UBS firing 5,500 on top of Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan & Lehman

Widespread Wall Street Layoffs

JPMorgan Chase is cutting its own staff to make room for incoming Bear Stearns Bear Stearns Cos Inc
executives it's hired as part of its purchase of that firm. According to one senior executive at JPMorgan, the firm also wants to "right size" the business.

JPMorgan is expected to cut more than half of Bear Stearns' 14,000 former employees, though CNBC has learned that JPMorgan has already offered jobs to around 4,000 former Bear workers. Senior people inside JPMorgan say the firm has no hard figure for the size of the layoffs.

Meanwhile, CNBC has learned that Lehman Brothers next week also is expected to add to the 4,900 layoffs it has already announced.

Chief executives of major wall street firms tell CNBC that the unofficial head-count reduction on Wall Street overall is 10 percent per firm as a result of losses and declining business stemming from the disappearance, at least for now, of the once-lucrative structured finance business.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/24468578

Guys you know your not suppose to post negative information. The state of the economy has nothing to do with NYC real estate. Wall street jobs have nothing to do with the decline in real estate in Manhattan. They only support increases. It's getting ugly on the street. Inventory up 20-30 in the next 3 months.

Watch the inventory in the 1.5-3M Range over the next 3 months. This is your traditional wall street range. This is where your going to to really start to see the effects. Just my analysis.

I know you guys don't mean it this way, but lets be careful about sounding like we are celebrating bad news. We get your point, the economy is bad, things could get worse, but people are losing their jobs and that's no fun.

Look, you know very well that Martians are looking to outsource labor and that that's why they've been showing up in Manhattan so much recently. Why do you suppose they go through so much expense to get here? Because they know that even with salaries of, say, $350,000 they can pick up bargains. And only in Manhattan. Toledo, Ohio will just not meet their exacting standards for a labor pool. So stop fretting about laid-off financial people. They will be quickly redeployed. And if the Martians don't hire them, they can always sell New York real estate.

JuiceMan- We finally agree on something. And I'm sorry if I sounded like I was getting pleasure out of the bad news. Actually my better half is not on sure solid ground as we speak.

lowery, I'm glad you read that very important article about Martians flooding the market. If co-ops would just sell to Lassie, Mr. Ed, Secretariat, Benjie, and gay men's gerbils, there would be no overhang on the market whatsoever.

JuiceMan, you're starting to sound like Karl Rove: not supporting the Iraq War = not supporting the troops and hurting morale.

The point of these posts is not to ridicule those who may have lost their jobs. The point of the posts is that after years of saying that Wall Street bonuses were propping up Manhattan prices - which they in fact were - now that that little fiesta has ended with a broken piñata that wound up having nothing in it but air, the bulls are STILL claiming that some other magical force will sweep into Manhattan - be it granite countertops or Mars or Uranus - to stop prices from ever falling.

You can't have it both ways, and you can't try to stop all publication of news you don't like because "it's bad for the troops."

BS.

dco, I hope things work out you and for your better half and that the impact is minimal.

Thank you.

The worst thing about losing your job in this climate is that getting a similiar one is going to be next to impossible. Where else can you make $250,000-Millions. The more you make the more you spend. Their are going to be some people who will really be in bad shape. Getting another job is one thing, get another job that pays the same is going to be next to impossible for sometime.

dco, "Getting another job is one thing, get another job that pays the same is going to be next to impossible for sometime." Amen. That's how the sword cuts both ways. When the going is good in that sector, no real estate price is too high. When this part of the cycle happens, though, there's nowhere to go. It hurts the youngest hardest.

I get the point steve, post all the doom and gloom you want (and I know you will), I just wouldn't get so happy about it.

UBS Set to Cut 5,500 Jobs After First-Quarter Loss (Update5)

By Elena Logutenkova

May 6 (Bloomberg) -- UBS AG, battered by $17.3 billion of first-quarter losses at its investment-banking unit, plans to cut 5,500 jobs and said clients withdrew a net $12.2 billion from its asset- and wealth-management divisions.

The headcount reductions, which amount to about 7 percent of the workforce, will include as many as 2,600 positions at the securities division, the company said in a statement today. The bank also said it plans to exit the municipal bond business and sell $15 billion in distressed assets to a newly created fund managed by BlackRock Inc. UBS had a net loss of 11.5 billion francs ($10.9 billion) in the first quarter.

