<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Truth About Cars</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/</link>
	<description>Macro Perspective on the Capital Markets, Economy, Geopolitics, Technology, and Digital Media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:47:29 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark E Hoffer</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/comment-page-1/#comment-128033</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark E Hoffer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 13:58:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=10160#comment-128033</guid>
		<description>lb, 

if &quot;Long&quot; F, why not short Puts?  the Mar09 3 Put looks like it was 2.23 bid
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/op?s=F&amp;m=2009-03

you may want to 2x check, but that leaves .77 U$D as max risk, no?

long F @ 1.43 gives one a max risk of 1.43 U$D, yes?

that seems like a big difference..(O yeah, pls. include trans. fees/costs)

past that, BR, that site http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/category/news-blog/bailout-watch/ , like yours, has long been a good one..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>lb, </p>
<p>if &#8220;Long&#8221; F, why not short Puts?  the Mar09 3 Put looks like it was 2.23 bid<br />
<a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/q/op?s=F&amp;m=2009-03" rel="nofollow">http://finance.yahoo.com/q/op?s=F&amp;m=2009-03</a></p>
<p>you may want to 2x check, but that leaves .77 U$D as max risk, no?</p>
<p>long F @ 1.43 gives one a max risk of 1.43 U$D, yes?</p>
<p>that seems like a big difference..(O yeah, pls. include trans. fees/costs)</p>
<p>past that, BR, that site <a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/category/news-blog/bailout-watch/" rel="nofollow">http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/category/news-blog/bailout-watch/</a> , like yours, has long been a good one..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: leftback</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/comment-page-1/#comment-128015</link>
		<dc:creator>leftback</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 03:56:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=10160#comment-128015</guid>
		<description>I bought F. Least lame of the three horses, big short position, you know I love a squeeze.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I bought F. Least lame of the three horses, big short position, you know I love a squeeze.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DL</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/comment-page-1/#comment-128000</link>
		<dc:creator>DL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:31:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=10160#comment-128000</guid>
		<description>Jack Welch opposes bailing out the automakers, and wants them to go bankrupt:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27840189


So according to Welch,  it&#039;s OK to throw endless amounts of money at the banks, but nothing for the autos.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jack Welch opposes bailing out the automakers, and wants them to go bankrupt:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/27840189" rel="nofollow">http://www.cnbc.com/id/27840189</a></p>
<p>So according to Welch,  it&#8217;s OK to throw endless amounts of money at the banks, but nothing for the autos.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat G.</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/comment-page-1/#comment-127998</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat G.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:18:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=10160#comment-127998</guid>
		<description>&quot;The Truth About Cars&quot;

It would be hard to imagine life without them.  Giddie Up...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The Truth About Cars&#8221;</p>
<p>It would be hard to imagine life without them.  Giddie Up&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DP</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/comment-page-1/#comment-127973</link>
		<dc:creator>DP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:29:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=10160#comment-127973</guid>
		<description>@DL said: &lt;i&gt;SPX 840 would be nice for the shorts, if it can get there).&lt;/i&gt;

Amazing how quickly things change. This time a few days ago we were wondering if 840 would hold on the way down.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@DL said: <i>SPX 840 would be nice for the shorts, if it can get there).</i></p>
<p>Amazing how quickly things change. This time a few days ago we were wondering if 840 would hold on the way down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KJ Foehr</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/comment-page-1/#comment-127966</link>
		<dc:creator>KJ Foehr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:59:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=10160#comment-127966</guid>
		<description>Bothe BAC and JPM are rallying, but C is not.  Perhaps that foreshadows its demise this weekend?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bothe BAC and JPM are rallying, but C is not.  Perhaps that foreshadows its demise this weekend?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DL</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/comment-page-1/#comment-127964</link>
		<dc:creator>DL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:51:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=10160#comment-127964</guid>
		<description>Today is options expiration.           Tim Geithner gets nominated today.       Coincidence?     

Obama is quickly learning the game.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today is options expiration.           Tim Geithner gets nominated today.       Coincidence?     </p>
<p>Obama is quickly learning the game.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MorticiaA</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/comment-page-1/#comment-127959</link>
		<dc:creator>MorticiaA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:38:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=10160#comment-127959</guid>
		<description>Gotta love the TTAC article farther down.  Apparently, F CEO Mulally drives a Lexus.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gotta love the TTAC article farther down.  Apparently, F CEO Mulally drives a Lexus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DL</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/comment-page-1/#comment-127956</link>
		<dc:creator>DL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:27:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=10160#comment-127956</guid>
		<description>Obama could induce a rally next week (if he wants to) by stating, together with Treasury designate Geithner, that he’s not going to raise cap gains taxes during the course of 2009.      He’s got nothing to lose by stating this… he’s not going to collect any money anyway (from that tax) during the course of 2009.        The purpose would be merely symbolic… but Wall Street would welcome it.  

(However, I doubt he’ll do it any time soon).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama could induce a rally next week (if he wants to) by stating, together with Treasury designate Geithner, that he’s not going to raise cap gains taxes during the course of 2009.      He’s got nothing to lose by stating this… he’s not going to collect any money anyway (from that tax) during the course of 2009.        The purpose would be merely symbolic… but Wall Street would welcome it.  </p>
<p>(However, I doubt he’ll do it any time soon).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DL</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-truth-about-cars/comment-page-1/#comment-127954</link>
		<dc:creator>DL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:21:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=10160#comment-127954</guid>
		<description>I think the Geitner rally continues into next week.  

(SPX 840 would be nice for the shorts, if it can get there).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the Geitner rally continues into next week.  </p>
<p>(SPX 840 would be nice for the shorts, if it can get there).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
