course.
As Tommy's been told:
"Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough, but do so by leading by example, by posting your own
purchase order record of CVX to show what the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see."
Instead of leading by example, Tommy vainly just posts bitter another "Grandpa Simpson" rant.
LOL! Hey Lyin' Asshole, your phony Etrade confirmation shows a price of ONE DOLLAR and NOTHING
for the quantity. Now, are you claiming that is a REAL confirmation????
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 1:56:09 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 3:24:44 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 1:23:10 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 3:48:50 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 9:10:12 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Yes, it is.
Nope: <https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
YA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter.
"...he vainly whined, so bitterly that his flecks of spittle tarnished the basement's linoleum floor." /s
On the contrary, I have tried to pass the secret of my success to you libtards and have
been met with nothing but scorn and derision (which is why you dudes aren't successful).
Incorrect: your so-called 'secrets' weren't secrets at all, nor even about how to be successful
in business. They were just a couple of already-known strategies for personal income taxes.
FYI, it is hard to honestly claim that the disinclination was scornful/derisive when it was explained
as due to individual circumstances (e.g. insufficient age for RMDs, employer benefits) which was
what made them de-optimal strategies to be employed at present.
Perhaps what you're thinking of as derision was in how it was noted that you had exaggerated
on your claimed magnitude of savings? Or how your misrepresenting a mere two tips as "many"?
Nope. Attention to Detail is a time-tested attribute for success in life & business: try it sometime.
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is
supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
You continually obliviate on it - that is ample evidence of jealousness.
Nah, it has merely become sport to remind you of your "emperor has no clothes" personal failure.
Because no one forced you to make your 'multimillionaire' claim, yet you did so & repeated that
many times. Your attempt to rub that in the face of others has backfired on you because you've
not ever substantiated your allegation, which is why it, like you, rings empty and hollow.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you present a PHONY E-Trade transaction and you QUESTION my veracity???Oh, look: Tommy is back to that old diversion attempt again, only this time he's tried to move from
Go back to the drawing board, bozo.
claiming it was a "very suspicious trade confirmation" to now alleging it was a "PHONY" one.
No proof again, of course.
As Tommy's been told:
"Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough, but do so by leading by example, by posting your own
purchase order record of CVX to show what the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see."
Instead of leading by example, Tommy vainly just posts bitter another "Grandpa Simpson" rant.
LOL! Hey Lyin' Asshole, your phony Etrade confirmation shows a price of ONE DOLLAR and NOTHING
for the quantity. Now, are you claiming that is a REAL confirmation????
And no account number either: you're just confused because the redaction of that information
was done as white on transparent, which your image viewer represented as white on white: try
opening the file in a better GIF browser/editor to better reveal where the redactions were made.
Or ask nicely what contrasting color you want it changed to .. perhaps "cowardly Tommy yellow streak"?
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 8:20:02 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 1:56:09 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 3:24:44 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 1:23:10 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 3:48:50 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 9:10:12 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Yes, it is.
Nope: <https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
YA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter.
"...he vainly whined, so bitterly that his flecks of spittle tarnished the basement's linoleum floor." /s
On the contrary, I have tried to pass the secret of my success to you libtards and have
been met with nothing but scorn and derision (which is why you dudes aren't successful).
Incorrect: your so-called 'secrets' weren't secrets at all, nor even about how to be successful
in business. They were just a couple of already-known strategies for personal income taxes.
FYI, it is hard to honestly claim that the disinclination was scornful/derisive when it was explained
as due to individual circumstances (e.g. insufficient age for RMDs, employer benefits) which was
what made them de-optimal strategies to be employed at present.
Perhaps what you're thinking of as derision was in how it was noted that you had exaggerated
on your claimed magnitude of savings? Or how your misrepresenting a mere two tips as "many"?
Nope. Attention to Detail is a time-tested attribute for success in life & business: try it sometime.
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is
supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
You continually obliviate on it - that is ample evidence of jealousness.
Nah, it has merely become sport to remind you of your "emperor has no clothes" personal failure.
Because no one forced you to make your 'multimillionaire' claim, yet you did so & repeated that
many times. Your attempt to rub that in the face of others has backfired on you because you've
not ever substantiated your allegation, which is why it, like you, rings empty and hollow.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you present a PHONY E-Trade transaction and you QUESTION my veracity???
Go back to the drawing board, bozo.
