Category: Speculation

You Would Be Better Off Buying McDonalds

You Would Be Better Off Buying McDonalds

Okay let’s roll the promoted stocks scoreboard:

Ticker Date of Article Price @ Article Price @ 2/4/14 Decline Annualized Splits
GTXO

5/27/2008

2.45

0.014

-99.4%

-59.9%

BONZ

10/22/2009

0.35

0.001

-99.6%

-72.4%

BONU

10/22/2009

0.89

0.001

-99.9%

-81.1%

UTOG

3/30/2011

1.55

0.000

-100.0%

-95.0%

OBJE

4/29/2011

116.00

0.200

-99.8%

-89.9%

1:40

LSTG

10/5/2011

1.12

0.017

-98.5%

-83.3%

AERN

10/5/2011

0.0770

0.0001

-99.9%

-94.2%

IRYS

3/15/2012

0.261

0.000

-100.0%

-100.0%

Dead
RCGP

3/22/2012

1.47

0.160

-89.1%

-69.4%

STVF

3/28/2012

3.24

0.500

-84.6%

-63.5%

CRCL

5/1/2012

2.22

0.015

-99.3%

-94.1%

ORYN

5/30/2012

0.93

0.132

-85.8%

-68.6%

BRFH

5/30/2012

1.16

0.440

-62.1%

-43.8%

LUXR

6/12/2012

1.59

0.013

-99.2%

-94.6%

IMSC

7/9/2012

1.5

0.780

-48.0%

-34.0%

DIDG

7/18/2012

0.65

0.038

-94.2%

-84.0%

GRPH

11/30/2012

0.8715

0.108

-87.6%

-83.0%

IMNG

12/4/2012

0.76

0.070

-90.9%

-87.1%

ECAU

1/24/2013

1.42

0.225

-84.2%

-83.3%

DPHS

6/3/2013

0.59

0.007

-98.9%

-99.9%

POLR

6/10/2013

5.75

0.060

-99.0%

-99.9%

NORX

6/11/2013

0.91

0.225

-75.3%

-88.3%

ARTH

7/11/2013

1.24

0.300

-75.8%

-91.7%

NAMG

7/25/2013

0.85

0.230

-72.9%

-91.5%

MDDD

12/9/2013

0.79

1.150

45.6%

1009.0%

TGRO

12/30/2013

1.2

0.350

-70.8%

-100.0%

2/4/2014

Median

-92.5%

-85.5%

Tonight’s loser-in-waiting is Fresh Healthy Vending [VEND].? But before I go there, let me point you to an article I read today regarding promoted stock scams.

We’ll start with the fact that there is [sic] essentially four kinds of penny stock companies in the Pump & Dump world: (1) the kind where the management is in on the scam and is directly knowledgeable and complicit with the intent to deceive the public; (2) the kind where some poor schmoe has a great idea (at least he thinks it is) that requires financing, and becomes the mark of a parasitic “funder” who makes all kinds of promises of unlimited monies and riches beyond the mark’s wildest dream; (3) the kind where the company is absolutely for real but the shares have been hyped (sometimes hijacked) into ridiculous valuations; and, (4) a hijacked empty and inactive shell.

The following article explains each type of promoted stock scam.? I appreciated it, because it clarified my thinking — I’ve seen all four of these, but I did n’t realize it until now.? My error was looking for one common modus operandi, when there are a variety of parties that can benefit from a stock promotion.

Fresh Healthy Vending fits the first category of promoted stock scams.? Read this portion of the Disclaimer:

The Wall Street Revelator and/or its publisher, Andrew & Lynn Carpenter, dba The Wall Street Revelator has received a total amount of Seventeen thousand five hundred dollars in cash compensation to assist in the writing of this Advertisement, as well as potential future subscription and advertising revenues, the amount of which is not known at this time with respect to the publication of this Advertisement and future publications. Brown Dog Marketing, Inc. paid two million three hundred thousand dollars to marketing vendors to pay for all the costs of creating and distributing this Advertisement, including printing and postage, in an effort to build investor and market awareness.

If successful, the Advertisement will increase investor and market awareness, which may result in increased numbers of shareholders owning and trading the common stock of Fresh Healthy Vending Inc. increased trading volumes, and possibly increased share price of the common stock of Fresh Healthy Vending Inc.

Brown Dog Marketing, Inc. was paid by non-affiliate shareholders who fully intend to sell their shares without notice into this Advertisement/market awareness campaign, including selling into increased volume and share price that may result from this Advertisement/market awareness campaign. The non-affiliate shareholders may also purchase shares without notice at any time before, during or after this Advertisement/market awareness campaign. Non-affiliate shareholders acted-as-advisors to Brown Dog Marketing, Inc. in this Advertisement and market awareness campaign, including providing outside research, materials, and information to outside writers to compile written materials as part of this market awareness campaign.

The bolding is mine.

The scam is rarely this bald.? The type for the disclaimer is 5 or 6 points.? Very tiny, though I have seen smaller.? But why be so plain?? Because few read it, and it immunizes them from any lawsuits.

In this case, one guy owns ~65% of the company, and he got the shares at a very low cost in the reverse merger that converted a “green advertising” company into a company that vends healthy snacks.? He has a history of his own that should raise a yellow flag.? But the rest of the holders that provided financing, have the chance to get out at much higher valuations as a result of the pump and dump going on here.

As a result of the reverse merger, this is a real company, unlike most promoted stocks.? It has real revenues, but still has negative net worth and regular losses.? Why this company has a market cap over $100 million is a mystery to me, aside from the promotional activity over the last few months.? Aside from that, its revenue growth is slowing, and it faces a number of lawsuits over its behavior as a franchisor.

Given trading volumes since the promotions began, it would not surprise me if the selling shareholders are out of their positions in full by now.? It would also not surprise me if this company did a PIPE or a secondary to monetize the gains of the main holder at a lower valuation.

As with all promoted stocks, this is something to stay away from.? On a speculative level, one can never tell where a stock like this will break down, but I can tell you this, it is coming soon, and holders at this price level will lose money.

