Thursday, November 15, 2012

Bluegreen Corp. (BXG) Undervalued?

Bluegreen Corp. (BXG) undervalued?Bluegreen has two segments. Bluegreen Resorts segment acquires, develops, and markets vacation ownership interests in its resorts. The Bluegreen Communities segment acquires, develops, and subdivides property & markets residential home sites to retail customers who seek to build a home in a residential setting.

The company has steadily grown shareholder equity year over year for the last 10 years and net profit margins are the best in 10 years as well but the stock has never sported great valuations and hasn't been loved.

Crunching the numbers A very brief analysis
Using an earnings discount model, the fair value of the company per share is $19. As of March 15 2007 it trades at $11. This is assuming a base earnings per share of $1.24 and 5% earnings growth for the next five years, 3% thereafter. Compared to an opportunity cost of another investment vehicle with a 10% return this seems pretty conservative considering a risk free 10 year gov bond is about 5%.

The question is. Can they deliver? I don't have a lot of confidence in the stability of earnings and operations, but they are worth keeping an eye on.
-author doesn't own Bluegreen Corp.

About














About Stock Pursuit

My name is Mark and I have been investing in stocks since 2001. I hold a B.A. in History from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. I am also a member of the American Association of Individual Investors.

I favor a contrarian value investing approach in stocks with an emphasis on fundamentals and also technical analysis. I don't shy away from small and micro-cap stocks aka penny stocks because often Benjamin Graham cigar-butts aka Net-Net's which are typically small companies present some of the greatest values.

Stock Pursuit is read by many professionals in the money management industry. This blog is very unique not only because it is one of the top blogs on the internet for deep asset value stocks but also because I cover many other things including momentum trading, technical analysis, stock market and economic commentary.

In the upper right corner of the site there is a search box where you can type in ticker symbols and words. Just hit enter to search.

My work has appeared on Dow Jones Marketwatch, TheStreet.com, SeekingAlpha.com, CapitalIdeasOnline.com, ValueInvesting News.com and CollegeAnalysts.com

Welcome to StockPursuit.com

Please read my Disclaimer. Click here to Contact me.


Disclaimer

General Disclaimer
The material on this site is for informational and entertainment purposes only. Information and opinions presented on the site are not solicitations of any order to buy or sell individual stocks or investment instruments. I am not a registered financial advisor. Please seek a professional financial advisor or certified financial planner before making investment decisions. Invest at your own risk. Stockpursuit.com and Mark Perkins assume no liability for anyones investment decisions, gains and or losses. Authors may hold positions in the securities mentioned at the time of writing. I can not guarantee the accuracy of information on the site.

Privacy Statement
Advertisers on this site may use cookies and/or web beacons to collect data in the ad serving process. Google as a third party vendor uses cookies on this site. Google's use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads based on you visit to this site and other sites on the Internet. Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy.

Log Files and Stats
Like many professional websites Stock Pursuit use Statcounter and Sitemeter to show me the traffic coming into the site. These sites store information such as internet protocol (IP) addresses, browser type, internet service provider (ISP), referring, exit and visited pages, platform used, date/time stamp, track user’s movement on this site. IP addresses etc. are not linked to personally identifiable information.

External Links and Advertisers/Sponsors
Stock Pursuit has external links to other websites. This site uses Google Adsense, Commission Junction, Ino.com for affiliate ads and have many sponsors on this site. Check the privacy policies of these sites. Stock Pursuit is not responsible for the privacy practices nor the content of such websites. StockPursuit.com and Mark Perkins assume no liability for products purchased outside of this site.

FTC Notice

I have affiliate links to outside products and brokers that I make money from. For affiliate links I am compensated on a per referral basis if a visitor buys a product or opens an account after that out-click. My reviews of products and stock brokers are intended to be objective. However, they are my opinion and thus may be biased.

YP Corp YPNT Livedeal LIVE

It publishes yellow pages through www.Yellow-Page.Net, www.YP.Net, and www.YP.Com. I listened to their 1st quarter 07' conference call and didn't hear any big troubles. I need to do some more homework on how the business works and potential setbacks from competitors. It seems solid as businesses need Internet presence and YP provides that. Their most recent balance sheet for the end of December had Total Assets of 26,316 against Total Liabilities of only 3,087, 2934 of that Accounts Payable and no long-term debt. This balance sheet seems better than a lot of stalwart S&P 500's. They are seeing more customers the CEO says from the telemarketing campaign and have a new partnership with web.com. This company is off the radar of the big institutions with a tiny market cap.