Oh, look: Tommy is back to that old diversion attempt again, only this time he's tried to move from
claiming it was a "very suspicious trade confirmation" to now alleging it was a "PHONY" one.
No proof again, of course.
As Tommy's been told:
"Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough, but do so by leading by example, by posting your own
purchase order record of CVX to show what the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see."
Instead of leading by example, Tommy vainly just posts bitter another "Grandpa Simpson" rant.
LOL! Hey Lyin' Asshole, your phony Etrade confirmation shows a price of ONE DOLLAR and NOTHING
for the quantity. Now, are you claiming that is a REAL confirmation????
And no account number either: you're just confused because the redaction of that information
was done as white on transparent, which your image viewer represented as white on white: try
opening the file in a better GIF browser/editor to better reveal where the redactions were made.
Or ask nicely what contrasting color you want it changed to .. perhaps "cowardly Tommy yellow streak"?
Since that would be too much work for Tommy, here's an update of the substantiation, with the
redactions done in Tommy Yellow so that he can't legitimately complain about not being able to
see exactly where each redaction was done:
<https://www.huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 9:59:32 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 8:20:02 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 1:56:09 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 3:24:44 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 1:23:10 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 3:48:50 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 9:10:12 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Yes, it is.
Nope: <https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
YA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter.
"...he vainly whined, so bitterly that his flecks of spittle tarnished the basement's linoleum floor." /s
On the contrary, I have tried to pass the secret of my success to you libtards and have
been met with nothing but scorn and derision (which is why you dudes aren't successful).
Incorrect: your so-called 'secrets' weren't secrets at all, nor even about how to be successful
in business. They were just a couple of already-known strategies for personal income taxes.
FYI, it is hard to honestly claim that the disinclination was scornful/derisive when it was explained
as due to individual circumstances (e.g. insufficient age for RMDs, employer benefits) which was
what made them de-optimal strategies to be employed at present.
Perhaps what you're thinking of as derision was in how it was noted that you had exaggerated
on your claimed magnitude of savings? Or how your misrepresenting a mere two tips as "many"?
Nope. Attention to Detail is a time-tested attribute for success in life & business: try it sometime.
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is
supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
You continually obliviate on it - that is ample evidence of jealousness.
Nah, it has merely become sport to remind you of your "emperor has no clothes" personal failure.
Because no one forced you to make your 'multimillionaire' claim, yet you did so & repeated that
many times. Your attempt to rub that in the face of others has backfired on you because you've
not ever substantiated your allegation, which is why it, like you, rings empty and hollow.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you present a PHONY E-Trade transaction and you QUESTION my veracity???
Go back to the drawing board, bozo.
Oh, look: Tommy is back to that old diversion attempt again, only this time he's tried to move from
claiming it was a "very suspicious trade confirmation" to now alleging it was a "PHONY" one.
No proof again, of course.
As Tommy's been told:
"Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough, but do so by leading by example, by posting your own
purchase order record of CVX to show what the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see."
Instead of leading by example, Tommy vainly just posts bitter another "Grandpa Simpson" rant.
LOL! Hey Lyin' Asshole, your phony Etrade confirmation shows a price of ONE DOLLAR and NOTHING
for the quantity. Now, are you claiming that is a REAL confirmation????
And no account number either: you're just confused because the redaction of that information
was done as white on transparent, which your image viewer represented as white on white: try
opening the file in a better GIF browser/editor to better reveal where the redactions were made.
Or ask nicely what contrasting color you want it changed to .. perhaps "cowardly Tommy yellow streak"?
Since that would be too much work for Tommy, here's an update of the substantiation, with the
redactions done in Tommy Yellow so that he can't legitimately complain about not being able to
see exactly where each redaction was done:
<https://www.huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Meantime, back on 3 Feb, we were told: “Prices have ALREADY factored those increases in and
company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED for an upside
move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM.”
But it appears that the Markets have had a difficult opinion of “bottom” than Tommy …
DJIA is currently down -800, of which -500 was just today. Similarly, Tommy’s favorite of TQQQ
was at $25.52 on the 3rd, but closed today at $22.35.
On Tuesday, February 21, 2023 at 10:28:09 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 9:59:32 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 8:20:02 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 1:56:09 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 3:24:44 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 1:23:10 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 3:48:50 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 9:10:12 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Yes, it is.
Nope: <https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
YA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter.
"...he vainly whined, so bitterly that his flecks of spittle tarnished the basement's linoleum floor." /s
On the contrary, I have tried to pass the secret of my success to you libtards and have
been met with nothing but scorn and derision (which is why you dudes aren't successful).