Sorted Weekly Tweets

Sorted Weekly Tweets

Emerging Markets Submerge

 

  • Argentina to Ease Currency Controls After Devaluation http://t.co/pnDs7kHHDb Argentina finally does something smart that will stabilize $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • Contagion Spreads in Emerging Markets as Crises Grow http://t.co/8tQg0o3wEA The Volatility Machine amplifies the tightening of the Fed $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • Traders watching for signs to see if this sell off is the big one http://t.co/EujnhyTV3z Feels like Shanghai Feb2007, market up&then died $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • Stocks Slide Toward Biggest Weekly Drop Since May http://t.co/AJ8JGDmZNl Volatility Machine kicks in, as emerging markets get hammered $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • China Moves to Avert Shadow Lender’s Default http://t.co/X6UnupKats China wants 2 avoid defaults, but what will they do when too big? $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • China Trust Products Gone Awry Evoke Soros Crisis Echoes http://t.co/sMEaYwiS61 Really sounds like China has a lot of Ponzi schemes going $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • China-Dumps-Dollars Hoax Not So Funny http://t.co/nvNpEgGK42 Remember the mercantilists lost. The neomercantilistic Chinese will lose big $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • Argentine Default Chaos Relived as Blackouts Follow Looting http://t.co/EW7kZrzbOa & Argentine Peso Drops http://t.co/nD9qMSJxla A mess $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Fool’s Gold: Behind Nu Skin’s Chinese Subculture http://t.co/FiwozVHn6y What does the party think about a business that sounds cult-like? $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Rousseff Debuts at Davos to Assure Investors She Had Spurned http://t.co/YTr84l0eTg Shortly after Dilma elected, I sold Brazilian stocks $$ Jan 22, 2014

 

Energy

 

  • You can?t be sure of Shell ? or shale http://t.co/5n1PLW2msn Behemoth oil companies are like utilities &pay good dividends, meh cap gains $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • Steady oil market at risk from sabotage, instability http://t.co/zHMkSoGlsD This is normal 4 the oil market; no reason to worry $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • Dunno: Polar Pig Deserves Little Blame for Propane Shortage? http://t.co/ehK6qV9cRl I think corporations & individuals should stockpile $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Quoting Bible, using Joseph stockpiling grain in Egypt, neglects an interpretation rule: u can’t get doctrine from a historical passage $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Energy is gradually decoupling from economic growth http://t.co/gn09N1yIJH What is really meant is that we continue to get more efficient $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Valero forecasts 4Q results above expectations http://t.co/NIOthsoMsl Well run company has a surprise beat FD: + $VLO $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • European businesses rushing to find Iran bonanza http://t.co/2258VWxDG9 Greed of businesses overcoming ideology of political allies $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Megaprojects a megaheadache for oil bosses http://t.co/X3IXqYAVDa Big projects almost always tend to lose $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • How America?s Fracking Boom Helps 2Boost Treasuries Demand http://t.co/lyAXsrmTUo Funny, but when we ran deficits, foreigners bot r bonds $$ Jan 22, 2014

 

Market Impact

  • Gundlach Counting Rotting Homes Makes Subprime Bear http://t.co/SXM2uwxd0Z Gundlach moves on anticipating a bearish housing situation $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • One in Three Audits Fail, PCAOB Chief Auditor Says http://t.co/FCZMp7tGfF No surprise. Some accounting requires intelligence of actuaries $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • How to invest in the hottest stock sectors http://t.co/ZIaKwXmdma I’ve written about this b4. It works, but it flames out occasionally $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • 6 reasons your investments stink http://t.co/4NfbdyIMsm Good asset allocation considers time horizon, & asset class relative valuations $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • 6 flawed rules of personal finance http://t.co/nO5kOsmVsb Generally right, except you shouldn’t spend >4% of your lump sum per year $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • Hard-to-Sell Junk Debt Lures Oaktree to JPMorgan http://t.co/MyJdNpw4Fo I respect Marks; there r no absolute values 2b had in junk debt $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • The mountain without Mohamed http://t.co/joadD6Wp2D Pimco is a “quant shop” which grew too large for the markets that it exploits $$ $TLT Jan 24, 2014
  • Goldman Stocks Strategist Fends Off ?Barrage? After Valuation Call http://t.co/nNCz1syP8m No one ever gets popular opposing a boom. $$ $SPY Jan 24, 2014
  • Bubbles as a deflationary escape chute http://t.co/hiDhyar3aD There are simpler & safer ways to run economic policy. Regulate banks hard $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Pressure mounts for corporates? cash piles to be put to work http://t.co/WBdUF52rz2 1 corporation’s cash is another corps short-term debt $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Floating Notes Debut in US as Cash Chases Fewer Securities http://t.co/9On051rHUu This will be good 4 money market funds in the short-run $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Why IBM Should Stop Buying Its Stock http://t.co/1gsVe7tLpS If you have highest price in the Dow Jones Industrial Avg u get more scrutiny $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Buffett Makes Millions Selling 500:1 Monkey-Linked Derivs http://t.co/6juOLsh2m3 @matt_levine Wrote about this 2 http://t.co/D3sirU5yWN $$ Jan 22, 2014
  • Buffett Backs $1B NCAA Hoops Tournament Prize http://t.co/MLvgHtx7NX Almost no way that Buffett can lose here; perfect bracket impossible $$ Jan 22, 2014
  • US Bank Risk Guidelines Would ?Accelerate? Enforcement http://t.co/DaeYf9zoje I’m not sure this will work, but it will bulk up compliance $$ Jan 22, 2014
  • CFOs Use Face Time, Plant Tours to Court Shareholders http://t.co/7CHts6TqdO This isn’t new, but it is wise to build goodwill w/investors $$ Jan 22, 2014
  • Why earnings could grow http://t.co/Zmwatc3v87 h/t: @ritholtz rising profitability, overseas biz, wise cap allocation, reasonable val’ns $$ Jan 22, 2014
  • Why ‘Peak-Earnings Models’ Are Nonsense http://t.co/Sa3uAci0pj Let’s see where actual unadjusted earnings are, & see if they are growing $$ Jan 22, 2014
  • Pimco CEO El-Erian Resigns http://t.co/Bl05w8h5Tn U have 2 remember that Pimco is a “quant shop.” They follow their models, not people $$ Jan 22, 2014
  • Gold-Price Banks Meet Amid Regulatory Pressure http://t.co/2W5hTdfKpm Post-LIBOR probe it’s in their interest to solve it quietly if poss $$ Jan 22, 2014

?

Rest of the World

 

  • Iceland Traps Hedge Funds in Refusal to Discuss Bank Claims http://t.co/kVUcp2fXvf Iceland delays claims from the crisis, cares 4 people $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Merger Bonanza Hits Finland as Economic Pain Becomes Asset http://t.co/FXCOFmQABx Finnish assets r cheap, & other firms buy them up $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Sochi Security Slalom Shows Terror Risk With Putin on Guard http://t.co/ij243mnvCN Russia will try hard, but will they prevent terrorism? $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Investors Seek Yields in Europe, but Analysts Warn of Risk http://t.co/a3eXCJjgqc Seek a margin of safety & don’t reach 4 yield anywhere $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Europe, Facing Economic Pain, May Ease Climate Rules http://t.co/2aK9oLpKg6 What a hoot! The Eurocrats turn their back on global warming $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • West Explores Plan B for Forces in Afghanistan http://t.co/9cKJcmzbyt If Afghans don’t want the US, we should leave; fractious place $$ $TLT Jan 24, 2014
  • Can Rising Property Values Spur Wary Japanese to Spend? http://t.co/fsrr5ArGtP Dangerous game, at the end 2much debt & 2 little cash flow $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Israeli Ultra-Orthodox Do the Math in Bid to Enter Workforce http://t.co/afrV0U0fd4 Think of Dark Ages where 25% were supported by others $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Olympics host Sochi remains a volatile region http://t.co/B8gwlvHrOR A great test 4 Russia; how well can u protect a perfect target $$ $SPY Jan 22, 2014
  • Abe Eyes Land-Price Reflation to Spur Construction Boom http://t.co/1QMMntydBq But Abe thinks he will succeed in creating property bubble $$ Jan 22, 2014
  • Pimco Dropping Linkers Calls Time on Abenomics Inflation Target http://t.co/r37SBu12G5 Pimco doesn’t believe Abenomics will inflate much $$ Jan 22, 2014

