Oh dear the Henry tax has just killed my mining portfolio

[tech/a]

And how about OZL? ........... as " experienced " traders would you take a position at 105/106 with a stop a touch below todays low ?

No signs staring at you ?

or is this classed as catching knives? instead of a technical entry with low risk/reward criteria,s.

silly me i must be the only silly bugga here

I spose i have to wait until tommorow till i get an answer tho?

You would have been stopped nun! at around 11.30
Want to have another go at the $1.02 low now in place?

 

[Joe Blow]

Thought I'd nip that little exchange in the bud before it deteriorated even further.

Back on topic please people, preferably without the insults and personal attacks.

Moving right along...

 

[nunthewiser]

yep i noticed my replys had been deleted , even the last one explaining why i took that tone in my reply.

fair enough.The first one was maybe out of line

Crux of the matter is that there has been cash to be made on intraday volatility on various mid cap mining stocks in the last 2 days.

 

[Muschu]

Dont!!

Initially like all "shocks" there will be over reaction.
Reality will eventually set in as the realisation strikes that production wont cease and demand will drive supply.
Id be more concerned with a fall in demand.
Youll see where it pulls up--it will be pretty clear.

So tech/a, and I have said before that I value your analysis and views --

Would you sell losing junior mining stocks at this point? Would you wait for a bounce? Hold?

Thinking of such miners as GMG, ETE, EXS, MGX, MMX, MRE, BRM, AGO... etc -- All of whom have taken a massive hit.

I ask only because I am very uncertain about what to do. Opinions welcome without an accompanying gaurantee....

Best

Rick

 

[So_Cynical]

Gezz Rick...chances are this is just a pull back and just as much a buying opp as it is a panic and sell moment, the only one of the stocks you listed that i hold and follow is MRE so ill keep my comments to just MRE.

Minara is hardly what i would call a junior miner, MC of 900+ mill and has been in production for many years, currently sitting on 280+ mill cash, no debt and pocketing 2 mill a week....now sure there's downside risk, always has been and always will be but there's got to be a fair chance that the super tax will be watered down...just imagine how the SP would surge on any back down announcement.

MRE also have to be close to announcing a divi IMO :dunno: .. imagine how the SP would rally on that!

 

[Julia]

So Cynical, you will hold most things through most events.
As I recall Rick's approach, it's quite different.
Unless I'm remembering incorrectly, Rick sold near his companies' highs, and repurchased at lower prices when an uptrend returned and did very well indeed.

You may be right in suggesting there's nothing much to worry about here.
Or the European situation, where now not banks but governments are on the edge of defaulting, may be the start of something every bit as bad as the GFC.

A friend of mine who has an attitude similar to yours scoffed at me when I said I'd sold out. He boasted that he was 'almost back to where he was before the GFC'. I bit my tongue instead of telling him that if he'd protected his profits, then bought back in at or near the bottom, he would actually have made a very tidy profit instead of now being poorer than he was two years ago!

 

[-Bevo-]

Don't trade the stocks atm but I see Canada on the news saying your welcome over here I guess they cant believe there luck, which brings the question if this tax was voted in makes me wonder if giving up ASX and trading Canada TSE might be a option for stock traders who like resource stocks?

 

[So_Cynical]

A friend of mine who has an attitude similar to yours scoffed at me when I said I'd sold out. He boasted that he was 'almost back to where he was before the GFC'. I bit my tongue instead of telling him that if he'd protected his profits, then bought back in at or near the bottom, he would actually have made a very tidy profit instead of now being poorer than he was two years ago!

I didn't sell and instead brought the bottom and am now (even with this pull back) about 18 > 20% above my pre GFC portfolio worth...we all know there's a 1000 if's and but's and there's always things what we could of done better.

Personally i hate the thought of selling or buying at the wrong time...im very confident that this is probably a good time to buy some stocks (over sold, low risk) and im also confident that now is a bad time to sell most stocks (over sold, low/med risk)

Last time we were at 4600 i brought ALZ as it took a big dip, made an easy 17% or so 8 weeks later...intend to do the same tomorrow though not ALZ cos its not dipping...i know its easy to have a little panic when the markets tanking, i panic a little too but seem able to talk my self around to behaving more rationally and try and see the upside.

After the last dip i was actually kicking myself that i didn't buy more MRE as it was dipping lower then than it is now, in fact would be buying them tomorrow if MRE was under 65 cents.

Good luck Rick.

 

[Space Invader101]

I'm switching REIT's or phasing out of the market. Either all my resource stocks hit their stop losses or I sold them to prevent further damage.

How long do we have to wait until we can vote the extreme socialist government out?

 

[nulla nulla]

You would have been stopped nun! at around 11.30
Want to have another go at the $1.02 low now in place?

That ozl $0.99 entry might be on the cards today. Or will last nights silly bugger action on the djia panic the price lower..$0.95?

 

[TheAbyss]

An interesting email last week around taxation of the high performers. Explains the taxation system simply and uses beer to keep our interest and certainly has some relevance to the Henry debacle.

Have a read...

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this;

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1
The sixth would pay $3
The seventh would pay $7
The eighth would pay $12
The ninth would pay $18
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59

So, that's what they decided to do..

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with
the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to
reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men
would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.

So the first four men were unaffected.

They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers?

How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realised that $20 divided by six is $3.33.
But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the
sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each
man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the
principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to
work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).

The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began
to compare their savings.

"I only got a pound out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man.

He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a pound
too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back,
when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get
anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine
sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to
pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have
enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is
how our tax system works.

The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the
most benefit from a tax reduction..

Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may
not show up anymore.

In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is
somewhat friendlier.



David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

 

[jojoventure]

Best explanation of the mining tax...

Should be on the front page of the daily telegraph.......

 

[shiftyphil]

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics.

Take his name off that article, it has nothing to do with him.

http://davidk.myweb.uga.edu/

"Contrary to Internet folklore, Dr. Kamerschen is NOT the author of "Tax Cuts: A Simple Lesson in Economics" or “Bar Stool Economics” or anything similar to that. Additionally, he does NOT know who wrote it and he has no opinion on its merits."