Incorrect: your so-called 'secrets' weren't secrets at all, nor even about how to be successful
in business. They were just a couple of already-known strategies for personal income taxes.
FYI, it is hard to honestly claim that the disinclination was scornful/derisive when it was explained
as due to individual circumstances (e.g. insufficient age for RMDs, employer benefits) which was
what made them de-optimal strategies to be employed at present.
Perhaps what you're thinking of as derision was in how it was noted that you had exaggerated
on your claimed magnitude of savings? Or how your misrepresenting a mere two tips as "many"?
Nope. Attention to Detail is a time-tested attribute for success in life & business: try it sometime.
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is
supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
You continually obliviate on it - that is ample evidence of jealousness.
Nah, it has merely become sport to remind you of your "emperor has no clothes" personal failure.
Because no one forced you to make your 'multimillionaire' claim, yet you did so & repeated that
many times. Your attempt to rub that in the face of others has backfired on you because you've
not ever substantiated your allegation, which is why it, like you, rings empty and hollow.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you present a PHONY E-Trade transaction and you QUESTION my veracity???
Go back to the drawing board, bozo.
Oh, look: Tommy is back to that old diversion attempt again, only this time he's tried to move from
claiming it was a "very suspicious trade confirmation" to now alleging it was a "PHONY" one.
No proof again, of course.
As Tommy's been told:
"Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough, but do so by leading by example, by posting your own
purchase order record of CVX to show what the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see."
Instead of leading by example, Tommy vainly just posts bitter another "Grandpa Simpson" rant.
LOL! Hey Lyin' Asshole, your phony Etrade confirmation shows a price of ONE DOLLAR and NOTHING
for the quantity. Now, are you claiming that is a REAL confirmation????
And no account number either: you're just confused because the redaction of that information
was done as white on transparent, which your image viewer represented as white on white: try
opening the file in a better GIF browser/editor to better reveal where the redactions were made.
Or ask nicely what contrasting color you want it changed to .. perhaps "cowardly Tommy yellow streak"?
Since that would be too much work for Tommy, here's an update of the substantiation, with the
redactions done in Tommy Yellow so that he can't legitimately complain about not being able to
see exactly where each redaction was done:
<https://www.huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Meantime, back on 3 Feb, we were told: “Prices have ALREADY factored those increases in and
company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED for an upside
move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM.”
But it appears that the Markets have had a difficult opinion of “bottom” than Tommy …
DJIA is currently down -800, of which -500 was just today. Similarly, Tommy’s favorite of TQQQTQQQ closed out the week today at $21.77
was at $25.52 on the 3rd, but closed today at $22.35.
Naturally, Tommy's in hiding, having called "BOTTOM" three weeks ago.
-hh
On Friday, February 24, 2023 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, February 21, 2023 at 10:28:09 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 9:59:32 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 8:20:02 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 1:56:09 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 3:24:44 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 1:23:10 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 3:48:50 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 9:10:12 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 6:11:29 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:03:00 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 4:33:01 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 1:28:06 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:31:30 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 8:48:44 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:20:39 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 12:32:41 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:22:11 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:59:18 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 7:03:32 AM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:26:01 AM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 8:50:32 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:52:37 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 2:26:16 PM UTC-8, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 8:51:50 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 3:10:19 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 8:27:03 AM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:37:56 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 8:17:20 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
Well, after yesterday's correction, seems about right to pull on Tommy's
chain again on how well his 'TQQQ' is doing.
Probably time to check these again; midday 22 Aug 22Meantime...
[YTD's were as of 19 May 2022]
BCE (DIV 5.3%) +2.3% Aug --> -2.81%
BBY (DIV 3.5%) -23% Aug --> -20.43%
CVX (DIV 3.5%) +40% Aug --> +33.69%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +12% Aug --> +18.11%
ENB (DIV 6%) +16% Aug --> +13.26%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +3.3% Aug --> -0.32%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +22% Aug --> +25.64%
NVS (DIV 2.5%) +1.8% Aug --> -2.74%
VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -14% Aug --> -22.55%
--------------------------------------
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +6.1%, which contrasts ever
so slightly to the likes of Tommy's TQQQ being down by a mere -66%.
8/22/22 Update:
YTD is still positive, at +4.65% whereas TQQQ at $32.4 is in the red at -62% ... although
to be fair, that is a four point recovery since May. Of course, this +4.65% is before
dividends (roughly +2.5%), so one could say that it is effectively at +7% YTD.