 

Companies & Industries


?? Fed May Protect Warren Buffett as a National Treasure http://t.co/zTdv5t6tTz Unlike most, Buffett has more than enough cash 2 survive $$ Jan 25, 2014

  • T-Mobile Answers Call of Underbanked as Banks Fail to Pick Up http://t.co/sAl7vhJJlP New cheap way 2do payments w/o a bank account $$ $TMUS Jan 24, 2014
  • eBay CEO Says Icahn PayPal Spinoff Makes No Sense http://t.co/4bKyeBMODa Then rename the company Paypal,& spin off $EBAY . $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • What Bankers Need to Know About the Target Breach http://t.co/L6XXJaFmVY Detailed; explains how credit data captured, stored & sent $$ $TGT Jan 24, 2014
  • Pinterest CEO Ben Silbermann on Being a Dad &Running a Company http://t.co/exLTi0CLyi The “Glass Ceiiing” Means u care about your family $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Madoff Haunts Yeshiva as University Slides to Junk http://t.co/ZbNeoudT1k Wise 2 avoid board conflicts where board member invests 4 board $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Diamond Foods CFO on Recovering From a Crisis http://t.co/aVFn9zioB9 America offers unlimited second chances, but clean things up or else $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Dan Loeb’s Third Point Discloses Stake in Dow Chemical http://t.co/2RuMuNEKjK Separate petrochemicals from specialty chemicals $$ $DOW #easy Jan 22, 2014
  • Buffett Leans on 29-Year-Old Cool to Oversee Problems http://t.co/NfABsLkBzD The start of a gradual centralization of $BRK-B businesses $$ Jan 21, 2014

?

US Politics & Policy

 

  • Thrill of Obama Home Visits Fades for Americans Cited at Events http://t.co/x0aWw6ddia Change seems like spare change or loose change now $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • Why Uncle Sam Can’t Guarantee College Grads a Job http://t.co/oM0htsJcLk College is debauchery, not job preparation; end the subsidies $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • Tor Anonymity Software vs. the National Security Agency http://t.co/mhBGgZPZyS Very cool, let TOR hide private communications from Gov’t $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • The Sleepiness of a Hollow Legend http://t.co/d2NRpymDBP Peggy Noonan on State of the Union Address. I never listen to them; not worth it $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • Davos pusillanimity watch, LGBT rights edition http://t.co/5BkuxGdANL vs Romans 1:28-32 http://t.co/jFOUPLWLgF Jan 24, 2014
  • Resolved: Obamacare Is Now Beyond Rescue http://t.co/SXiG685Z2r Idea is most of the improvements won’t survive the necessary cost cuts $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • NSA?s Spying on Phone Calls Illegal: US Privacy Board http://t.co/ZStT1WAiwT Should not be written off; this aids a healthy debate $$ $SPY Jan 24, 2014

 

US Healthcare

 

  • More Women Seeking Medical Help to Get Pregnant http://t.co/8ICRmFNKx3 Natural result of delaying marriage, or not marrying at all $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Where Have All the Uninsured Gone? http://t.co/0jlpsHORUj They don’t want insurance. They will take their risks & pay as they need to $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • How Qualified Is Your Doctor? http://t.co/XkAxYmjsA6 Hard 2 tell, is certification busy work or real testing? $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Circumcision Coverage Comes Into Focus http://t.co/rZ24KWxvGb One of those issues where if someone has a view, it tends 2b polarized $$ Jan 22, 2014

 

Other

 

  • How Real is Spike Jonze’s ‘Her’? Stephen Wolfram and Peter Norvig Weigh In http://t.co/IgJG3bdrYr AI will not get self referential ideas $$ Jan 25, 2014
  • New York Officials Arrest Man in Lufthansa Heist http://t.co/toMAGIz5ck It took 35 years, but finally an arrest 4 the ’78 heist & others $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Card-Theft Software Grew in Internet’s Dark Alleys http://t.co/cvTgCMC0lA The losses occurred from Target missing hacks of credit cards $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Give the guy a second chance. Yes he blew it once b4, but he is smart and now knows what the limitations r http://t.co/6Fbp1jc6EJ $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Can a Disgraced Trader Get a Job in Academia? http://t.co/qjoP4duPQL He deserves a second chance; that is what makes America great $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Vital Signs: More Households Don?t Own a Car http://t.co/HBlc8L9z1V More options available 4 getting around & owning a car is costly $$ Jan 22, 2014
  • Top employers for flexible and work-at-home jobs http://t.co/UGz6F2XMae Home work getting more common, challenges managing the dispersed $$ Jan 21, 2014

Wrong

  • Wrong: This 100-year-old idea could end San Francisco?s class war http://t.co/Wtxk7wwsvH Sorry, land tax would get passed to renters $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Dunno: Don’t Care About Deficits? Vote Republican http://t.co/1BKNS2m80j The t-party cares about deficits & they r growing in the GOP $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • Wrong: Huge cash pile puts recovery in hands of the few http://t.co/8rRHHFpZJN Most of the cash collateralizes derivatives, etc. Not free $$ Jan 24, 2014

?

Comments, Replies, Retweets

  • Roddy Boyd finds alleged Ponzi schemer http://t.co/GRBY0dqLqv What a guy, Roddy Boyd. $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • @footnoted @theofrancis @BoydRoddy His skills r considerable, as r his ethics. $$ Jan 24, 2014
  • @pmarca I’ve said that, but less colorfully; the market reflects all information acted upon, including errors. $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • @maoxian Good point, will have to consider that. But board should not have members investing for them $$ Jan 23, 2014
  • Wrong: UBS Tells Davos Leverage Ratio Over-Reliance Threatens Stability http://t.co/DZ5gfHmXXK After a crisis from overleveraged banks? $$ Jan 22, 2014

?