UBS fell as much as 5.6 percent in Swiss trading, the most in seven weeks, after clients withdrew more assets than they added for the first time in almost eight years. Chief Executive Officer Marcel Rohner told analysts he expects ``tough business conditions,'' which already caused $38 billion of markdowns at Switzerland's biggest bank, to continue.

``The bank's reputation is tarnished,'' said Dieter Winet, a senior portfolio manager who helps oversee 63 billion francs at Swisscanto Asset Management in Zurich. ``They pointed out some problems in private banking, which is their last jewel. The other two divisions have even bigger problems, as one nearly drove UBS to bankruptcy.''

Earnings Breakdown

Pretax profit at the wealth management and business banking unit fell 1.7 percent to 2.15 billion francs, while profit from asset management slumped 17 percent to 330 million francs. The 18.2 billion-franc loss at the securities unit compares with a profit of 1.54 billion francs a year ago.

The job cuts are on top of 48,000 reductions announced by the world's biggest banks and securities firms in the past year, as writedowns and losses from the U.S. subprime crisis swelled to $319 billion.

The measures will save about 3 billion francs a year, UBS said. The bank's first-quarter loss after writedowns of $19 billion was in line with its estimate on April 1. It had a 3.03 billion-franc profit a year earlier.

UBS fell 5.2 percent to 34.96 francs as of 2:15 p.m. in Zurich, valuing it at about 76.1 billion francs. The company lost more than half its value in the past 12 months, making it the fifth-worst performer in the Bloomberg Europe Banks and Financial Services Index of 59 stocks.

Slimmer Securities Unit

Rohner and Kurer told shareholders last month they plan to slim down the securities unit while focusing on the ``core'' wealth management franchise. The private bank had net new money inflows of 5.6 billion francs in the first quarter, while Swiss business banking and global asset management had 18.4 billion francs outflows.

Outflows accelerated towards the end of the first quarter and UBS remains ``cautious'' with regards to outlook for net new money, Chief Financial Officer Marco Suter said in an interview. He declined to say if clients added or pulled money in April.

``We expect this difficult environment to remain and be characterized by a continuing unfavorable global economic climate, de-leveraging by institutional and private investors, slower wealth creation and lower trading and capital market activity,'' Rohner and Kurer wrote today. ``The impact will affect all of our businesses and we are required to manage costs, resources and capacity very actively.''

Fixed-Income Cuts

The bank already eliminated 1,500 jobs in the investment bank at the end of last year. It brought in Jerker Johansson from Morgan Stanley as new head of the unit in mid-March and said last month it will put assets related to U.S. residential real estate into a separate unit that may be spun off later.

UBS plans to sell subprime and Alt-A mortgage assets to BlackRock by the end of June. Outside investors are committing $3.75 billion to the fund and will carry first losses, Suter said. ``These are highly professional investors,'' he said. ``It just shows you that they see profit potential.''

Most job cuts at the investment bank will be in the U.S. and London, and at all levels, according to UBS. About 26 percent of headcount will be reduced in fixed-income and 9 percent in investment banking and equities, Johansson said on a conference call, adding that real estate and securitization businesses will also see some of the largest headcount reductions. UBS is in talks to sell the municipal-bond business, he said, declining to name potential buyers.

The securities unit, which at the end of the quarter employed 21,230 people, is targeting pretax profit of about 4 billion francs, down 28 percent from the level of 2006.

Citigroup, Merrill

``In the coming quarters and potentially even years, the securities industry will have to live with lower transactions and lower commissions,'' said Paul Vrouwes, a fund manager at ING Investment Management who helps oversee about $23 billion, including UBS shares.

New York-based Citigroup Inc., which has suffered almost $41 billion in writedowns and losses from the subprime crisis, cut about 15,200 jobs and Merrill Lynch & Co. reduced 5,220 positions. Investment banks may have to eliminate as much as 35 percent of employees as leveraged lending dwindles and the pace of mergers and acquisitions slows, Kenneth Moelis, the former president of UBS's investment bank, forecast last month.

Chairman Marcel Ospel, who replaced half of the executive board since losses began in 2007, stepped down last month. The bank got shareholder approval to raise 15 billion francs through a rights offer after receiving 13 billion francs to replenish capital from investors in Singapore and the Middle East in March.

Some investors, including Luqman Arnold, a former UBS president whose London-based investment group holds more than 1.1 percent of the bank's shares, are demanding a split of the investment bank from other units. Rohner said today that UBS is committed to its integrated-bank model, although he wants each unit to be successful on its own.