Been way too long since reporting back on this...
BCE (DIV 5.3%) -14% BBY (DIV 3.5%) -18% CVX (DIV 3.5%) +44%
ED (DIV 3.5%) +13%
ENB (DIV 6%) +1%
JNJ (DIV 2.4%) +5%
LMT (DIV 2.6%) +39% NVS (DIV 2.5%) +4% VTRS (DIV 4.5%) -18%
Total portfolio slice is still net positive 'YTD', by +5.54% on Equities values...plus, of
course, the dividends spun off...roughly another +3.77%, so approx. +9% paper return.
30 Jan update:
+7.34% appreciation, plus the dividends, so roughly a 10%-11% YoY return.
Apologies, forgot to include the comparison back to TQQQ for Tommy.
TQQQ (close yesterday) at $18.27 ... down -17% since Tommy's claimed purchase of it
at $22.00, executed back on 5 Dec 2022:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.sport.golf/c/ooGucHaSsFI/m/DpkT6VenAwAJ>
Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share.
-hh
Well, let's look at how Lyin' Asshole's strategy played out.
I figured you'd crawl back as soon as you were 'safely' above water.
The Fed announced today a 0.25% rate hike and indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes.Not sure what you're reading, because:
"The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates
more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating."
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html>
It includes a statement of "...“a couple more” rate increases..." too.
This is what I was anticipating, and the market responded accordingly.
TQQQ is now at 24.39, giving me about an 11% gain in less than 90 days - not bad.
So? Does that mean that you sold today?
So, you STATED that I had a 20% LOSS w/o asking me if I had sold!
Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed out of TQQQ with just his 11% gain (before STCG taxes).Incorrect. The comment was noting that you were hiding while you were underwater:
"Tommy's silent, of course, as TQQQ's back under $22/share. "
WHY don't you maintain the same standards????
Sorry, but I *exceed* the standards that you use, by actually substantiating statements.
More importantly, the trajectory going forward is much more likely to be up than down.
Yes, that's what the Fed said: "...“a couple more” rate increases...".
Or did you mean to suggest something else?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I'm going to give you the MOST IMPORTANT piece of advice yet: the Fed is near
the end of their rate increases and the market KNOWS that. Prices have ALREADY factored those
increases in and company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED
for an upside move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM. Is that clear enough
for your peanut-sized brain??????
Hmmm...So you've definitively called the bottom. Does this also mean that you're also saying that there will be
no recession in 2023 either?
Meanwhile, the Lyin' Asshole has his thumb up his ass, not knowing what to do, but what else is new?
Golly, looks like Mr. Senile forgot that someone mentioned buying TQQQ in December
at lower than a $22/share price, which mathematically means better than +11%:
Hey LA, did you BUY TQQQ at that price? I DOUBT IT!!!!
Already posted that I did, but didn't provide a receipt, so here ya go:
<http://huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Still waiting.Granted, it is redacted, but it is nevertheless sufficient to show a TQQQ purchase in December, at
a price whose first digit is a "1" instead of a "2". Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough,
but do so by leading by example, by posting your own purchase order record of CVX to show what
the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see.
[quote]
12/27/22 update: TQQQ low & close: $16.72 & $16.84
Looks like I can expect some paperwork in the mail from a certain limit order...
[/quote]
Hmmm...that suggests something north of +40%, doesn't it?
Not for you because you DIDN'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except for how any TQQQ purchase below $20.00 versus your $24.39 price point
would be at least a +22% gain.
Likewise, for even lower prices:
If PP = $19.50 --> +25%
If PP = $19.00 --> +28%
If PP = $18.50 --> +32%
If PP = $18.00 --> +36%
If PP = $17.50 --> +39%
If PP = $17.00 --> +43%
If PP = $16.50 --> +48%
etc
Meantime, today's jobs report was too strong, so Markets are dropping because they know
that that's meat for the Federal Reserve to keep on increasing rates for longer = a Tommy oops!
Without nitpicking, ...
This would be the part where Tommy tries to ignore that his call that the Feds have ended making
rate hikes is looking quite incorrect at the end of last week. Plus Tommy's silent on if he's bailed
out of TQQQ with just a 11% gain (before STCG taxes).
... its good to see that you followed my advice FOR ONCE!