There’s No Tiger in the Tank

There’s No Tiger in the Tank

Okay, time to roll the promoted stocks scoreboard:

Ticker Date of Article Price @ Article Price @ 12/30/13 Decline Annualized Splits
GTXO

5/27/2008

2.45

0.009

-99.6%

-63.2%

BONZ

10/22/2009

0.35

0.001

-99.7%

-74.2%

BONU

10/22/2009

0.89

0.001

-99.8%

-78.6%

UTOG

3/30/2011

1.55

0.002

-99.9%

-91.1%

OBJE

4/29/2011

116.00

0.230

-99.8%

-90.3%

1:40

LSTG

10/5/2011

1.12

0.012

-98.9%

-86.9%

AERN

10/5/2011

0.0770

0.0001

-99.9%

-94.9%

IRYS

3/15/2012

0.261

0.000

-100.0%

-100.0%

Dead
RCGP

3/22/2012

1.47

0.140

-90.5%

-73.4%

STVF

3/28/2012

3.24

0.430

-86.7%

-68.3%

CRCL

5/1/2012

2.22

0.024

-98.9%

-93.5%

ORYN

5/30/2012

0.93

0.030

-96.8%

-88.5%

BRFH

5/30/2012

1.16

0.610

-47.4%

-33.3%

LUXR

6/12/2012

1.59

0.012

-99.2%

-95.7%

IMSC

7/9/2012

1.5

0.850

-43.3%

-31.9%

DIDG

7/18/2012

0.65

0.053

-91.8%

-82.2%

GRPH

11/30/2012

0.8715

0.024

-97.3%

-96.4%

IMNG

12/4/2012

0.76

0.050

-93.4%

-92.1%

ECAU

1/24/2013

1.42

0.248

-82.5%

-84.7%

DPHS

6/3/2013

0.59

0.006

-99.0%

-100.0%

POLR

6/10/2013

5.75

0.050

-99.1%

-100.0%

NORX

6/11/2013

0.91

0.096

-89.5%

-98.3%

ARTH

7/11/2013

1.24

0.290

-76.6%

-95.4%

NAMG

7/25/2013

0.85

0.290

-65.9%

-91.7%

MDDD

12/9/2013

0.79

0.480

-39.2%

-100.0%

12/30/2013

Median

-97.3%

-91.1%

Before I talk about tonight’s loser-in-waiting, let me tell you what happened to Makism3D, the last company I reviewed.? Four days after I reviewed it, the SEC suspended trading, and it reopened on 12/30, falling 49% on the day.? Dig the price graph:

MDDD

The SEC is getting more aggressive about suspending trading in companies that are being promoted.? Some suggest that publishing pieces like this, or others at Seeking Alpha, is encouraging the SEC to be more bold.? If true, that is good.

Now for our loser-in-waiting — Tiger Oil & Gas [TGRO].? I ran into TGRO via an ad on Bloomberg.com.? It led me to this spammy article, which led me to this even more spammy article.? If I were invests.com, I would be more protective of my reputation.? I get all sorts of requests to publish low quality articles at Aleph Blog, maybe 50 per month.? You can make money doing that in the short run, but I never want to treat my readers in such a bad way.

And if I were Bloomberg.com, I would not let them advertise.? Because I write these articles, sadly, I get ads for them, but if I see those ads, I tell my ad network to stop running them.

TGRO is another company that has no revenues, negative income, and negative net worth.? Sound familiar?? Maybe Congress should ban “development stage companies.”? I’ve never seen one that was worth anything.

Here is the beginning of the disclaimer:

This report is for informational purposes only, and does not represent a solicitation to buy or sell the profiled company?s securities, which trade under the symbol TGRO, nor any other securities. StockTips.com is operated by Amerada Corp. (AC). Neither AC nor its employees are certified financial analysts or licensed in the securities industry in any manner. The information in this marketing piece and any accompanying information is subjective opinion and may not be complete, accurate or current and was paid for directly or indirectly by shareholders of the profiled company who may or will profit as a result of the preparation, publication and distribution of this marketing piece and accompanying information. AC expects to receive $2,500,000.00 (TWO MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS) as a marketing budget for production and distribution of TGRO marketing material from an unaffiliated 3rd party, Laluna Services, Inc.

And that is what paid Bloomberg.com to give them the top link on a box to the side.? The amount paid is 5% of the present market cap, but 30% of the market cap prior to the promotion.? Look at the price graph:

I should add that this was a operating chemicals company 2007-2010, and another development stage company prior to that.? Such behavior where a company is in the development stage indicates that there is little if any underlying business, and that it is merely a machine to suck money out of the pockets of naive investors, and into the pockets of promoters and insiders.

As I often say, “Don’t buy what someone wants to sell you.? Buy what you have researched and think is valuable.”? Particularly with intangible items like stocks, those who are directly paid to promote stocks are almost always scammers.

Avoid promoted stocks.

Classic: The Correlation Trade Gone Wrong

Classic: The Correlation Trade Gone Wrong

The following was published at RealMoney on May 23rd, 2005.? It’s a little obscure, but indicative of what can happen when too much money pursues an obscure arbitrage.? If nothing else, the piece tries to explain a complex concept to those with moderate market knowledge.

Because of the market dislocations last week, I want to give a primer on the class of derivatives that really jolted the markets this week: Indexed Synthetic CDOs.? First, some definitions:

1)????? CDO – Collateralized Debt Obligation.? A trust that owns bonds, loans, or credit default swaps.? The ownership in the trust is hierarchical.? There are several classes of certificates that have different interests in the trust, which get defined by which class receives losses from defaults first, second, third, etc.? The earlier that a class (or tranche) receives losses if they occur, the higher the yield a class of certificates receives.

2)????? Synthetic ? a term used in opposition to ?cash.?? One who transacts in corporate bonds participates in the cash market.? The synthetic market in corporate credit is composed of credit default swaps.? It is called ?synthetic? because it transacts in corporate credit risk without making loans to corporations.

3)????? Credit default swaps ? A market participant who buys default protection on a given corporation through the credit default swap market gains the right to deliver a certain amount of defaulted bonds in exchange for the par value of the bonds, when an event of default occurs for the class of bonds covered by the agreement.? In exchange for this privilege, the buyer of protection pays the seller a fixed fee for the term of the swap, which is usually five years, but can vary.

4)????? Spread ? That fixed fee is called the spread.? When the spread falls, the value of a credit default swap to someone who has previously sold protection becomes more valuable, in the same way that a bond price rises when its yield falls.

5)????? Indexed ? A third party puts together a seemingly diversified (or focused) list of companies so that investors can invest in a liquid pool of similar companies that they want exposure to, whether on a debt, synthetic, or equity basis.

Indexed Synthetic CDOs gather together the risk of debt default for a group of corporations, and parcel the risk of default out in a concentrated form to those who hold the ?first loss? certificates, in exchange for a high yield.? Those who hold other certificates in the loss priority get lesser yields commensurate to the risk of taking losses.