To contact the reporters on this story: Elena Logutenkova in Zurich at elogutenkova@bloomberg.net;

Last Updated: May 6, 2008 08:22 EDT

No one saves for a rainy day anymore.

Is it raining?

The sun is always shining for the bulls.

meanwhile the Dow will probably make an all time high in the next few months.

and what, pray tell, does the Dow have to do with housing?

Nothing. Absolutely, completely, 100% uncorrelated. Ask Miller Samuel, go onto their website, or perhaps you need me to find the link?

ah yes the many bulls. its begs the question if there are so many bulls and thus so much demand, why are prices dropping, which of course these same people are constantly reminding us of?

mafia please keep the "warnings" coming, I know many people couldn't keep themselves from overpaying without them. thanks

dco, it's not just about matching your income. Sometimes an entire field dies and you have to re-invent yourself to find any work (i.e. CDO structurer.) Me and my spouse were there in 2001-2. It's not fun. I wish you both the best.

I have loved every economic dip. Take a year off. In 01 I bought a camper van in Australia, drove around for a few months. Met A TON of bankers and the most interesting people. Ditched the van eventually and went to Malaysia for even longer. Came home once the storm had passed and worked within a year. It was in adifferent capacity, though, as you point out LP1.

Thanks LPI

truth be told--the industry inflated wages because of the insane growth they experienced. it's time for a reality check and wages will decrease to reflect that. sad but true. the worst part is that the traders that screwed this whole thing up will be less bad off than the analysts that just did their job and will be sent packing with a couple months severance and little to show for their hard work. UBS was the worst bunch because the traders were jerks and, after losing $39B, stupid as well.

Bank stocks up today!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

houser, because of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

You're an....

No because we may of hit bottom. Upward and onward from here stevejhx but of course there may be some bumps in the road here and there.

Not banks, houser: Frannie Mae and Freddie Mac are going to be allowed to underwrite more mortgages, that's all.

Nevertheless, I have no doubt that the stock market is going to go up (not that I'm invested in the US at all). Housing, on the other hand, is not. See my answer to your post on the rent v. buy thread, and maybe JM can take a stab at it, as well, to see what the problem is.

Nothing to do with the stock market. Manhattan real estate prices are 0% correlated to the stock market, 100% correlated to Wall Street bonuses.

Facts.

du I said take a look at banks . The banking index BKX . You get it now steve?

I'm doubtful that Manhattan real estate has hit bottom... and I wouldn't bet that the stock market has either.

dco - I completely agree about watching the 1.5-3mil range and that being the Wall Street bonus sweet spot. My streeteasy searches are all in that range and very recently there has been a marked trend of little arrows pointing downwards in the email updates I get every day...

Can you spare some change............????

"New Price Drop could Imperil Mortgage Agencies" see today's NYT's article. Freddie and Fannie could be in for trouble too.

"No because we may of hit bottom."

Ahhh... i see we not only have real estate lemmings but common stock lemmings here as well.

http://www.stocktiming.com/Tuesday-DailyMarketUpdate.htm

The institutions (aka the big boys who drive big market swings) have been playing the retail investors (aka the lemmings) with the recent price runup, fooling them to buy into this staged rally. Watch what happens when they offload and burn the lemmings.

why are you so obsessed with the word lemming?

houser, banks go up when the guarantors can guarantee more.

"We may of hit bottom"?

You mean, "We may HAVE hit bottom?" Spelling and editing errors are acceptable on this board, but not 5th grade grammar!

mrsbuffet, bottom? See how many listings on today's streeteasy?

Did the sky fall today? It seems that we are a year into the creidt crisis and Manhattan is still INCREASING.

It must suck to be a naysayer like Steve and wake up every day hoping for a crash and it not happen.

Meanwhile, the smart money just made another 20%

petrfitz, I made 60% last year, doing swimmingly this year, as well.

So much so that the yield on my non-down-payment pays my rent.

Steve how many buyers have been on the sidelines and have not bought this year? You dont see them all coming back in at the same time as soon as the press starts to call bottom?>

You dont think that that inventory will get snatched up?

Idiot

Steve - I bet that your landlord loves the rent you pay him!

He does, but not as much as I love not paying the extra $4,000 a month it would cost me to own the place (tax benefit included) based on the prices in the building across the street, and the extra $12,500 a month I make investing the down payment in Brazil.

By my calculations I come out $16,500 ahead each month, approximately $198,000 extra a year, tax 'benefit' factored in.

