Media Appearance: CNBC’s Squawk on the Street (6/10/08)

Squawk_on_the_street_440x230b

>

This morning, I am on CNBC’s  Squawk on the Street, at 9:35 am. Overseas markets are trading very heavy, and US Equity Futures are looking pretty rough.

Back in January, we discussed our outlook for 2008 — here’s how we saw the year in January, with actualy mid year lows.

Index_________2008 Mid Year______2008 Final______Actual 2008 Low YTD
DJIA:_________11,900____________12,800___________11,740
S&P 500:_______1,275____________1,350____________1,273
NASDAQ:_______2,275____________2,400____________2,169
Russell 2000:___ 580______________639______________644
10-year yield:___3.75_____________4.10_____________3.33

Note we revisit our outlook on June 30th.

UPDATE: June 10, 10:00 am

DOH! We make great time — the roads are relatively light —  but get caught in traffic, too late to make the spot. (And I have a studio upstairs from my office? Why do I even bother with the NYSE floor in 100 degree heat!?)

Anyway, I’m told the spot will get rescheduled in the near future.

>

Previously:
Media Appearance: CNBC’s Squawk on the Street (1/10/08)
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/01/media-appearanc.html

Squawk Video (1/10/08)
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/01/squawk-video.html

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web:
  1. phatmary commented on Jun 10

    Barry, you’re on top of your game buddy!

    kudos

  2. dave54 commented on Jun 10

    JP Morgan [stock] is weak today because with ‘systemic risk’ under control, but oil prices soaring, the Fed has to raise rates?

  3. stuart commented on Jun 10

    Reading Bernanke’s comments and listening to Paulson comments it’s clear they’re terrified of a collapse in the buck. Sure, lambaste China for currency intervention but it’s ok for us to do it. Next time concerns are raised with China about their management of the Renminbi, guess what their response will be. FU Manchu. Can’t believe the audacity of their lies in their deliberate dollar prop job. They are going to get taken to the wall.

  4. michael schumacher commented on Jun 10

    Actually out on CN”BS” just to hear what you have to say but as usual they need to get some pumptard from UBS and then some CEO that will say it’s all ok….

    Don’t they have watches or ANY sense of time??

    Switched it off after the pumptard from UBS said the S&P will grow by 20%…..this year…

    Ciao
    MS

  5. Vermont Trader commented on Jun 10

    Stuart – I find all of this talk of intervention amusing.

    The US doesn’t have any foreign currency reserves to intervene with. You can’t buy dollars when you don’t have anything to sell.

    The only way we can support the buck is by asking other countries (ie China) to do it for us and they are already propping up the dollar.

    So it’s just talk.

  6. stuart commented on Jun 10

    “So it’s just talk”. Exactly. Do you not think Paulson, Bush and Bernanke were unaware of the markets reaction to their overt prop job comments. Albeit, jawboning is extremely temporary. Nevertheless it is deliberate intervention intended to move currency markets in a particular direction. What they have done is set themselves up on a pedestal to be hacked off at the knees once it becomes all too clear, even after lies and spin are evident to the willfully blind, else the blowback is depression. They have put themselves into a defined corner now, and once their assertions are called, perhaps even raised, what then? Rates are rising as we get flooded in treasuries and this is not going to abate because funding requirements are just getting larger and larger. Jawboning is aimed at fools and meant to convey more spin that it is intentional and cover up the fact that the Emperor has no clothes.

  7. brasil commented on Jun 10

    US intervention..they really don’t want to intervene other than to slow down the rate or steepness in the drop…a bounce all the way to $USD 78 or so only brings us to the long term monthly down trend line..not very exciting and below the old floor in the 80 area…by the way ..who was responsible for negotiating trade deals with China way back when that did not cover currency energy ect ..Clinton admin…and at who’s bidding ..I-Banks and Big multi nationals with no sense of loyalty, right or wrong just bottom line ..yet sadly both parties are bought and paid for..

  8. michael schumacher commented on Jun 10

    “Food and other commodities are not speculation but supply demand.”

    File that in the Hank Paulson BS indicator bin….

    They are certainly in overdrive denial mode today…

    Ciao
    MS

  9. michael schumacher commented on Jun 10

    brasil-

    I’m sure blaming Clinton for the last 8 years of failed policies (meaning NONE at all) makes you feel better however it’s more the fault of the current administration for doing nothing about any of it and then laying blame at congress’ foot because they’ve not done anything for 1.5 years.

