Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

I agree entirely, greek. Six or seven years ago, I queried with my pension provider (thankfully a final salary scheme) why the pension fund was lending substantial amounts of stock to third parties for what seemed a pittance by way of fee. The response was that it "added liquidity to the market" and the practice has grown significantly since that time. Seems to me a complete distortion of the market - if I was dictator then no-one would be allowed to sell any shares they did not own. No objection to pure spread betting (although too risky for me) but I would ban stock lending. Short selling seems to have been invented as another way for the greedy to make (or lose) large amounts of money gambling with shareholders capital.

D'accord.

Shorting, CFD, Leveraging.
They all have the same effect. They magnify peoples ability to trade volume way above their natural boundary, so sate their greed. This therefore magnifies the fluctuation in prices beyond normal market activity. Any investor can buy or sell ten times his weight and for some that is an enormous weight.
Does this not remind you in many ways of the current housing / financial markets? Greedy banks leveraged to death lending money to people who are then endebted way beyond their weight.
And if it does, are we learning no lessons from the current meltdown? Do we sit idly by, knowing full well that the financial markets will do exactly what the housing and secured lending markets are doing right now?
Perhaps the answer (to both issues) is a review of capital adequacy. Banks must have liquid capital of 4% of the debt. Perhaps the time is right to up that and introduce a ruling that any trading of shorts and CFD's are backed by liquid capital of a much higher figure than the (I believe) 10% that is current.
This would both reduce the amount of money used in these practices and also reduce the amount of forced dealing by almost eradicating margin calls.
I know it would slow growth and investment, but surely stability is a goal worth paying for.
It would be painful for some, but so is the housing crisis, and in both cases we will emerge with sensible, sustainable and predictable markets, providing we can learn from our mistakes.

Just as a footnote, futures were never intended to be a form of speculation, so perhaps the problem is that we have allowed it to be so.
Futures were merely a form of loan from the rich traders to the poor producers to ensure something was produced that the trader could trade!! No interest was payable but trading terms were more beneficial than would otherwise be the case.
There is no need, with a modern banking system for any producers to require a loan. How stupid is it to assume that Saudi Royal family need paying up front for their oil so they have enough money to produce it???

Hi Alan,

Fully agree. But when you think that the Government is the biggest debtor in the country and that they (we) are leveraged up to the hilt, is it any wonder the general attitude of the populous is spend today, worry tomorrow.
As to the value of commodities, you only have to read about the 'Great Tulip Scam' of the 1630's to see how greedy people (and as I want as much cash as I get get from investing, I'm in there somewhere) can escalate so called items, or/and commodity values.

For those who have never heard of The Great Tulip Scam, it is well worth a read, it's second article down. It is a story that has fascinated me for years http://web.archive.org/web/19980202160003/http://www.dirtgardener.com/TipSheets/Bulbs/Tulipamiana.html

Talk about getting in at the top and selling at the bottom.

Zimbabwe.

Once again I find myself pissing in the beer of civilization (or at least that part of it that takes any notice of the media).

Yes, Mugabe is a despotical tyrant who deserves an hour in the company of his countrymen and a hammer. He should be ousted by means of a rocket propelled jockstrap, and a large amount os semtex. I have no time for him or his like.
At the same time, I am not convinced of the credentials of his opposition, but thereby hangs another tale.
The cause of my infuriation with Mugabe, the media, the UN, and the rest of the world is the reaction.
The part of the world that looks on newspapers as something other than litter tray liners is busy convincing itself that if Zimbabwe had oil, the UK and USA would be there in a little under 4 seconds, shooting anything that moved (particularly each other in the case of the USA). There is much gnashing of teeth that we are doing nothing and the good people of Zimbabwe are suffering because of it.
Several points of order, please Mr Chairman.
1) Oil is irrelevant. There is enough natural mineral wealth and agricultural wealth in Zimbabwe to buy the whole of the Arabian peninsula 10 times over, and own all the damn oil.
2) The UK & USA are more than fully committed to other arenas where the UN asked us very nicely to sort out a mess. Afghanistan, Belize, Iraq and, in the fullness of time, Iran and Korea. How about asking the Italians, Anzacs or Spanish or French to have a turn?
3) Could it be that we are not greatly concerned over helping out people who supported and took part in the butchery of British and Dutch descended farmers, now that the same tactics are employed against them.
4) The same hand wringers who moan we are not there asking Mugabe some very difficult questions would kick off big style if we were there without a UN mandate. They did that recently over Iraq, where we did have a UN mandate!!
5) which brings me to the UN. A bunch of spineless idiots who really believe that the cure to the Zimbabwe problem is a strongly worded letter and a bit of tut-tutting. This is unlikely to work in an inner city primary school. The chances in the killing fields of Africa are nil.

We cannot be too critical though. Our government has responded with the toughest and most hard hitting response ever. We will not allow their cricket team here.
Pathetic.

Yes Alan, but if they had as much oil as Iraq, don't you think the world would have looked at the situation a bit keener and earlier. I agree the UK/USA are fully committed, re any direct action. As to your comment re a strongly worded letter, I have just heard prior to seeing your post that Gordon Brown has stated, "Britain is ready to tighten measures against the government in Harare and will ban Zimbabwe's cricket team from touring Britain next year".
OH NO I can hear Mugabe crying into his silk hanky. So thats it then. We can expect him to repent all his sins and renounce leadership.
As to the UN. Fully agree. They are worse than useless, with about as much spine as a jellyfish.
Also, isn't it strange that Amnesty International appear very quiet. They are still though (about 6 weeks ago in Yorkshire) approaching people re condition in our prisons being degrading etc. Easy targets spring to mind.