Brief Analysis
They were profitable in the first quarter of 07' with $.01 eps. Actually an increase from last year. Reuters shows estimates for full year 07' of .07 eps and 08" up to .15 eps. A free cash flow model would be the best to find the intrinsic value of the business but assuming a very conservative full year 07' eps of .03 cents per share and 08's eps of $.06. It would be worthwhile to hold the shares in 08 with a pe of 13.16 and a eps yield of 7.5 at a share price of .79 a share.
If eps continues to grow in the future the stock is a bargain at under a $1. I don't see the company encountering any troubles in the near future. Over the next year or two the worst thing that could happen is they continue to deliver so so and the stock goes no where. I don't invest in stocks. I invest in businesses by buying shares of stock. This company is worth watching.
I don't own any shares of YP Corporation at the time of this writing.


"YP Corp. is America's Local Online Yellow Pages(tm) and offers businesses a simple and affordable way of creating a web presence and marketing their products and services to local audiences online. The Company offers an Internet Advertising Package, which provides advertisers preferred placement in yellow page search results and their own Mini Webpage(tm) where they can provide potential customers with details about their products and services.

About Web.com

Web.com, Inc. (NasdaqGM:WWWW - News), is a leading destination for the simplest, yet most powerful solutions for websites and web services. Web.com offers do-it-yourself and professional website design, website hosting, e-commerce, web marketing and email. Since 1995, Web.com has been helping individuals and small businesses leverage the power of the Internet to build a web presence. More than 4 million websites have been built using Web.com's proprietary tools, services and patented technology. For more information on the company, please visit http://www.web.com or call 1-800-WEB-HOST."

-source, Yahoo! Yahoo.com, http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/070222/113995.html


Digg!

Waiting For Something Good at Caribou Coffee CBOU


I believe Caribou does a couple things better than Starbucks. Starbucks is the juggernaut of coffee shops. There are Starbucks across from Starbucks at street corners. Caribou is # 2 right now in the industry second to Starbucks and has slim to no chance of ever being #1. Caribou has more traditional espresso beverages (even though SB tries to use fancy Italian) like calling a macchiato a macchiato not a latte like SBux.

Caribou has been profitable on the bottom line before but not for long. Whether the aggressive new CEO's plans will take market share from Starbucks remains to be seen. Recent same store sales were negative, decreasing 1%. I like what Caribou is doing with the brand getting it out there with General Mills with a snack bar and I believe selling beans(which is one of the most profitable items by the way) in stores finally. Caribou actually may have a sort of competitive niche over Starbucks in that their beans are typically a lighter roast than Starbucks. Lighter coffee's actually have slightly more caffeine(roasting takes some out), more acidity and a different flavor which can be sweeter compared to Starbucks darker roasts. A consumer report in 2004 ranked Caribou's light Colombia #1 among 42 Colombian gourmet coffees. I believe in that same report Dunkin Donut's arabicas had higher ratings than Starbucks.

Opening many more unprofitable Caribou stores is scary for the company maybe even Krispy Cream scary but their other segments seem great like the recently announced Coke bottled cold coffee beverages that are to be sold in stores next year. The same product as Starbucks. I feel Caribou does some things much better than Starbucks, from my experience working at Caribou and seeing and hearing things from Starbucks customers. Caribou aggressively focuses on customer service, including remembering customer names and drinks to get repeat business. Some Caribou customers are looking for a certain atmosphere that is different than a Starbucks or the Starbucks imitators. I think Caribou's Alaskan lodge atmosphere accomplishes this.
Caribou like any smart fast food or quick serve company uses computer screens that display the upcoming orders as opposed to yelling or writing down orders which has more room for errors and is less systematic. Starbucks doesn't use this technology. Many Caribou's have recently upgraded to the espresso machine tech that has been in Starbucks.

I have mixed feelings about Caribou and their ability to become profitable consistently year over year. I think buying shares before a proven growth strategy and business plan with solid cash flows & earnings is purely speculation. If things improve buying below intrinsic value could be lucrative. Buying Starbucks below intrinsic value is an almost sure 2 bagger.

There are some positives for Caribou along with finally getting the brand out in stores and the coming bottled iced coffee drinks with Coke. I like what I'm seeing from Caribou and I hope same store sales stay positive and other segments keep improving and something trickles down to the bottom line consistently then I will maybe take a position if they're at a cheap price.

