Sunday 23 September 2012

Stocks Finish Mixed on Late Weakness


Equities were in positive territory for most of the session with investor sentiment lifte

for clarity on a rescue program for Spain, strong quarterly results from homebuilder KB Home (KBH) and the global availability of Apple's (AAPL) iPhone 5, but selling pressure arrived in the final hour.
The Dow fell more than 17 points, or 0.13%, to close at 13,580. The blue-chip index, which was up nearly 50 points at its high for the day, snapped a three-session winning streak and was down 0.10% for the week.
Find out what stocks Link and Cramer are trading before they trade them
Decliners outpaced advancers within the Dow, 17 to 13. The biggest losers were Alcoa (AA), Cisco (CSCO) and Coca-Cola (KO).
Blue-chip winners included Exxon (XOM), General Electric (GE), and McDonald's (MCD), which rose 0.60% after announcing a 15% dividend hike.
The S&P 500 was down incrementally, slipping 0.01%, to settle at 1460.

week down 0.41%. The Nasdaq was the lone winner, adding 4 points,
 or 0.13%, to close at 3180. The tech-heavy index lost 0.12% on the week.
The strongest sectors in the broad market were health care and energy. Transportation, basic materials and consumer non-cyclicals were in the red. Volume totaled 4.75 billion on the New York Stock Exchange and 2.53 billion on the Nasdaq.

There was some optimism in early trading following a report that European Union officials are working to pave the way for a new rescue program for Spain. The Financial Times said an economic reform package for Spain is expected to be revealed next week.
The paper said the program will concentrate on structural reforms for Spain's economy instead of more taxes and spending cuts.
"With the decision-making process of the Euro area distilled down to a very small number of people, such stories are just speculative," noted Paul Donovan, global economist at UBS. "However, Spanish conditions relating to structural reform not fiscal targets would be helpful, as Spain stands a good chance of missing its fiscal targets."

Gold Price Today

 

Friday’s PM gold fix of $1576 (£1007, 1296 euros) per Troy ounce was the 10th week that Friday’s gold fix prices have alternated between up and down since week ending 11th May 2012.
As we mentioned a few weeks ago, the gold price is stuck in a range of $1555 – $1635 and that range is contracting as it fails to break through $1600 in the near term. It is one of the tightest weekly trading ranges that the gold price has seen since the beginning of the bull run.
“Daily momentum is flat” Tim Riddell, ANZ Bank head of global markets research, notes.
For pound sterling and US dollar investors the gold price is the same that it was two months ago.


 Yet despite the above we’re convinced the gold price can run further…
Two main drivers of demand for the gold price remain. Inflation and the US Dollar trade deficit.
In the UK we’ve seen a reversion to Quantitative Easing, with the latest £50m spending adding to the pot of debt that is continuing to mount. And whilst unemployment has


Friday 21 September 2012

Gold Prices




Gold prices may seem a little mysterious at first, but in fact they are no different than those of things you buy every day. Like everything else, gold originates with producers (mines) then travels down a distribution chain to the end consumer.
The top of the gold distribution chain is the over the counter (OTC) market, where prices are driven by supply and demand. Because gold is a commodity its price is independent of the source. On the OTC market principal buyers ‘shop’ producers for the best offered price, negotiate a contract with a producer, and then execute the physical exchange. From there gold passes down through various levels of 

wholesalers to the retail market.
Gold prices to the end consumer can vary considerably depending on how many hands it passes through and the markups applied along the way. Clearly the only meaningful and unambiguous benchmark for gold prices must come from the top of the distribution chain.

Wednesday 1 August 2012

Health insurance companies owe nearly $ 74 million in rebates to residents of California



Will be nearly 2 million residents of California received $ 73.9 million in cuts from health insurance companies as part of the Code of Federal health care, according to state officials.

Insurance companies to notify regulators in June, the government of how much they owed to customers in the premium rebates or credits because they did not spend at least 80% or more from 2011 premiums on medical care. And the minimum is 85% for employers with more than 51 workers.

Figures released Tuesday to mark the end result of California, insurance companies must be issued refunds by Wednesday. Has received many employers and consumers are already messages informing them of the amount of their opponent.

Average discount is $ 65 per family, according to the State Department of Insurance.

"The law requires care at reasonable prices that have spent more than dollars to our health insurance premiums and health care, rather than on administrative costs and profits," said the Commissioner of the California Insurance Dave Jones.

Owed by Anthem Blue Cross, the largest country in the profitability of insurance companies and unit of a needle, approximately $ 40 million in rebates and Blue Shield in California and had to return about $ 11 million to customers.

Due to non-profit Kaiser Permanente, the largest insurer in the state $ 0.277000 in discounts to holders.

United Group, Aetna Inc. and CIGNA Corporation owed all California employers about $ 3.4 million.

At the national level, and federal officials said health insurance companies owed $ 1.1 billion in cuts to up to 12.8 million Americans. Discount the average national level of $ 151 per family, according to the federal government.

For people who get health coverage through work, and verification of the discount or credit goes to the employer. By law, employers can be revenue-sharing with employees on the basis of how much they contribute to the annual installments or apply the savings in health care costs in the future.

And individuals and families who buy their own policy receive rebates directly. Consumer advocates praised the new restrictions on insurance companies costs and profits.