Setting the Stage

The Indexed Synthetic CDO market rallied until March 2005.? In most cases, the more risk an investor took, the better that investor did.? The indexes were rallying.? Those willing to offer protection against the default of a wide number of corporations were willing to do so at smaller and smaller spreads.? As I stated previously on RealMoney, those spreads were too small to compensate for the possibility and severity of losses.

Also, until March of 2005, the decline in spreads was fairly uniform.? There weren?t many credits within each index that were not moving in tune with the rally.? This was significant, because it meant that results were particularly good for the ?first loss? investors.? What hurts ?first loss? investors are credits going into default.? If the spread on the index as a whole improves (goes lower), but a small minority of credits diverge (get wider) and then default, the ?first loss? investor can get hurt, while investors with greater loss protection can still do well.

What Happened Last Week

Last week, not only did spreads rise in general, but some credits related to the auto and auto parts industries widened disproportionately.? This wouldn?t have been such a problem, except that a large number of hedge funds participated in the Indexed Synthetic CDO market doing an esoteric arbitrage trade, where the hedge funds when long the ?first loss? piece, and short 2.0-2.5x the ?second loss? piece.? This trade was sometimes called the ?correlation trade? for reasons I will talk about in a moment.

Why do such a trade?? The lure of free money is inexorable, and the trade had been free money for a while.? So long as movements in the spreads of credits in the index remained closely correlated, the hedge would hold between the ?first loss? and ?second loss? pieces, and the hedged investment would earn a high riskless yield, which to a hedge fund is the holy grail; a lot of hedge fund of funds will throw money at a strategy like that.

All arbitrages boil down to buying and selling two similar securities, and attempting to profit from the price or yield spread over the anticipated time horizon of the transaction.? Arbitrages can be intelligent or foolish depending on whether the anticipated total return is large enough to compensate for the negative results if the convergence anticipated in the arbitrage does not occur.

Last week, conditions for the hedge did not hold as the credit default swap spreads on automotive-related credits rose, leading the ?first loss? pieces to fall in value.? Surprisingly, the ?second loss? pieces actually rose in value, as a number of players moved to close out their hedges, which put downward pressure on the prices of the ?first loss? pieces, and upward pressure on the prices of the ?second loss pieces.? This became self-reinforcing for a while until the close on Tuesday.? On Wednesday, hedge funds and investment banks poured fresh capital into the trade, since the risk reward ratio on the hedged trade was now more attractive, bringing the market back to a more normal state.

Effects on the equity market

This put a damper on the equity market for several reasons: first, some players feared that some of the investment banks were caught on the wrong side of the trade, or had lent to those on the wrong side of the trade.? My guess is that?s not true, but if true, it could raise systemic risk issues, which lowers equity values, as it did in 1998 during the LTCM crisis.? The risk controls at the investment banks are far superior to those at most hedge funds now, and far superior to what they were at the investment banks during LTCM.? That doesn?t mean there can?t be crises, but the preparations for a crisis are better now.? The investment banks have laid off more risks to other market participants.? The other main effect on the equity market was that yields on riskier corporate bonds rose, which usually correlates with lower stock prices.

In closing, just be aware that there are other big markets such as the credit default swap market, both in its single-credit, and indexed forms, that can have a big effect on the equity markets.? There is a lot of leverage around, and ?bets gone wrong? can be big enough to knock some confidence out of the markets.? But I offer this hope: so long as the effects of the ?bets gone wrong? do not affect major institutions such as investment banks, commercial banks or insurance companies, the effects on the markets should be transitory, as they were after LTCM.

Three Dimensions, and Printed, but not Real

Three Dimensions, and Printed, but not Real

Okay, let’s run the promoted stocks scoreboard:

Ticker Date of Article Price @ Article Price @ 12/9/13 Decline Annualized Splits
GTXO

5/27/2008

2.45

0.014

-99.4%

-60.9%

 
BONZ

10/22/2009

0.35

0.001

-99.6%

-74.2%

 
BONU

10/22/2009

0.89

0.001

-99.9%

-79.4%

 
UTOG

3/30/2011

1.55

0.001

-99.9%

-93.0%

 
OBJE

4/29/2011

116.00

0.350

-99.7%

-89.1%

1:40

LSTG

10/5/2011

1.12

0.015

-98.7%

-86.2%

 
AERN

10/5/2011

0.0770

0.0001

-99.9%

-95.3%

 
IRYS

3/15/2012

0.261

0.000

-100.0%

-100.0%

Dead
RCGP

3/22/2012

1.47

0.300

-79.6%

-60.4%

 
STVF

3/28/2012

3.24

0.490

-84.9%

-67.1%

 
CRCL

5/1/2012

2.22

0.028

-98.8%

-93.5%

 
ORYN

5/30/2012

0.93

0.038

-95.9%

-87.6%

 
BRFH

5/30/2012

1.16

0.420

-63.8%

-48.6%

 
LUXR

6/12/2012

1.59

0.015

-99.1%

-95.6%

 
IMSC

7/9/2012

1.5

0.800

-46.7%

-35.8%

 
DIDG

7/18/2012

0.65

0.049

-92.5%

-84.4%

 
GRPH

11/30/2012

0.8715

0.053

-93.9%

-93.5%

 
IMNG

12/4/2012

0.76

0.063

-91.7%

-91.4%

 
ECAU

1/24/2013

1.42

0.330

-76.8%

-81.2%

 
DPHS

6/3/2013

0.59

0.007

-98.8%

-100.0%

 
POLR

6/10/2013

5.75

0.090

-98.4%

-100.0%

 
NORX

6/11/2013

0.91

0.160

-82.4%

-97.0%

 
ARTH

7/11/2013

1.24

0.182

-85.3%

-99.0%

 
NAMG

7/25/2013

0.85

0.785

-7.6%

-19.1%

 

12/9/2013

Median

-97.2%

-88.4%

Market regularities are heartening.? It’s astounding how regular the losses are from promoted stocks.

On to tonight’s loser-in-waiting, Makism 3D Corp [MDDD].? This is another company with no revenues, has never earned a dime, etc.? It used to be a company that supposedly was trying to improve cellular telephony, but never earned a dime doing so.? So they bought a UK company that was supposedly working on 3D printing, and surrendered the company to them.

It would be incredibly surprising that a company of three people would be able to overthrow the 3D leaders — DDD and SSYS.? They have invested a lot of time, money, and effort to improve 3D printing, and a startup can beat them with less than a million bucks, and less than a year, with a young undifferentiated staff?? I don’t think so.? Or, as an old-style pinball machine might say, “TILT!”

I don’t buy it, and you should not either.? As with all promoted stock scams, the hard part is identifying who benefits.? My guess is affiliates of the guy who wrote the glowing report.? The company has disclaimed ay responsibility.

In any case, avoid promoted stocks.? Do your own research, and buy stocks that you find attractive.? Don’t buy anything that another is trying to pitch you.