Another deafening silence is coming from across the border in South Africa.
Nelson does not appear quite as keen to criticise his brother in the struggle against imperialism as he ought.
The oil thing is a total smokescreen which is an easy target for those who like walking down Pall Mall carrying home made banners.
The truth is, without the UN allowing it, nobody would dare lift a finger for fear of the crap that has been thrown at UK & USA.
Remember, Mugabe is an amatuer compared with Saddam in the torture and put citizens to death stakes, so if we could not remove Saddam for that reason, we cannot do anything to Mugabe until he kills a few more hundred thousand.
The worst of it is, he knows this from watching the world react to Iraq, and knows he is safe unless his African neighbours turn on him.

We have some august personages reading these threads!!!
Just 24 hours after reading the comments on Zimbabwe, and being chided for his lack of voice on the subject, Mr Mandela finally speaks................

This morning I had a Nostradamus moment.

I was reading a news report that the government wants us all to cover our roofs with solar panels and build those lego windmill thingies in the back garden to turn wind into electric.
Suddenly I was aware of the news report in 2034;

The Swedish government (sponsored by Ikea) today blamed the UK government (sponsored by BetFred) for its drought and lack of summer (brought to you by Ambre Solaire - official partner of climatic seasons).
The wind (courtesy of Budweiser - proud supplier of climates and beer) that blows across the Virgin Atlantic bringing rain (Blockbuster DVD's - have a night in) has been disrupted by approximately 85 million wind turbines placed in back gardens across the United M&S Kingdom.
The disrupted airflow has caused rainclouds to sit over the British Isles and not get as far as Volvo-Sweden with terrible consequences for their harvest of bio-diesel.
The Swedish cabinet (built by Ikea) is demanding compensation to the tune of several billion episodes of Big Brother, and 10 points in the eurovision song contest as the euro currency is now worthless.
The British Prime Ministers, Ant & Dec (sponsored by Pepsi - official soft drink of wannabes) responded by telling a really bad joke in a Swedish accent and banning the playing of Abba records.
Minister for science, John Tickle of Braniacs, said he thought it was all nonsense and was doing an experiment by farting into a plastic beach windmill to see if it was true.
We asked the secretary general of the UN for his comments, but he had none as their sponsorship deal had not been finalised with Vodaphone.

This news report was brought to you in association with Stella Artois - reassuringly twaddle.

Greek,

Being a fellow Yorkshireman, I think you better know the truth about Robert Mugabe, but lets keep it just between us two.

When the Magatron came to power in 1979, she was already setting her sights on Yorkshires miners, but Ian Smith of Rhodesia was giving her gyp over it. He needed experienced miners to advise him on his mines and was getting them from Castleford.
To sort out the problem she organised an undercover MI5 agent to visit Rhodesia and negotiate on her behalf. She sent Yorkshireman Bob Hardcastle, but under an assumed name. He was distraught to find that miners there had to work for a living and decided there and then to tackle it by usurping Mr Smith and seizing power, so he could infiltrate all the miners in Yorkshire to work there following there pits getting closed.
Under his assumed name, he won power from the Nottingham shop steward Joshua (National ko-operative of mine operators) or Nkomo for short and ruled the new Zimbabwe.
Now, under the 30 year rule, these facts have come out and Gordon Brown must be seen to do something. He has sent over Bob's old foe from Burnley, to masquerade as a political opponent and finally oust the ex yorkshire miner.

It may sound a little far fetched but the evidence is there for all to see;

1) His skin colour. Years of ingrained coal dust from working the seams.
2) The rise of Zimbabwe in world cricket. This must come from Yorkshire.
3) Most conclusively of all. His assumed name Robert (Bob in its longer form) Mugabe (e-ba-gum, backwards). How much more Yorkshire does it get????

It makes more sense than Maestros claims on 9/11

Alan,

After reading your last few posts, I can't help thinking that you are actually Kev and that Hewittalan6 (Alan) is your alter ego. Surely the thoughts of Kev are so parallel with your own that you must be both, one and the same.
There can't possibly be two such brilliant philosophers on the same planet, can there?

Its the medication, Greek.
Ye Gods this is fantastic stuff.
I can recommend the NHS when you consider your arrangements for a coronary event.

I have it on very good authority that the credit crunch is over. The FTSE is dramatically oversold and will start to fly up by the end of the week. The very sound reasoning behind this, apparently, is that........................































my wife has been shopping today :o(((

Mine was shopping today and yesterday and the day before and the day before and the day before and the day before!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Just read a wonderful couple of posts on the bugs thread. It ran like this;

Greekman; "Ian. Bit of a problem with one of your facilities in the Investors room. When I type something onto a thread, there appears to be some kind of time-out utility that doesn't quite allow me to finish that which I am trying to say. Therefore I have to type out my requirements in word and use cut & paste into the add a post box before pressing Post Message.
The issue appears to be the limited amount of time (only about 2 minutes) to complete my thoughts before this timing out occurs, and as you are well aware, wel constructed and reasoned debate can take as lon

Ian (MAM); "For Christs sake get on with it, Greekman. We haven't got all day you know".

Alan,

Have granted you the poetic license you have obviously used. Thinking of a quick reply. Will post it tomorrow.

Greek,
;-)
Alan

every now and then you see someone who is blessed with a true talent.

Yeh, ok he's good Bosley......but he's drinking Stella out of a wine glass! I'll bet he was reassuringly pi**ed after.

Why are people on this thread talking to each other?