Nah, the TQQQ holdings are insignificant: they're worth the entertainment value of seeing you
squirm, because no matter what brag you try to make, you know someone else is doing better than you.
The Lyin' Asshole's string of lies is unbroken: WHEN did I say that the Fed had ENDED their rate hikes?
Nah, I'm just already accepting a hike at the Fed's March meeting, based on what you said, which was:
"....indicated they were close to the end of rate hikes."
That's in conjunction and context with how you've not denied having also called the bottom already, as well as
the elaborations on how a bottom occurs only a few months before the last rate hikes. Together, it points to
the Fed's March meeting as being the last rate hike as being what you meant - - at the time you said it.
Naturally, now that the Fed has clearly said otherwise, you're trying to change what you meant, particularly
particularly since the June and even May Fed meeting dates are already too far into 2023 for a reasonable
expectation of a Fed rate cut occurring 2023, because any sort of Fed rates hold duration would be negated.
Meantime, you're silent on if you already bailed out of TQQQ at its 11% gain point (before STCG taxes).
Ditto on you providing clarity on if you're also saying that there will be no recession in 2023 either.
INTC values as of:As well as your mystery purchase record on CVX....oh, gosh on INTC too (purchased claimed prior to 11 Jan 22)
31 Dec 21: $48.94**
11 Jan 22: $52.46
11 Feb 23: $27.80
** - adjusted close; lowest daily non-adjusted low for 10/31/21 through 1/11/22 was $49.18
Hey Asshole, at least you ADMIT that I didn't say the Fed was DONE with rate hikes.
There are, at least, two more rate hikes in the works, PROBABLY (note I am not declaring this) 0.25% each.
Oh, so it’s “at least two”? That’s what’s now supposed to be “close”? This pushes out the first
meeting with no expected rate hike to mid-June, so where does that now place your bottom,
for which you’ve previously said “I am saying that the market is going thru a bottoming process
this quarter.”, which ends in just 51 days? Trying to copy my 1H comment?
So, now you are arguing about what "close" means. Sorry, but your sorry ass
doesn't deserve an education in that.
Nope, just illustrating how you’re trying to [use] a rubber ruler…again. And got caught…again.
We have ALREADY had our recession which you profoundly waffled about.No, NBER is the authority on that, and they’ve not made that call. Sorry.
Sorry, but we WERE.
Nope. No matter what you want to believe, NBER has not made that determination.
I have ALREADY put you on notice that I AM NOT informing you of all my trades, …
Non sequitur, as you’ve been on notice yourself that you can’t make any claims on any
trades that you’ve not posted prior adequate notice. Thus, you’ll no longer be able to
cherry-pick from your entire portfolio to find a winner to claim…unless you choose to
disclose your entire portfolio, of course.
You are a PIECE OF WORK, Asshole! I owe you exactly NOTHING, which is exactly
what you DESERVE. You are a loser living a life of quiet desperation that looks at
diminishing those that have done better than you.
Golly, that reflection you see of yourself in the mirror really is quite ugly, isn’t it?
… just as YOU are not doing the same (and, now, declaring that you bought TQQQ
with a very suspicious trade confirmation).
Nah, you’ve already been told to provide an example of your own trades with the level
of detail you’re trying to complain about not getting from others…and have not done so.
Silence from Tommy.
Let's face it: you're jealous of my success and want to belittle it at every opportunity.
So be it - you are welcome to wallow in your proven mediocrity.
Sorry, but you do that all on your own and to yourself. No one here has any reason
to be in the least jealous of your little goldfish bowl’s echo chamber.
Yeah, right - coming from a loser.
Nah, the problem you have Tommy is that I’ve not tried to brag as much as you, so
you’re stuck in the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” logical trap.
Plus even when I’ve dropped clues, you’ve been unable and/or unwilling to
comprehend and/or acknowledge their significance. Your loss, not mine.
BTW, a retired friend sent me these two links recently; first is an illustration
whereas the second is a quasi-analysis…a bit overly broad, but nevertheless
revealing on some of your behavior:
< https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396981&sid=7b59bcd7747813e9852733284ece221f>
< https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Quick reads both.
Gosh, Tommy's gone silent. Perhaps from this in the last cite:
[quote]
Common tells of the Upper Middle Class belief system
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important... * Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
YAAAWWWWWNNNNNNNN...
“Cry harder”, Tommy.
Your attempt at psychoanalysis is PATHETIC, Lyin' Asshole.It’s not mine:
[quote]
* Absolute obsession with being seen as important...