Two zeroes merge, and should we expect a positive result?? I think not.

 

On Fat Tails

On Fat Tails

I’m reading an investment book that is arguing for market timing.? I’m not impressed with the line of argumentation so far.? I just finished a chapter where the authors pointed out that security price movements are more volatile that the normal distribution would admit.

This is a well known result, or at least it should be well-known.? What I hope to contribute to the discussion is why the tails are fat, and skewed negatively.? There is a famous saying in investments:

Cut your losses, and let your winners run

I regard this saying as vapid, because I have had so many investments where the price action was bad initially, but ended up being incredible investments.? I have also had companies stumble after prior gains, and persevere for greater gains.? Intelligent asset management does not react to the past, but analyzes future prospects, and looks at current margin of safety.

But imagine a situation where many parties have their plans, and they are all similar.? I’ll give a few examples:

  • Institutional investors decide in 1986 to follow the momentum, but be ready to sell if the momentum breaks.? They want upside, but want to protect the downside.
  • Japan was a total momentum market up through 1989, and the reverse thereafter.? Loose monetary policy was an aspect of that, as was a loss of fear, warrant speculation, etc.
  • Those investing in hot emerging markets in the mid-90s did not recognize valuations getting stretched, and the inability of the countries to maintain stimulative policies amid falling currencies.
  • The guys at LTCM were geniuses until they weren’t.? They had no idea of the risks they were taking.? They did not have an ecological view of investing.? Essentially, they thought liquidity was free, until the jaws of the trap snapped shut, and they died.? Taking a concentrated position is a risk, because the investing typically pushes up the price.? When you are so big in a position that you are affecting the market price, that is a bad place to be for two reasons: 1) if you sell, you drive down the price for future sales, and 2) you no longer know what the fair price would be if you weren’t there.
  • Aside from that with LTCM, their brokers mimicked their trades, accentuating the boom-bust, but the brokers had risk control desks that forced them to sell out losing trades, which further hurt LTCM.
  • Think about residential mortgage bonds in 1994.? So many players thought that they had mastered the modeling of prepayment risk only to find amid a Fed tightening cycle that many wanted to limit their interest rate risk as rates skyrocketed, fueling a self-reinforcing panic.
  • Consider tech stocks 1998-2000.? Momentum ran until the sheer weight of valuations, together with insolvencies, crushed the market as a whole, and tech stocks more.? Think of European financial institutions getting forced by regulators to kick out US stocks in September 2002, putting in the bottom.? Regulators almost always act too late, and exacerbate crises, but they should do that, because worse things would happen if they didn’t.? (Later = bigger crisis, Earlier = Some Type II errors, regulating where it was not needed).
  • Finally, consider the housing/banking crisis in the US 2005-2009.? People bought homes with a lot of debt financing, and short-dated debt financing.? Banks levered up to provide the financing.? Shallow credit analysis allowed banks to take on far more risk than they imagined.? It all ended in a trail of tears, with many personal, and not enough corporate bankruptcies, with the taxpayers footing the bill.

In each of these cases, you have correlated human behavior.? The greed of investors gives way to fear.

Now if you are thinking about Modern Portfolio Theory, where market players have perfect knowledge, this doesn’t make sense.? These crises should not happen.? But they happen all too regularly, and I will explain why.

Men are not greedy as much as they are envious.? This leads to mimicking behavior when things are going well.? Those not currently playing want a piece of the action, and so they imitate.

Modern Portfolio Theory implicitly assumes that market players don’t react to the actions of other market players, but that is false.? Most market players don’t think; they mimic.

That is what leads to fat tails, because when people move as a herd, you get dramatic price moves.? Because fear is a greater motivator than envy, that is why the big downward moves are almost always greater than the big upward moves.

Add into that the credit cycle, because gains on credit-sensitive bonds are small, but losses are huge when they occur.? The distribution of outcomes has a long left tail.

The main point here is that price movements are non-normal because market players act as a group.? Their behavior is correlated? on the downside, and to a lesser extent on the upside.

Among other things, this means Modern Portfolio Theory is wrong, and needs to be severely modified, or abandoned.? It also means that we need to watch the credit cycle, and speculative activity to get a sense of how committed the hot money is to risk assets.? Hot money follows trends.? Cold money estimates likely returns over a market cycle, and invests in the best ideas when they are out of favor.

I don’t think timing the market is easy.? I do think that fundamental investors have to look at whether they have a lot of opportunities, or few, and vary their safe assets opposite to opportunities.

So beware the fat tails — we haven’t had a lot of volatility recently.? Maybe we are due.

On Liabilities in Asset Allocation

On Liabilities in Asset Allocation

From an e-mail from one of my readers:

I?m not sure if you have the time to respond to this, but figured I?d send to you and just see!…

(Just FYI, I?m not an investment professional of any sort, so I don?t have any ?skin in the game? as they say, just a geek who follows the markets and DIY financial-planning issues and long-time reader of the Aleph blog)

I recently read an FP article by a guy I?ve read a lot (Alan Roth).? He suggested that, when your analyzing an investment portfolio and making asset-allocation decisions, you need to treat mortgage debt as an ?inverse-bond? or an ?anti-bond??such that any mortgage debt held would dollar-for-dollar negate or reduce your actual bond investment holdings.? And the result is that this made the investor?s actual portfolio risker than they realized, since their ?true? bond allocation was smaller than they had considered.

I thought it was a novel concept, but I found some problems with that approach, within the context of asset-allocation.? My main point was that the primary purpose of analyzing a portfolio?s asset allocation is to manage risk through diversification of assets (generalizing here in interests of being concise).?? The pinnacle of diversification is non-correlation: generally in economic environments where equities soar, bonds will underperform, and vice versa.? However, classifying a debt as an ?anti-bond? doesn?t actually provide any portfolio diversification, or introduce any non-correlation.? It won?t actually negate the amount that your bonds would rise, and it won?t actually offset the amount your bonds would fall, in those respective market environments.? And even if you consider that the real value of the debt is decreased if inflation rises (as the NPV calculation would be using a greater discount rate), that doesn?t have any real-world effect on the portfolio and it?s risk and return behavior.? Since borrowers aren?t allowed to ?mark-to-market? their mortgages, that debt holding value does not fluctuate?it is fixed, and amortized from its historical cost, regardless of any market conditions or any theoretical NPV/DCF changes. ?Therefore, the inverse- or anti- bond holding in the portfolio has zero impact on the portfolio?s actual risk/return behavior, and so it seems to me it doesn?t add any functional value to frame debt as an ?anti? portfolio holding of some sort.

Also, if you were going to do that, to be fair and complete, you must apply that same principle to every single debt the client has (otherwise, it would be rather arbitrary just selecting the mortgage debt).? This adds unnecessary complexity in the asset allocation analysis.

