dear son,  Thanks for this information.  My account is with an online broker and I don't know how a partial sale would be reported as my trades have always been all or nothing at all.  Anyway, only a current member has access to the actual data and an ex-member's guesswork is just that, guessing.  So there we have it.  No sales.  No reportable losses.  No trading history.  No inclusion among the premium services of Weiss Research Inc.

Wait a minute!  How can it be 38%?  OK, BofA says so and Fidelity agrees with BofA.  But I don't understand this and the numbers look simple enough to be understood.  And I'm determined to understand, so I'm getting my thinking cap out from the corner of the closet where I last saw it, and there, its on, I'm ready to start thinking.  Oh, spoke too soon.  It's time for a tea break.  I'll get back to this after my tea, which is followed by my afternoon nap.  Then, when I'm refreshed and in complete possession of my mathematical powers, in that full hour before dinner, I'll tackle and solve how a 25% loss morphed into a 38% loss in the wink of an eye.

>>Martin spent $58,000 to buy the position that now has a value of $36,000. That’s a $22,000 loss. That $22,000 decline in the position’s value represents a loss of 37.93% on an investment of $58,000.<<

M’son, my records show that Claus bought 1490 shares of the financial IETF for $98,880.38. Half of that would be about $49400 (as j.t said). Where does your $58K figure come from? It can’t be a loss greater than what’s calculated now (~27% as of today) if none had been sold, because the selling price for the half that was sold would have been higher than the price of what remains unsold. 27% should overestimate the actual loss, which is ~22% according to j.t.’ values.

BTW, bravo to Claus for selling and rescuing some of Martin’s investment. Not that Martin cares, as the portfolio entire loss is probably petty cash to him and a small price to pay for the opportunity to publicly exercise his smug and smarmy know-it-all permabear ideology. I wonder if he feels any shame in this fiasco.

dist and stockcrazy:  Thanks, but …

Now that I'm on record saying that the IETF loss is 25% and not 38% I find myself doing what I always do when I defy the experts and that is to try and figure out why I'm wrong before somebody else beats me to it.  It's a race against the clock.  And this time I'm up against 2 experts, and they both say the loss is 38%.  Egads, but I'm having trouble with this one.  Why is it OK to add the loss onto the original cost basis?  You can't do this with a capital gain, can you?  Absolutely not.  The IRS won't stand for it.  Or am I wrong on this too?  But it's OK to add on a loss since the IRS doesn't tax capital losses … yet … although that would certainly be a significant source of new revenue to fund the currently unfunded government spending plans as well as take a big bite out of the national debt.  Maybe if I'd studied algebra instead of biology back in high school I wouldn't be having problems like this today. Boy oh boy oh boy.  Mine is not to reason why … sigh. Some things are just meant to be taken on faith, and this appears to be one of those things.

Post edited 7:58 am – August 6, 2009 by martins_son

This is how the Portfolio page reports the position as of this morning before the market opened:

stock: XYZ  #shares: 745  total cost:$58,866.98  total mkt value: $35,909.00   Gain: -39%

months in portfolio: 4+  % of Port: 3.81%   last purchase: 4/27/2009

This is how the financial inverse stock has performed and is exactly how it appears. Clause nor Martin would never show a greater loss than they had to, think about it. Martin's ego would forbid it but the law and accounting rules compel him to report the total amount lost, both actual and paper, and combine them and measure that number against any remaining position in the portfolio that still exists.

I am being highly entertained by this never ending thread. 

j.t.,

Here's my last comment on the math (I promise!)

You're not adding the loss to the basis…you're reducing the basis by the funds you've withdrawn from the position.

…And I did study algebra…. 

We do have one point of agreement…the loss is $21,980.38

Spent a few minutes in Bill Bonner's website reading his latest:

http://dailyreckoning.com/dont…..-recovery/

Bill's in France, sipping pernod, and Martin is in Jupiter, Florida, sipping skim milk, both of them waiting for the imminent and inevitable market crash.  2 peas in a pod, but with a difference.  Bill makes me laugh while I ponder the impending fall of civilization, while Martin … nothing to laugh about in any of his emails. And too, I didn't 'hire' Bill as my investment advisor and therefore I didn't lose any money with him, while … well … I didn't lose any money with Martin either. 

I bought Claus first 3 recos and watched, unperturbed, as they nosedived, resurfaced, and today, 4-1/2 months later, they are showing a tidy little profit of 10%.  Interestingly, the 2 stocks are up 14% and 19% while the ETF is a laggard at 4%.  A profit, for sure, and the only ones of the first 9 recos that do have a profit.  But still, I'm a bit miffed at the performance of all 3 of them when I should be making happy plans about how to spend the proceeds as soon as I cash in.  Solar panels?  New windows?  Not enough profit for either one.  That's what's miffing me!  Too little profit and it took too long to get it. That's why I prefer options.  As long as there are more windfalls than wipeouts, you'll make money, fast, and lots of it.  In contrast, watching stocks creep up and down for weeks on end gives one too much time to think about the impending fall of civilization and then blog about it.

Post edited 9:57 am – August 7, 2009 by martins_son

This is as of 11AM and as you can see we officially hit the minus -40% plus on our financial short and the market is up 125 points. These numbers come directly off the Portfolio Page of the fund manager.

Post edited 2:25 pm – August 7, 2009 by martins_son

Congratulations Claus and the MCP members still holding the financial short for over four months now. That position is down at this minute………….. DRUM ROLL, PLEASE :             minus -41.77% 

Again, this is how Fidelity records the transaction on the site's Portfolio Page, that's all I can report, some feel that number is correct , others disagree. The most important thing is it's a loss any Wall Street firm would have ejected Clause long ago for. Claus said in a memo today he wants to sell them at some point in the future when the ship hits the “Neutral Zone” or sooner if possible. Go to MAM and read it, folks you can't make this stuff up!    

I went to the link, read Prechter, and promptly sold my 3 China options.  (Must get down to business and find that option thread, its name quite forgotten, and post the results there.)  Didn't buy anything yesterday, for if the long awaited market collapse is imminent, as Martin used to say, and now Prechter says, the wait-and-see approach seems the wisest course. 

My 3 golds tumbled over the last 3 days, and combined profit dropped from 10% to 6%.  Wowie … 4-1/2 months and 6% profit.  The last right time to buy gold was in November when it touched 700.  I was ready and eager to buy at 704, had my index finger on the submit order button, when I heard an 'expert' say gold's next stop was 650.  Why buy gold at 704 when I could get it for 650 in a few days?  The wait-and-see approach seemed the wisest course.  From that very moment, gold marched steadily upward to 1000 in late February.  Oh, woe.  Why do I open my door when the experts come knocking?  Why do I open my ears to their malarkey?  But wait!  There's a new expert, the Oracle, I haven't listened to yet.  Maybe …

Then in mid-March I joined MDCP and Claus issued buy reco #1.  At last, the long wait for gold to go to 650 was over, and I was in, at 952.  Since then gold has been stuck in the range-bound mud.  Not buying gold at 704 was a mistake for sure, but it doesn't make my Top 10 List of Mistakes, or even my Top 100 List.  Why hold these golds?  Don't I have anything better to do with my money?   Like buy gold coins and store them in Switzerland?  Or maybe solar panels?  New windows?  More investment newsletters?  The FA?

J.T…post #170…was just downright……. FUNNY……thanks !!

When Claus turned bullish last week, I said to myself it's probably time to buy those inverse ETFs.

Hmm.  12:00.  Is that noon or midnight?

Marty should start reading this forum. It’s been more fruitful than any paid service I’ve used.

I guess that's the reason for the Weiss Forecast Contest.