I certainly learned my lesson betting on the Giants a week ago on Monday night against the Lions. I had initially promised myself that I won't bet on the Giants as I'm too emotional about them-I could never bring myself to bet against them.
However, I had a very good weekend in Week 1-in my first time ever betting on the NFL I was up $1500, thanks to the an improbable rally by the Eagles, not just rubbing out a 17-0 1st quarter deficit but covering the 10 and 1/2 point line at the last minute by returning an interception for a touchdown.
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-stock-market-nfl-week-1-and-being.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DiaryOfARepublicanHater+%28Diary+of+a+Republican+Hater%29
I've learned my lesson: I must never bet on the Giants. At least it only took me one time. How many times do the inflationphobes have to be wrong?
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102008157
Krugman never tires of mocking them but they never tire of being wrong. At this point they're reduced to playing the Bill Clinton's Monica Lewinsky strategy-'it depends what the definition of is is'-they will never settle on a straightforward definition of inflation but keep moving the goalposts.
Today of course the big focus in the market is the Fed so this CPI number will be culled over-does this push back the time for the first rate hike?! A Guest on CNBC pointed out that what matters more than when the first hike will be is how fast rates will rise and where they will end.
We can argue about Secular Stagnation but people are acting as if it's true. I mean if the hawks and the market bears are right and the economy is close to overheating, then it's striking to compare the the way prices are acting today to the last time we were near the end of the boom cycle-2007. Back then inflation was at 4%. Now we haven't even hit 2% inflation and this is it?
Some observations on today's market. Gilead may be in some trouble-at least until they figure out how important this failed test for Solvadi is. It's been a great ride for the stock but it clearly topped out at $110-it sold off twice on news about it making a deal to have the drug sold for less in poor countries-ie, it's been looking for an excuse to selloff and with a real fundamental reason to we'll see if teh bears are able to keep it under $100 this time-the last two times it snapped back very strongly.
The market doesn't seem to like lower oil and gas prices. Yes, lower gas and oil means higher real wages for workers and higher profits for business that have significant fuel costs, but the market seems to think that this is more than cancelled out by the deflation of commodity prices.
Finally, for this week's NFL I was really unlucky this last week. I admit I should never have gone with the Giants-even though I only had them covering a 7 point spread. However, this last week was really bad luck. How often will both Seattle and San Francisco lose by 9 and 8 points respectively when they are 7 and 8 point favorites respectively?
I did nail both the Bengals at home over the Falcons-they were favored by 7 and easily covered against Atlanto-they were 8-0 both straight up and against the spread last year-and the Browns beating the Saints-for N.O. to be favored by 7 on the road was absurd against a Browns team that had a very impressive 20 point comeback against the Steelers in week 1-even if they did lose in overtime.
This week I have the Bengals at home-favored by 7-against the Tennessee and the Saints at home-by 9 and 1/2-against the Vikings. Basically pick the Saints at home and bet against them on the road. The same would seem true of the Bengals, but they actually had a very impressive road win in week 1 so maybe that will not be the case this year.
However, I had a very good weekend in Week 1-in my first time ever betting on the NFL I was up $1500, thanks to the an improbable rally by the Eagles, not just rubbing out a 17-0 1st quarter deficit but covering the 10 and 1/2 point line at the last minute by returning an interception for a touchdown.
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-stock-market-nfl-week-1-and-being.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DiaryOfARepublicanHater+%28Diary+of+a+Republican+Hater%29
I've learned my lesson: I must never bet on the Giants. At least it only took me one time. How many times do the inflationphobes have to be wrong?
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102008157
Krugman never tires of mocking them but they never tire of being wrong. At this point they're reduced to playing the Bill Clinton's Monica Lewinsky strategy-'it depends what the definition of is is'-they will never settle on a straightforward definition of inflation but keep moving the goalposts.
Today of course the big focus in the market is the Fed so this CPI number will be culled over-does this push back the time for the first rate hike?! A Guest on CNBC pointed out that what matters more than when the first hike will be is how fast rates will rise and where they will end.
We can argue about Secular Stagnation but people are acting as if it's true. I mean if the hawks and the market bears are right and the economy is close to overheating, then it's striking to compare the the way prices are acting today to the last time we were near the end of the boom cycle-2007. Back then inflation was at 4%. Now we haven't even hit 2% inflation and this is it?
Some observations on today's market. Gilead may be in some trouble-at least until they figure out how important this failed test for Solvadi is. It's been a great ride for the stock but it clearly topped out at $110-it sold off twice on news about it making a deal to have the drug sold for less in poor countries-ie, it's been looking for an excuse to selloff and with a real fundamental reason to we'll see if teh bears are able to keep it under $100 this time-the last two times it snapped back very strongly.
The market doesn't seem to like lower oil and gas prices. Yes, lower gas and oil means higher real wages for workers and higher profits for business that have significant fuel costs, but the market seems to think that this is more than cancelled out by the deflation of commodity prices.
Finally, for this week's NFL I was really unlucky this last week. I admit I should never have gone with the Giants-even though I only had them covering a 7 point spread. However, this last week was really bad luck. How often will both Seattle and San Francisco lose by 9 and 8 points respectively when they are 7 and 8 point favorites respectively?
I did nail both the Bengals at home over the Falcons-they were favored by 7 and easily covered against Atlanto-they were 8-0 both straight up and against the spread last year-and the Browns beating the Saints-for N.O. to be favored by 7 on the road was absurd against a Browns team that had a very impressive 20 point comeback against the Steelers in week 1-even if they did lose in overtime.
This week I have the Bengals at home-favored by 7-against the Tennessee and the Saints at home-by 9 and 1/2-against the Vikings. Basically pick the Saints at home and bet against them on the road. The same would seem true of the Bengals, but they actually had a very impressive road win in week 1 so maybe that will not be the case this year.
No comments:
Post a Comment