Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Statements about my mental capacity, like most of your contributions to this forum add little to this discussion but do continue to make me chuckle...cheers. It is a pity that obviously where you were able to foresee the impending financial disaster that occurred, no one else worldwide could. With your economic credentials surely you must be under utilised in whatever capacity it is that you work. Maybe you should become a financial advisor, in the meantime, please continue your contributions for my ammusement...


Nobody else worldwide was able to see the impending financial disaster that occurred??!!

That has to be one of the most ludicrous and inaccurate claims I have yet seen anyone make in relation to the 2008 economic meltdown and stock market crash.
You're completely out of touch with reality. You don't have a clue. You've swallowed the Cassamatis lies, hook line and sinker.
I'll bet that just like Cassamatis, SICAG's Noel O'Brien and various others, you also claim that the 2008 market crash and financial crisis were unprecedented!

In the months leading up to the market peak in November 2007, every single day there were dire warnings from hundreds of financial journalists and economic analysts worldwide that the economic situation was becoming critical and a market crash was imminent.
In every newspaper and on every TV and radio station, there it was, warning after warning after warning that world economies and markets were on the verge of a catastrophic meltdown.
US banks were going broke, with many more predicted to follow.
Many fund managers stated publicly that they had taken the precaution of converting their clients to cash.
Many private investors also converted their portfolios to cash.
Some of those investors are contributors to this thread - they're the same people you've been targeting with your vehemence and ridicule and bitterness.
They're the same people whom you've implied are complete blockheads.
They're the same people who were sufficiently switched on to avoid being lured into the Storm Financial trap.
And you claim that nobody was able to see the impending financial disaster??????!!!!!

You were exposed to the same information as the rest of us in regard to the impending economic meltdown. Either your mind lacked the capacity to absorb that information, or for some reason you blocked it out and ignored it.
But please don't continue to insult your own intelligence by claiming that nobody knew about the coming crisis.

Because of your misguided belief that nobody saw the financial crisis coming, you seem to think it was inevitable that investors got burnt by it.
Let me tell you something which clearly you have not understood......Even if investors were not aware of the impending financial crisis, it didn't matter. They didn't need to have advance warning of it - all they needed to do was react to it once it arrived in the form of a bear market.
How? By taking defensive action, off-loading part or all of their portfolios, or giving their brokers instructions to sell specific stocks if they fell to a certain price level.
Any or all of these actions would have taken investors out of the market before they lost their shirts, even if they'd had no advance warning of the impending meltdown.

Investors were afforded plenty of time for defensive action to preserve the bulk of their capital, due to the relatively sedate nature of the 2008 crash compared to the severity and suddenness of the 1987 wipe-out.

2008 crash - down 56% in 17 months
1987 crash - down 50% in 8 weeks

The 08 bear market wiped 20% off the All Ords in the first 13 weeks. The October 87 crash wiped 25% off the market in just one day!

Again I make the point......due to the relatively mild nature of the 2008 crash in terms of the speed of the decline, there was plenty of time for investors to get out of the market before suffering catastrophic losses, even if they'd been unaware that a crash was coming.

In one of my early posts I told of a relative of mine who borrowed a six figure sum to sink into the market through an Investment Advisor.
As the market approached it's November 2007 peak, and the alarm bells were ringing every day through the various media outlets, I advised her to quit half her portfolio and pocket well in excess of 100% gains. She ignored my advice because her advisor told her to 'hang in there - stocks are a long term investment'.
When my chart of the All Ords showed me that the market had peaked and had now turned bearish, I advised her to liquidate her entire portfolio.
Her gains at that time were still around 100%. Again, she ignored my advice because her advisor told her to hang in there.
Her 100% gains evaporated month by month as the market headed south in 2008. She has since quit her portfolio, not only missing out on the six figure profit that was available earlier, but sustaining a heavy loss.

Perhaps you think I've just made up this story, or that I've related it for the purpose of big-noting myself. You'd be wrong on both counts if that's what you believe.
The story is true enough, and I haven't told it to big-note myself, but rather to illustrate to misinformed people like you that by keeping yourself abreast of world events through news programmes and such like, by learning some very basic chart-reading skills, and by being flexible in your approach, you can avoid getting cleaned out by market meltdowns and incompetent outfits like Storm Financial.