Instead, the appropriate (and only) way to analyze debt is, separate from investable portfolio assets, on the cash-flow side of things.? Simply asking what is the ?optimal? use of the available capital; i.e. what net ?return? do you earn by using capital to eliminate debt, versus what net return could you earn if you kept the debt and employed the capital elsewhere (this will be different for each investor and their unique situations).? This is the way to analyze and evaluate debt, not to mingle it in with your invested assets and classify it as an ?anti-bond? holding within your portfolio.

I was just curious your take on this, and if I am misunderstanding or missing something.? Do you ever consider client?s debt as ?inverse-? or ?anti-? bonds in the context of asset allocation?

Thanks!

When you manage money financial firms, if you do it right, you consider the promises that your firm needs to fulfill.? When will cash be needed to pay obligations?? That helps drive asset allocation, because assets should broadly match liabilities.

Now, I am not a financial planner.? That said, the same principles apply to personal asset allocation.? If someone has a large mortgage or other debts, and he can’t invest his fixed income assets at levels that exceed the yields on those debts with reasonable risk, he should not invest in bonds — he should pay down his debt.? In the case of 401(k)s or IRAs, where there might be matches or tax advantages, the calculation becomes more complicated.? You have to weigh the match and tax deferral vs the negative arb on bond yields vs the mortgage and personal debts.

There is another factor here — how stable is your job?? If stable, it is bond-like, and you can take more equity risk with investments.? If your job has payoffs that vary a great deal with the market — commissions, bonuses, etc., it is stock-like, and you should take less risk in your investing — take excess earnings and pay down the mortgage.? I did that when I went from being a bond manager inside an insurance company, to being an equity analyst inside a hedge fund.? I paid off my mortgage in full, so that I would be free to take risks for my new employer.

As for the article, the concept is not novel.? It is well-known and practiced by institutional asset managers who manage money to the horizons needed by their clients.? As an example, the cash flows of a pension plan are relatively determinate, and the discount rate calculates the value of the liability.? The portfolio should throw off cash when needed in order to minimize risk.

In some cases, where bonds don’t offer enough yield, and equity prices are depressed, it might make sense to tactically mismatch, betting that equities will offer better returns versus the liabilities than bonds would on a risk-adjusted basis.

This argument has made its rounds for the last 20 years in insurance and pension management?? Do we match asset and liability cash flows, or do we trust in the equity premium, and invest in risk assets?? The correct answer is hybrid.? In general, match assets and liabilities, but if there is a significant tactical advantage to not match, then do that.? Think of buying junk bonds in late 1998.? Time to throw matching out the window.? And then in mid-1999, buy equities.

Now, not all clients will allow for that much risk-taking.? Many institutional investors will not let the asset manager take advantage of temporary dislocations.

In general, I think Mr. Roth is correct, but with an adjustment.

  • In extraordinary times, where bonds yield more than the earnings yields of stocks (think 1987 & 2000), buy bonds heavily, even if you have mortgage and other debts.
  • In extraordinary times, where stocks earnings yields are much higher than bonds, mismatch and own more stocks relative to bonds.? Just beware deflation, with falling future earnings.
  • In normal times, an indebted investor should not add to his leverage, but should invest in bonds, or better, pay down his debt.? Being debt-free is an excellent thing, and allows the investor to take more risks when the market is offering bargains.

Debt is either something to be funded by bond assets, or funds a margin account where you outperform the yield, or die.? All of this depends on where the market is in its risk cycle.? Only take risk where it is rewarded.

 

On Alternative Investments

On Alternative Investments

What makes an investment alternative?? Typically, it is because not many institutional investors own it.? But why don?t they own alternatives?? What attributes can characterize them?

  • Lower Liquidity ? this can take the form of long lockups for private equity, liquidity limitations on hedge funds, Real Estate LPs, etc.
  • Limited market for trying to sell out of limited partnership interests early
  • Can go both long and short financial instruments, use derivatives
  • Can hold commodities and collectibles (Art, wine, who knows?)

Typically, the form of the investment is a limited partnership.? The limited partnership can own all manner of assets, and short some of them also.

As with most valid investment ideas, those that get there first do the best.? You don’t want to be the last one to the party — you buy into a saturated market at an overvalued price.? Far better to avoid the market than to be the last one in.

You have to understand, there is nothing truly different about alternative investments.? They may invest in private businesses, and lever them up, but the returns aren’t greater than if we levered up public companies to the same degree.

They may go long and short, but there are so many trying to do it that the limits of arbitrage are tested, which is a major reason for why hedge funds are doing so badly.? When you have a lot of parties trying to make differential bets, the reward to the exercise declines.

Briefly, while working for Finacorp before it liquidated, I had the opportunity to give advice to some large pension plans that were charging into alternative investments in 2009.? I counseled them to stick to more liquid investments, because alternative investments had become common.? Alternatives are not magic — you have to evaluate them like any business, and ask whether the entry price discounts a high return or a low return.? Are the commodities/collectibles in over- or under-supply?? What possibility might you face of needing to raise liquidity at an inopportune time?

There are two matters affecting any investment:

  • Underlying behavior of the asset in term of its relative value, and
  • Behavior of those who hold the investment, their perception of relative value, and their need for liquidity.

To give an absurd example, think of Bernie Madoff.? The actual value of the assets never did anything.? But parties owning interests in Madoff’s “fund” needed to raise liquidity when the public equity markets plunged in 2008, which led to the insolvency.

Investor behavior affects asset prices.? Big surprise, not.? This is Ben Graham’s voting machine.? The weighing machine eventually catches up when there are liquidity events where investment vehicles get dissolved for cash or other securities.

This is not to say that there is no superior management talent with respect to alternative investments, but that it is subject to the same limits as public investments.? As more capital is allocated to a manager, he moves down his list and says, “Okay, what’s the next best thing to which I can allocate capital?”? Too much money kills even the best of managers.

Perhaps the best way to go is to focus on the Seth Klarmans and Howard Marks of our world, and be opportunistic.? Hold cash when it makes sense, or send it back to the limited partners, but invite them back and invest heavily when conditions warrant.

My view is this: given the wide level of investing in alternative investments, there is no reason why they should outperform, and no reason why they should be uncorrelated with other risk assets, because the same owners own both.