Calling a bottom in the stock market is completely unrelated to the housing market, where the bad news hasn't even begun yet.

"Steve - I bet that your landlord loves the rent you pay him!"

Classic- ala spunky, when hamsters in head can't muster intelligent analysis, you must revert back to the good old "pay landlord rent" routine.

"as soon as the press starts to call bottom"

give me a break. stop acting like monkeys. what to monkeys do? they are infatuated with picking bottoms.

these are the same idiots since last year who kept trying to say, this is the bottom! then another wave of crisis hits, and then they get amnesia again and say no. no... THIS is the bottom! keep trying.

When I see a candlestick chart for the housing market, then I'll "pick the bottom," as it were.

But no such animal exists, so I just watch the trends, and by any long-term measurement - affordability, rent-to-own, Case-Shiller - housing is waaay overpriced in Manhattan.

Of course next year rents are shooting up 50%, so all of this will be sustainable.

Did I mention there are 7,722 active listings in Manhattan today, which is approximately a 1-year supply?

Let them pile up, while houser finds a candlestick chart for me, or looks up what one is. "We may of hit bottom."

But MMAfia...what are you doing if not looking for a bottom? In a simplistic form your position is that housing is overpriced and must collapse to affordable levels. OK. Got it. So, in the equation you must have a bottom in mind. So, when you feel prices are back in line and buy..are you a monkey that picked a bottom? Or do you think there will be a burning bush like sign that says "It's the bottom"...what happens in your world?

I have decided that everything in the world is great. Further Manhattan is a magical place where real estate NEVER seems to decline. Every weekend there are lines around the block of people looking to buy property that has no chance of ever declining. Each property has 10-20 offers over asking and those down arrows are actually mistakes. I feel sorry for all you chumps who can't afford a $7000.00 a month nut. If "you haven't flipped your a drip". I have made so much money I no longer have to work. Thanks for not understanding just how magical NYC real estate is.

eah, ask Juice what the answer to your question is. I already answered this in detail before for him. really simply put, as far as the housing market goes, i'm not picking a 'bottom'. i'm waiting for the housing market to get back into equilibrium.

so equilibrium doesn't equal a bottom? essentially, you are looking for a bottom number. just as people looked to sell at the top. you're no different. so, get comfortable with your status as a lemming or a monkey...whichever makes you feel most comfortable...

equilibrium is not a "bottom," idyit. Equilibrium is when it costs about the same to buy as to rent. Sometimes it is cheaper to buy than to rent (1998, for instance). That would be a bottom, which since there are no candlestick charts for the housing market, cannot be forecast in the same way as stocks.

but for "equilibrium" to happen, in your mind, there has to be a dramatic drop in price. So, you just define your bottom as "equilibrium"...i guess to sound terribly informed and special.

bottom is just a silly term chucked around. like bull or bear. what we're all waiting for, in varying degress, is top or bottom of markets.

i do like idyit. very irish way of saying it.

"so equilibrium doesn't equal a bottom?"

Look, obviously you do not understand economic principles.

Equilibrium does NOT equal a bottom. Prices could easily swing waaaay past equilibrium point and decline much further before it re-adjusts upwards BACK to equilibrium.

So, no, I am NOT looking for a bottom number. I am looking for a number that is in line with various equilibrium points, such as income appreciation, rental cost, etc.

Could prices go down even further? Sure it could. But I'm not a monkey, and I don't pick bottoms.

"Could prices go down even further? Sure it could. But I'm not a monkey, and I don't pick bottoms."

I meant, "Could prices go down even further PAST EQUILIBRIUM? Sure it could. But I'm not a monkey, and I don't pick bottoms."

btw, as I told houser yesterday who was so keen on the stock market bottoming (again, another monkey infatuated with picking bottoms), the institutions, aka big boys have now started to unload their shares to the lemmings who followed the pied piper and bought into this staged rally. now that prices are high, the big boys have started to unload their shares, leaving the lemmings to become bagholders of overpriced stock.

bond-actions started at 1pm EST (end tomorrow). right on the money, the big boys started their methodical unloading. poor lemmings. all they read at the headlines on cnbc and listen to the talking heads while they get taken yet again by the pros. this is exactly why professional traders at the big investment banks love volatility and high beta.

no--i have no clue about economic principles - you're quite right on that. i actually don't work in the industry at all and am really just a bored housewife. anyway, looking for a number at which you will buy in is timing a market and so on. use whatever economic term you'd like. static economic principles are very, very hard to apply and live by. ask bernake. something tells me when he was teaching his actions of the past months would not have made his lecture lineup....

eah, "but for "equilibrium" to happen, in your mind, there has to be a dramatic drop in price."