In some of my earlier posts I mentioned a $35 book that details simple, safe and very effective strategies for profitable stock market investment.
I claimed that if Storm investors had been familiar with these strategies and had implemented them, they would have not only got out of the market before the crash wiped them out, but they would have got out with substantial profits in most cases.
In fact, with this knowledge under their belts they may have felt no need to go near Storm Financial in the first place.

This one book costing the princely sum of about $35 dollars, really can empower private investors to play the stock market safely and profitably under all market conditions.
I'm not going to tell you the name of the book or give you the post numbers in which I mentioned it. I suggest you get off your back side and search back through my posts until you find it.
There is simply no excuse for your ignorance about market investment matters. Put in some effort, broaden your outlook, get rid of your tunnel vision, and you just might develop into a capable stock market investor in your own right, without the need to rely on others to tell you what to do.

And don't waste any more of your time by coming back at me with another one of your sarcastic posts. I can play that game as well as you can, but there's little point in wasting our time and emotional energy in that sort of endeavour.
There are people on this thread who know a hell of a lot more than you about market investment. Rather than viewing them as fools and subjecting them to sarcasm and ridicule, you'd be doing yourself a big favour if you made it your business to learn something from them.
 
Seems EC is doing an Alan Bond ... I don't recall, I can't remember.

During his evidence, Mr Cassimatis was unable to recall a number of particulars relating to Storm, including whether or not he served as managing director.

He was then shown a business card on which he was named as MD.

Mr Cassimatis was also unable to recall details of a planned float of the company scheduled for 2007, but which failed to proceed.

See http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,,26135128-3102,00.html

By Anthony Marx, September 28, 2009 01:31pm
 
Have you been at the hearing, Steve?

Do you know if a transcript will become available?

My post crossed with Quincy's. Thanks for that, Quincy.

Anyone actually at the hearing?
 
Whats the latest on Storm, Manny, SICAG moneyspiders and the rest of the motley crew?

Been away fishing.

Only been able to access Twitter from a Yankee mate's "cell".

Back in Townsville.

gg
 
"Founder gives evidence about Storm collapse'

"The founder of Storm Financial has begun giving evidence at a public examination of the planning company's collapse."

"One of the first questions he was asked was whether he was Storm's managing director."

He gave an interesting answer

More from the ABC

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/28/2698404.htm

Is this a joke, Solly, did he really say that!!

gg
 
"Storm Financial planned margin call alert: Emmanuel Cassimatis"

"FORMER Storm Financial managing director Emmanuel Cassimatis has told a Brisbane court that the company was developing a way to identify clients going into margin call when the market nosedived late last year."

More from Andrew Fraser in The Australian here;

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,26135155-643,00.html

How many years had he been a financial advisor with clients using margin?

Developing a way = Having a plan.

I've had margin loans, and always had a plan.

Maybe I should look at becoming a financial adviser.

Fail to plan, and plan to fail.

gg
 
"I don't know, I can't remember"

"The founder of collapsed advisory firm Storm Financial has told a Brisbane court he doesn't know why his attempt to publicly float the company failed."

More from Daniel Hurst from Fairfax's Business Day here;

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/i-dont-know-i-cant-remember-20090928-g8gv.html

Storm's Managing Director Emmanuel Cassimatis has been hauled before a Federal Court hearing today to answer questions about his company which left investors with large losses when it was wound up in March with debts of about $80 million.

In his evidence today, Mr Cassimatis, dressed in a suit with no tie, told lawyers for liquidator Worrells he did not recall key details about the company's activities. During his testimony, punctuated by long silences and short answers

Manny, as one who has been in court numerous times for unpaid parking fines and not wearing a helmet, there is one golden rule mate, always wear a suit with a tie when in court.


gg
 
It is very interesting to note that he wasn't wearing a tie.

I know people might scoff at this, but wearing a tie to court/an inquiry hearing is a sign that you take what is being said seriously, you understand the consequences/ramifications, and are willing to conform to someone else's opinion/direction. Hence why every crim worth his salt, no matter how unrepentant, and how 'anti the system' he is, will front to court in a suit and tie.

When I worked in Defence Recruiting, one of the little tricks into guessing the personality of someone was watching what they came dressed to their interviews in. Someone who didn't wear a tie was often cocky, came across arrogant, and believed they were superior to the person that was interviewing them, and hence wanted to reinforce an image of non-conformity, and vicariously, contempt for that person(s).