Update on Promoted Stocks

Update on Promoted Stocks

Let’s trot out the promoted stock scoreboard:

Ticker Date of Article Price @ Article Price @ 7/25/13 Decline Annualized Splits
GTXO

5/27/2008

2.45

0.014

-99.4%

-62.9%

BONZ

10/22/2009

0.35

0.002

-99.3%

-72.9%

BONU

10/22/2009

0.89

0.007

-99.3%

-72.2%

UTOG

3/30/2011

1.55

0.001

-99.9%

-95.3%

OBJE

4/29/2011

116.00

0.445

-99.6%

-90.8%

1:40

LSTG

10/5/2011

1.12

0.023

-97.9%

-87.2%

AERN

10/5/2011

0.0770

0.0002

-99.7%

-95.7%

IRYS

3/15/2012

0.261

0.000

-100.0%

-100.0%

?Dead
RCGP

3/22/2012

1.47

0.255

-82.7%

-70.6%

STVF

3/28/2012

3.24

0.340

-89.5%

-79.7%

CRCL

5/1/2012

2.22

0.043

-98.0%

-94.9%

ORYN

5/30/2012

0.93

0.090

-90.3%

-84.8%

BRFH

5/30/2012

1.16

0.280

-75.9%

-68.2%

LUXR

6/12/2012

1.59

0.022

-98.6%

-97.1%

IMSC

7/9/2012

1.5

1.100

-26.7%

-24.0%

DIDG

7/18/2012

0.65

0.030

-95.4%

-93.8%

GRPH

11/30/2012

0.8715

0.113

-87.0%

-93.7%

IMNG

12/4/2012

0.76

0.130

-82.9%

-91.2%

ECAU

1/24/2013

1.42

0.262

-81.5%

-94.4%

DPHS

6/3/2013

0.59

0.028

-95.3%

-100.0%

POLR

6/10/2013

5.75

0.400

-93.0%

-100.0%

NORX

6/11/2013

0.91

0.350

-61.5%

-99.0%

ARTH

7/11/2013

1.24

0.385

-69.0%

-100.0%

NAMG

7/25/2013

0.85

1.230

44.7%

6688.9%

8/26/2013

Median

-94.2%

-92.5%

Tonight’s loser in waiting is the same one that I wrote about last time, North American Oil and Gas [NAMG].? This time the Washington Times was spreading the garbage of Tobin Smith via email, as opposed to Bloomberg last time.

But wait, the stock has gone up 45% since I wrote about it.? Doesn’t that mean I am wrong?

No, that’s happened a number of times with the above stocks.? When the promotion ends, so does the stock price.

Two final notes:

1) iTrackr is dead.? Total loss.? Not the next Microsoft or Google.

2) Nova Mining has renamed itself The Radiant Creations Group, Inc. [RCGP].? They have changed their focus from mining to a company that:

engages in the development of various skin protection and hydration, anti-aging, liver health, weight balance, and OTC products. It provides day creams, anti-aging night creams, acne gone and sports block products, and wrinkle repair creams; and weigh control and weight loss products, as well as liver detoxifiers.

Usually, when a promoted stock changes strategies, it changes owners, and that is happening here.? It also likely means there will be a new promotion, where a new pump-and-dump occurs.? You might think that it is a new time for speculating, but the company is trying to buy in shares at a price below the current market price.? Closely held promoted companies offer up all manner of bad surprises for the minority shareholders.? Don’t risk investing here.

 

On Avoiding Con Men

On Avoiding Con Men

I’ve written on this topic before, but I want to take a different angle of attack on it tonight.? Before I do, I would like to give links to some of the things I have written on the topic:

Okay, enough.? I’m surprised that I have written so much on this topic.? There’s more, but I leave out the marginal stuff.

This article is partially prompted by my review of Octopus.? But it was triggered by my receipt of an e-mail today, that when I clicked on the link, led me to something like this.

Passive income is one of the ways that scammers appeal to the greed of people.? You get money, and you don’t have to work.? But passive income stems from buying or creating something that will have continual demand.? That takes effort or ingenuity at taking risk, and if you are wrong, you could lose a lot of effort and/or capital.

Passive income is easy to achieve.? What is hard is making sure that it continually rises, and that it stays at a high level relative to capital deployed.

With President Obama, his book “The Audacity of Hope” brought him a lot of passive income.? But there was risk involved; who knew that he would be elected President?? Few of us writing books will get so great an audience, and get such a long tail.? Most books are here and gone.? Same for most songs.? Same for most plays, etc.? Royalties are not as easy as they seem.

Most royalties are wasting assets.? Mines get mined out.? Wells go dry.? Things that are published stop selling as much.? In that sense they are worse than bonds, because the yields decrease over time.

So, no, passive income isn’t a solution, and may end up delivering less than conventional investments.

Developing a Defensive Mind

I have a saying:

Minds work best when they are like castles, when there is a moat, and defenders at the ready to deal with deceivers with arrows and boiling oil.

Here is my main advice: you need to be skeptical, but not cynical.? Skeptics question, but can be convinced with adequate evidence.? Cynics think the world is rigged.? Here’s their flaw — they can be tricked into scams where they think they are on the rigging side, when they are not.

Here’s my advice to aid your thinking: the world is not rigged.? There are few if any significant conspiracies that deny wealth and power to the masses.? The reality is more banal.? Some people, as a result of their training, networking, and effort do better than others.? Most people don’t put forth sustained, focused, intelligent effort that allows them to accumulate wealth.

Are there some that make money off of government connections?? Yes, but they are not the rule, and they don’t advertise for passive capital.

Passive capital is a highly competitive place to be.? Making money with money is desired by financial institutions, pension plans, endowments, etc.? If there were an easy way to do it, the big guys would have figured it out long before you.

If it seems to good to be true, it probably is

Trite, but true.? Condition your mind to dismiss schemes that cannot fail, investments that are a one way ticket to riches, etc.? Get a sense of the scammer voice, where he invites you into a secret “club.”

Look, if I had a path to easy riches, would I share it?? No.? All riches stem from hard mental or physical work, even if you inherit it.? That is why you have to distrust those who try to scam you through proffering easy riches.? There are no easy riches.

There are no secrets in investing.? Don’t let anyone tell you that they have a secret tactic.? I don’t have a secret tactic.? I do have my own methods, which draw from a lot of well known methods, and my own sense of what works in business, which also stems from well-known ideas.

Avoid anything that makes you think you are in the inner ring — the precious few, who due to connections have been able to escape the ordinary lot of men, because they are part of the club that has the secret, or government connections to a secret program.

If someone has a great opportunity, and need passive capital, they will advertise it boldly, because they want the cheapest cost of capital.? Those that limit the message to a select few are likely scamming.

Final Points

Pay attention to auditors and custodians.? They protect you, and they should be high quality, and unaffiliated with the promoter.? Avoid those that do not market broadly — what I mean here is those that don’t go through major brokers.? The more exposure an idea has the more likely it is valid.?? That said, highly exposed ideas will likely produce market-like returns.? There is a trade-off here.

Also, all investing involves uncertainty.? Reject those that tell you something is a sure thing.? THERE ARE NO SURE THINGS!

Sigh.? Do I have to go to that level of emotion/energy?? I GUESS I DO! Because the scammers keep coming around and milk the unwary.

PS — I know my readers are smarter than most, but if you have friends or relatives that you think might need this, please forward it on.? Delete this last line to protect their self-esteem.

Theme: Overlay by Kaira