"The choice is a symbol of new controls on the industry to ensure patients get the best value per dollar premium for it," said Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access California, a group defending the rights of the consumer.

In Picking Facebook Shares, Repeating the Mistakes of the Past




Since the collapse of the dotcom bubble in 2000, small investors were wary of the right of the stock market. Facebook was going to change everything, so the average investor returns.

Instead, Facebook was a massacre of individual investors, highlighting once again why the stock selection is a game loser. This was a huge uproar about Facebook as investors on the retail salivated at the chance to buy what they hoped to be the next apple. Even now, after initially trading above $ 40 a share, and shares now down nearly 43 percent of the subscription price.

For example, Facebook is one more confirmation of the studies showed that, on average, and individual investors consistently lose when buying and trading of individual stocks. They are better off investing in index funds is negative.

Professors Brad Barber and M. Terrance Odean recently issued a paper survey evidence. Studies of individual investor trading and found that "many investors earn poor returns even before the costs." Those investors trading bad and tend to lose more money than they would using a simple buy and hold strategy in the boxes that correspond with negative indicators such as Standard & Poor's 500-stock index.

How big is the loss? The same authors in another study of 65,000 investors found that the 20 percent who traded most actively earned 7 percentage points a year less than the buy-and-hold investors, the 20 percent who traded least actively. For the individual investor, that can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars over a lifetime.

This is not surprising. Even mutual fund managers have trouble beating the market. Last year, according to S.& P. Indices, 84 percent of actively managed funds did not beat the Standard & Poor’s index representing that fund’s sector. Going back over five years, 61 percent of funds underperformed. Even so, most mutual funds beat individual investors who try to do it themselves.

If the professionals have such problems, individual investors don’t have a chance. They are not as knowledgeable and not as disciplined. Study after study has found that individual investors have a disposition effect — that is, they tend to sell winners too soon and hold on to the losers by refusing to recognize their failure.

Individual investors are also heavily influenced by their mind-set and their environment.

For one, they are strongly influenced by media reports and buy stocks that are promoted. And, yes, there are studies of Jim Cramer’s show, “Mad Money,” and this effect. One recent study found that the higher the viewership of the show, the bigger the market reaction to stock recommendations. The authors also found that Mr. Cramer’s buy recommendations had more influence than sell recommendations, reflecting people’s desire to bet on winners. But didn’t we know that already from the tech bubble? More than a decade ago, stocks of companies with little or no profits were wildly hyped. It all ended badly, with retail investors losing the most.

In full disclosure, I’m still a little bitter about that. In 1999, I bought Ask Jeeves stock at about $120 a share, eventually selling at below a dollar before shares went up 28-fold and the company was sold to IAC/InterActiveCorp. I’m unfortunately a great example of how retail investors can time things perfectly wrong as they become part of the herd. The Facebook affair was but a sad repeat.

These inherent flaws put us off on the wrong foot when we pick and trade stocks. We don’t diversify enough, don’t do enough research and tend to sell on emotion rather than logic.

If this weren’t hindrance enough for even the most educated individual investor, the Facebook debacle shows that the market is rapidly changing in ways to make it even harder for individual investors to profit.

In the case of Facebook, the profits from investing were largely taken from individual investors before the I.P.O., by trades in the private market where most individual investors could not trade. Goldman Sachs, for example, led a private investment round at a $50 billion valuation only a year ago, selling a third of the stock in the offering at about double the price. By the time Facebook came to market, there was little left for average investors.

The losses in Facebook show that Wall Street doesn’t seem to care much about the individual investor. Companies are increasingly going public with structures that disenfranchise stockholders, or they are looking to cash out and go private just before things get good. Investment banks furiously peddled Chinese issuers to a public that didn’t seem to care much about the companies’ problems.

Instead, the markets have become the domain of hedge funds, where high-frequency trading peels off short-term profits. In the longer term, the severe underperformance of mutual fund managers last year was attributed by Horizon Advisors to the volatility in the markets and the increasing correlation of stocks. As stocks move together, or become correlated, picking winners that offer returns higher than the market average becomes more difficult.

Beyond all of these barriers, individual investors are also faced with a stock market that has remained stagnant for the last decade.

So what can be done?

One thing to consider is whether to further educate individual investors on the problems of investing on their own. The studies show that in general, investors are better off in passively managed index funds. But even here, investors tend to defeat themselves. At least one study has found that investors who engage in passive exchange-traded funds eat away the gains in performance by using this as an excuse to trade more. The problem again occurs when investors try to trade on their own.

In light of this, more disclosure and education would be nice. Perhaps Mr. Cramer’s show could begin each segment with a note spelling out how much investors lose when they trade on their own. The warning could be given to all investors when they sign up for brokerage accounts. And because not everyone will heed this disclosure, the government might take steps to limit the ability of people to trade in their retirement accounts, where the bulk of Americans hold their invested wealth.

But the bottom line is that more needs to be done to educate and help individual investors. It should become common knowledge that investing in an individual stock and trading may be fun, but it may also be dangerous to their wealth. Perhaps the warnings could start with a confessed Facebook I.P.O. investor.

Steven M. Davidoff, writing as The Deal Professor, is a commentator for DealBook on the world of mergers and acquisitions.
المصدر:مدونة علي شار http://www.alishare.info/2012/07/blog-post_02.html#ixzz22HlGP5vz