Why am I not surprised to see Manny adopting this. So his quest for justice for his client's stops when it comes to remembering key things....things like what his actual role was at Storm? Bloody hell. I went from feeling a very tiny ounce of regret for his downfall this morning (and by small I mean insignificant) to the point where I'd happily fling dog faeces at his open, lying mouth. It's evident that any inquiry into him and his staff's neglect is above him.

Well well well, things are going to get very interesting for Manny in the next few months....I can guarantee it.
 
I've often wondered why Manny was most often seen/photographed in jeans and open-necked shirt, almost as if he was verbalising "look at me - I'm just an ordinary bloke, just like you". Maybe I was wrong, and he's just a slob instead? Very disrespectful to appear in court under-dressed like that - I'm surprised his high-priced legal-eagles didn't dress him better...

Was Julie at the enquiry? How like Manny to pass the buck when it came to who was managing director - it's a wonder he didn't claim it was his Mum!
 
Was Julie at the enquiry? How like Manny to pass the buck when it came to who was managing director - it's a wonder he didn't claim it was his Mum!

Julie was there in the morning, apparently in deep conversation with a former CBA employee who went on to become a salesperson with Storm. Both of them are due to appear tomorrow.

Remembering what they forgot or forgetting what they remembered?
 
I've often wondered why Manny was most often seen/photographed in jeans and open-necked shirt, almost as if he was verbalising "look at me - I'm just an ordinary bloke, just like you". Maybe I was wrong, and he's just a slob instead? Very disrespectful to appear in court under-dressed like that - I'm surprised his high-priced legal-eagles didn't dress him better...

Was Julie at the enquiry? How like Manny to pass the buck when it came to who was managing director - it's a wonder he didn't claim it was his Mum!

I have always found this website invaluable to peruse the day before a court appearance.

http://www.ehow.com/how_8979_dress-court-appearance.html

Going to court is a bit like doing examinations at school.

Its the preparation weeks before that gets one through, trying to cram the day before is useless.

So I always concentrate on my appearance particularly picking my suit and tie to give the appearance of one who takes the whole schamozzle seriously. (You usually find that anyone not wearing a Lowe's suit takes it seriously).

I usually wear one of my Giorgio Armani's.

(Note, Do not ever wear Banana Republic or Canali. I seen a guy do it once and he's still in Lotus Glen, and that was in the year of the Expo.)

Magistrates are always afraid of making mistakes and often deal with the unwashed, but Districk or Federal needs a certain sense of gravity.



Difficulty: Easy
Instructions
Things You'll Need:
Men's Dress Shirts
Men's Dress Sweater
Mens' Dress Pants
Neckties
Sports Coat
Women's Dress Coats
Women's Dress Pants
Women's Dress Shirts
Women's Dress Sweater
dresses and skirts
1.Step 1
Understand that a courtroom is a formal, serious place and that judges are generally conservative.
2.Step 2
Choose clothing that you are comfortable wearing. You will look nervous and shifty if you are adjusting your clothing and constantly rearranging yourself in court.
3.Step 3
Avoid sneakers, trendy clothing, lots of jewelry, loud colors (especially red), revealing outfits, outrageous hairdos, and stained or damaged clothes. Do not wear a lot of perfume, cologne or aftershave. Wearing leather is not advisable.
4.Step 4
Wear a suit, dress, or blouse and skirt if you are a woman. Do not wear spike heels, sandals or open-toed shoes. Wear a bra and pantyhose even if it kills you. Be sure your bra and slip are not showing.
5.Step 5
Wear a suit, jacket and tie, or shirt and tie (only if you don't own a jacket) if you are a man. Never wear a hat.
6.Step 6
Remove your coat before entering the courtroom.
7.Step 7
Look as serious, reasonable, modest and ordinary as possible. You don't want to stand out or call attention to yourself.
8.Step 8
Take off any expensive pieces of jewelry if you are trying to get the court to award you money.
9.Step 9
Leave pocketknives, guns and any other weapons at home. They are not permitted in the courthouse.



Follow this formula and you have at least a fifty fifty chance of getting through with the minimum sentence, if they can prove on the evidence or plant it on you.

And you will get off if its a matter of your word against theirs.

gg
 
Top