* Insecurity...
* Passive aggressive behavior...Constant emphasis on how “high they are up the chain”.
* Obsession with “comp”....common for them to prod and try to figure out how much you make...
[/quote]
Yes, it is.
Nope: <https://bowtiedbull.substack.com/p/going-through-levels-of-wealth>
Shoot the messenger much?
The bottom line is the same: you just live a miserable life jealous of others
who have succeeded where you have failed.
YA instance of a (self-alleged) RSG “multimillionaire” being vain & bitter.
Hardly. I am neither vain nor bitter.
"...he vainly whined, so bitterly that his flecks of spittle tarnished the basement's linoleum floor." /s
On the contrary, I have tried to pass the secret of my success to you libtards and have
been met with nothing but scorn and derision (which is why you dudes aren't successful).
Incorrect: your so-called 'secrets' weren't secrets at all, nor even about how to be successful
in business. They were just a couple of already-known strategies for personal income taxes.
FYI, it is hard to honestly claim that the disinclination was scornful/derisive when it was explained
as due to individual circumstances (e.g. insufficient age for RMDs, employer benefits) which was
what made them de-optimal strategies to be employed at present.
Perhaps what you're thinking of as derision was in how it was noted that you had exaggerated
on your claimed magnitude of savings? Or how your misrepresenting a mere two tips as "many"?
Nope. Attention to Detail is a time-tested attribute for success in life & business: try it sometime.
Naturally, Tommy has provided zero quantified metrics for what anyone is
supposed to be jealous of him for. Perhaps it will be stomach acidity level?
You continually obliviate on it - that is ample evidence of jealousness.
Nah, it has merely become sport to remind you of your "emperor has no clothes" personal failure.
Because no one forced you to make your 'multimillionaire' claim, yet you did so & repeated that
many times. Your attempt to rub that in the face of others has backfired on you because you've
not ever substantiated your allegation, which is why it, like you, rings empty and hollow.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you present a PHONY E-Trade transaction and you QUESTION my veracity???
Go back to the drawing board, bozo.
Oh, look: Tommy is back to that old diversion attempt again, only this time he's tried to move from
claiming it was a "very suspicious trade confirmation" to now alleging it was a "PHONY" one.
No proof again, of course.
As Tommy's been told:
"Go ahead and complain that this isn't good enough, but do so by leading by example, by posting your own
purchase order record of CVX to show what the minimum disclosure resolution is that you want to see."
Instead of leading by example, Tommy vainly just posts bitter another "Grandpa Simpson" rant.
LOL! Hey Lyin' Asshole, your phony Etrade confirmation shows a price of ONE DOLLAR and NOTHING
for the quantity. Now, are you claiming that is a REAL confirmation????
And no account number either: you're just confused because the redaction of that information
was done as white on transparent, which your image viewer represented as white on white: try
opening the file in a better GIF browser/editor to better reveal where the redactions were made.
Or ask nicely what contrasting color you want it changed to .. perhaps "cowardly Tommy yellow streak"?
Since that would be too much work for Tommy, here's an update of the substantiation, with the
redactions done in Tommy Yellow so that he can't legitimately complain about not being able to
see exactly where each redaction was done:
<https://www.huntzinger.com/usenet/2022-TQQQ_redacted.gif>
Meantime, back on 3 Feb, we were told: “Prices have ALREADY factored those increases in and
company profits have ABSORBED those increases, so the market is GREEN-LIGHTED for an upside
move. In other words, we have already seen the market BOTTOM.”
But it appears that the Markets have had a difficult opinion of “bottom” than Tommy …
DJIA is currently down -800, of which -500 was just today. Similarly, Tommy’s favorite of TQQQTQQQ closed out the week today at $21.77
was at $25.52 on the 3rd, but closed today at $22.35.
Naturally, Tommy's in hiding, having called "BOTTOM" three weeks ago.
My, My! We haven't heard from the Lyin' Asshole on this topic for SOME TIME! I wonder why?
Could it be because TQQQ closed yesterday at $36.82?
My gain on TQQQ is now over FIFTY PERCENT!
All that the Lyin' Asshole has to show is his obviously FAKE TRADE!
And you libtards have been WAY BEHIND THE CURVE on everything else,
calling for a market pullback, saying we should wait until even 2024 to reenter the market!
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 63:40:47 |
| Calls: | 6,712 |
| Files: | 12,244 |
| Messages: | 5,355,976 |