    Your logic leaves out the ensuing year’s where MUCH could have been done but it wasn’t.

    Try again…

    Ciao
    MS

  10. brasil commented on Jun 10

    Michael ..always enjoy your posts…think you missed the sentence..both parties are bought and paid for…which they are and do the bidding for large corporations interest and marketed that this is good for all…unchecked capitalism is as dangerous as unchecked communism …as for failed policies of the last 8 years..think you may miss the point..the policies of the last 8 years were to prevent another terrorist attack on US soil and to combat terrorism…that has seemingly worked but at the expense of everything else ..probably not very wise in hindsight but at the time it seemed prudent..so much so that better than 80% of the electorate and more in Congress were on board…as to blaming GW admin for the banking real estate debacle is beyond riculous…a true analysis would put thousands in jail for fraud .starting with the rating agencies and trickling down ..of course this will never happen..

  11. michael schumacher commented on Jun 10

    I see your attempt at back peddling….here’s you’re statement:

    “who was responsible for negotiating trade deals with China way back when that did not cover currency energy ect ..Clinton admin..”

    Now who was responsible for continuation for far longer than what the Clinton Admin. did or did not do?

    We live in a much different world now than 10 years ago….I put that SQUARELY on the current admin. for doing nothing.

    This part of your reply just takes the cake:

    “the policies of the last 8 years were to prevent another terrorist attack on US soil and to combat terrorism”. I bet you think the TSA keeps us “safe” too.

    So you drank the “safe at all costs” mantra too?

    Good luck with that

    Ciao
    MS

  12. brasil commented on Jun 10

    lol..michael …no no..no ..I could care less..safe at all costs…not me..I am reporting..that seems to be what happened.. of course from my limited perspective..if you want to trace the roots of this back to Nixon opening China by all means..lol..but I think a reasonable look at the start of China’s emergence would stem from the point they entered the WTO when there was some leverage to negotiate with ..not back pedaling at all…I think there is enough responsibility to go around..and big business interests are the hands pushing the agendas …growth in mature markets is dead…unions, rules, regulations..who needs that when you can move to undeveloped markets with dictators on the take and starving populace grateful for whatever you give them …I respect your point of view though..thanks for the dialogue

  13. Mike in NOLA commented on Jun 10

    100 degree heat? You should move to the Gulf South where it’s cooler :)

    I do think you are a little optimistic.

  14. michael schumacher commented on Jun 10

    with that I can agree…..it started way before both however I think the effects of continuing to do nothing are a bit exacerbated by the lack of any real clarity or forsight when it was really needed…..both are guilty…I guess I get a little miffed when the “blame Clinton” thing is offered up in defense of the last several year’s of inaction. I must have read that poorly. I do see that used quite often however.

    God help us all if this is allowed to continue though…

    Ciao
    MS

  15. mari commented on Jun 10

    BR: Any comments on Lehman’s conf. call?

    They sold $130 billion of asset that are junior in nature and took $17 billion in losses – does anyone know if any of the junior tranches trade 85-90%? – they are still talking about keeping upside on tranches/securites. Watchout for their LEVEL III assets…

  16. michael schumacher commented on Jun 10

    mari-

    Did they ever identify who they got the $6b from???

    Ciao
    MS

  17. mari commented on Jun 10

    MS:

    http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/10/for-lehmans-fuld-a-reversal-of-fortune/

    To shore up its finances further, the bank will sell $4 billion of common stock priced at $28 a share and $2 billion of preferred stock that will covert into common stock in three years. Buyers include the state pension fund of New Jersey and C. V. Starr & Company, the investment fund by Maurice R. Greenberg, the former head of the American International Group. Investors in the deal said they were reassured by Lehman’s actions.

    “I think they’ve done a pretty good job conservatively marking down the things that should be marked down,” Mr. Greenberg told CNBC.

    He said further markdowns were possible, but that would not “harm the company in any great degree.”

  18. michael schumacher commented on Jun 10

    Thanks….knew about the N.J. angle but not Greenberg. I wonder how his last placement went??? LOL

    Ciao
    MS

Read this next.

Posted Under