Amn't I predicting that?

"So, you just define your bottom as "equilibrium"...i guess to sound terribly informed and special."

Non sequitur. Prices go way below "equilibrium" all the time - last "bottom" was 1998, starting from a precipitously high "top" in 1988.

But all these swings are things you see in hindsight. Makes for fun chat on blogs but it is never something you pick unless it is a total fluke. The tone you gys use is comical since you're so very convinced of your own rectitude.

And steve, you're not predicting dramatic price drops--I think most of us on here are expecting price drops - some severe, some mild...again, the "bottom" or "equilibrium" will be not be an even propostion.

You and MMAfaia are acting like whining ...

Cassandras

"again, the "bottom" or "equilibrium" will be not be an even propostion"

that eah, is where the problem is. equilibrium is in fact THE proposition. equilibrium by definition, means that the market is functioning, and is not out of whack (which it currently is). When markets are out of synch, they adjust back to equilibrium as long as it is a free market, which real estate still is. This is your basic Adam Smith "invisible hand" theory that is taught in all economics 101 classes in high school or in college.

learn more, understand more, educate yourself more, and you be able to better protect yourself from being manipulated and/or taken by the nefarious elite who take advantage of the unknowing and unsuspecting.

"But all these swings are things you see in hindsight."

Wrong again, Young Grasshopper. Real estate is a highly illiquid market. It's not possible to pick a bottom, but it is possible - and easy - to find out when it costs the same to own as it does to rent, and you have a long time to "get in on the action."

Unlike the idyits who lined up for apartment auctions 4 years ago, who thought they had to jump right into a market that is illiquid.

You can also pretty much figure out what's going to happen in the future by looking at inventories and interest rates. I check pretty much daily.

Finally, between streeteasy & nybits, there is some transparency in Manhattan real estate.

petrfitz: "Steve how many buyers have been on the sidelines and have not bought this year? You dont see them all coming back in at the same time as soon as the press starts to call bottom?"

I'm watching closely from the sidelines, and you're totally wrong. There are plenty of bearish articles in the press, and also plenty of bullish ones, some substantive, many fluffy. What I've seen in my part of the market that matters to me is:

-There's been no bonus bounce in '08.

-The normally hot spring open house season is a total dud.

-Put those two together and '08 will just keep getting worse for sellers.

-There will be no bonus bounce in '09.

-The marginal properties that were getting snatched up at ridiculous prices aren't any more.

-The average properties that were trying to compete with luxury properties aren't any more.

-Most brokers have totally changed their tune.

-The sellers that are pricing any significant appreciation over 2007 have units that just sit there.

"You dont think that that inventory will get snatched up?"

Inventory has been climbing steadily since August '07, the only down month being December when listings get pulled for a "fresh" Jan re-release, while above conditions have transactions way down, and there are 10s of thousands of units in the pipeline. No other year this decade has seen such a steady upward climb in inventory.

grasshopper. steve...you just made me tingle. no one has called me grasshopper in YEARS. you savage you.

ok MMAfia and Steve, I will try to read more and say less and eventually I ,too, can be a renter again.

But i like the nefarious elite. i have made all my money off the nefarious elite. i can blog most of the day because of the nefarious elite.

eah, you must have an interesting technique if you are able to make money off the nefarious elite without understanding something as basic as the difference between equilibrium and bottoms.

my wife makes money off the nefarious elite as well. her interesting technique is in fashion. when i learned of the mark-ups the luxury brands charge... i thought it was a joke at first.

oh, i do difference between equilibrium and bottoms. i understand the difference between a lot of the concepts i learned in school. mostly the difference between the "textbook" case and how things play out in reality. but mostly, if it doesn't make me money, i forget it. i have no interest in "winning" banter or dick swinging. i am sure i would be thrashed multiple times. but, in terms of wealth building, i do fine. i'll never make the forbes list. but i have come to accept that.

so, if you're wife makes money of the elite--why are you bashing them?

Most economists (e.g. Samuelson 1947, Chapter 3, p. 52) caution against attaching a normative meaning (value judgement) to the equilibrium price. For example, food markets may be in equilibrium at the same time that people are starving (because they cannot afford to pay the high equilibrium price).

One of my favourite quotes about equilibrium.

eah, first you post this:

"so equilibrium doesn't equal a bottom? essentially, you are looking for a bottom number. just as people looked to sell at the top. you're no different."

and now, you post:

"Most economists (e.g. Samuelson 1947, Chapter 3, p. 52) caution against attaching a normative meaning (value judgement) to the equilibrium price. For example, food markets may be in equilibrium at the same time that people are starving (because they cannot afford to pay the high equilibrium price).

One of my favourite quotes about equilibrium."

Now I realized I'm wasting time with you (unlike houser, you're boring). Clearly, you had no understanding with the first post. Then you go off googling and come back with a Sameulson quote, professing that it's one of your favorite quotes about equilibrium?

LMAO. Sorry, but you don't fool me. Nice try though. Adios.

BTW- as I have told houser and other stock market bottom-picking monkeys yesterday, you were TAKEN by the big boys. Watch and learn n00bs.

I did google the quote--you're right. You think I remember it directly? I thought it underscored my point.

Adios...you mean, you're not going to anon. blog with me anymore? Gutted. And, dude, we're all wasting our time on here with each other. What, did you think we were doing? Changing the world?

I am actually a top, if people need to know.

That's what you all say.

eah, that's the wrong equilibrium. "food markets may be in equilibrium at the same time that people are starving (because they cannot afford to pay the high equilibrium price)."

That is the equilibrium between supply and demand; we are discussing the equilibrium - equality - between rental and sales prices. The are in equilibrium when they are the same, since there would then be equality between market rents and imputed rents.

Which means, in elemental terms, that since buying and renting an apartment get you the same benefit - shelter - they should cost the same. And over long periods of time they always do. Just right now they don't.

The equilibrium you are talking about would be if the supply demand equilibrium of real estate were $1 billion psf. Of course no one would buy real estate that that price. What would happen, however, is that more housing will be built until the equilibrium price was an affordable one at all demand price points.

This is what I mean about all the fancy people on this website, who claim they understand CAPM yet incorrectly post about the commutative property of multiplication and get it wrong.

No, actually, I think I'm the only top in Manhattan. Most live in the outer boroughs, or with other women.

We don't need to rehash this Steve, MMAfia already pulled my pants down and exposed me as a fraud for googling a quote. I actually have no clue about finance. Or real estate. I've just been BSing this WHOLE time.

I would MUCH rather discuss the top bottom dynamics of Chelsea boys...

I'm not really a talker. Screamer maybe, talker, not much.

You'd bottom with the right guy. Or the right poppers.

gross this isn't manhunt please can there be some limits here

oh lighten up. but, i guess we have to go back to discussing nuances of equilibrium.

by using the word gross, kyle, i call bottom. chicks says gross...

kylewest is the gayest guy on here - check out his posts on Jade and bears.

is he that swedish former pron star agent guy i always read about on Curbed?

What is Curbed? Sorry, I have no clue.

oh, its hysterical. it is streeteasy but more obviously ridiculous.

stevejhx,

http://curbed.com

spunky got called blasted over there too (!) lol

Looks like the Institutional Selling is beginning to ramp up now... houser, it's exactly as I showed you in that graph yesterday when you proclaimed the banking index closing in the green. masterfully architected by the professional trading desks to lure unknowing/uneducated/unsuspecting retail investors into the manufactured run-up in prices.

As I said before, we are in a Bear market, and the manufactured counter-trend rally will (and now has) failed to break important resistance (1425 for the S&P). this has given the institutional investors a good price to exit and dump their positions on the lemming investor who will end up as bag holders.

Now, prepare for the next leg down in the current Bear market as Institutional selling increases.

spunky's banned everywhere?

stevejhx,

to refresh our memories (this was quite a while ago):

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/2520-spunky-gets-slapped

(:~

steve, you really liked that Jade review of mine, huh? still talking about it weeks later. well, the building is like a trip to Six Flags for anyone remotely interested in (dubious) design. all i meant above was that the "double" had been completely dropped from the "entendres" and the posts had kind of crossed the line to just plain crass. nothing beyond that. y'all need to put in a little more effort to pump up the wit and not take "RE porn" quite so literally. that's all. type on...

spunky's banned everywhere---- stevejhx

Oh stevejhx I come back from Rome and you still here, still posting funny numbers. At least they're entertaining.

Glad you're back, spunky! I missed you!

You're really in Rome & are posting on streeteasy? Wow! Lame.

No I'm back apparently you still have a knack for misinterpretation and presnting funny numbers.