Related
Caribou Coffee CBOU Needs To Go Back To The Drawing Board
Update on Caribou Coffee CBOU
Starbucks SBUX New Appointment Doesn't Mean They Will Print Money

full disclosure: I don't own any Caribou Coffee,Starbucks or Coca-Cola shares as of this writing.

Who's Looking Out for Shareholders?





The payout ratio of Large-cap companies earnings to its shareholders has decreased consistently over the decades since the 1930's where there was avg 80% payout. Decades ago it was not uncommon for companies to sport huge dividend yields. There has been a slight increase in dividend payouts in the past few years I speculate because of changes in tax laws toward individuals. It is no surprise to me that during the 1990's dividends did little for investor returns.

What I'm concerned about is the possibility of an epidemic of loosely issued stock options grants at companies that destroy shareholder value. Some major large-cap tech companies during the tech bubble were destroying shareholder value by issuing millions upon millions of stock options then having to repurchase those shares with cash that could have been payed to shareholders in the form of dividends or buybacks that actually benefited the investor. Instead they were buying back so EPS would grow at the rate the street was looking for. It harms shareholders to dilute the shares. Would you rather have a 50% cut of a companies profits or a diluted 48%? Is this trend of decreasing dividends and options going to continue and what are the implications to investors? What is happening to the cash? are they just doing more buybacks of options grants in recent years?

And also why don't these companies issue shares instead of options? I don't understand the obsession with options. Just give me the shares. Everybody needs to quit speculating.

Inefficient Markets

From watching the recent news about all the volatility and seeing so many uneducated short-termists in the US markets I believe the markets may be less efficient now than before the internet revolution. This is opposite of the what efficient market theory tries to prove. Efficient market theory an accepted idea in some academia states that with the availability of free information to people who purchase and sell stocks that stocks are priced efficiently. This is bullshit. As many have proven, notably Warren Buffett,“I’d be a bum on the street with a tin cup if the markets were always efficient,”said Buffett.

Before the internet it was harder for the average Jane's to get their hands on up to date info like the professionals about companies financial info. Frankly fewer people were investing as trade commissions were far greater than they are today. My thesis is, even though more info is available markets are less efficient and people recognize intrinsic value less often. So what I'm hypothesizing now is it seems the markets are way less efficient now with available info and access to online brokerages with millions of people who don't know what their doing in regards to the real value of the companies they are trading and speculating. They have little to no education in investing and certainly contribute to over-inflated pricing as happens in any bubble. Is it possible that the bubble's and crashes will be exaggerated by this individual investor with access to brokerage services? It is interesting to see what has happened and will happen in an industry that used to be dominated by an elite few and now encompasses more of the population. I believe that a contrarian strategy of investing in the markets is even more applicable today because of the internet and the popular "following the herd" mentality.

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Investing Isn't Gambling

I'd like to lay to rest the idea that investing in companies through stock markets is "gambling" or speculation. The reason to invest money in any investment vehicle is to get a return on ones investment. You can do this at any bank with a savings account, money market or certificate of deposit but the returns aren't as high as stocks, bonds, owning a business or real estate

Savings accounts should be FDIC insured so ones risk is extremely minimal in loosing all of ones funds. Government savings bonds are backed by the US government and are a little riskier as interest rates can fluctuate with long term bonds but have little risk in loosing ones principle. The problem with these prior mentioned investments is that the return you get on the initial investment is basically slim to none with inflation factored in.
So where can one look to get huge returns on investment? There is owning or starting a private company, investing in property/owning property, investing in companies through stock markets, high yield bonds like junk bonds or company bonds. As far as

I know the only vehicles that have unlimited return potential are owning a company and investing in companies through the stock market. Are these gambling? If gambling is defined as the voluntary risking of a sum of money on the outcome of a game or other event then no. Companies are not a game or event. Investing in a bond has risk but taking risk is not gambling. While trying to decipher the two I just had an epiphany of one of the best explanations I have read on the matter by Warren Buffett who proves that with the approach of investing in companies by exploiting price and value large returns have been made CONSISTENTLY and evidence shown in this link. loads slowly.
Buffetts essay

http://www1.gsb.columbia.edu/valueinvesting/research/public_archives/DOC032.PDF

Privacy Policy

Privacy Statement
Advertisers on this site may use cookies and/or web beacons to collect data in the ad serving process. Google as a third party vendor uses cookies on this site. Google's use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads based on you visit to this site and other sites on the Internet. Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy.

Blogs and Sites

College Analysts

Market Prognosticator

Shadow Stock: Deep Value Micro Caps

Momentum Stocks

Old School Value

Yes and Not Yes

PennyStocker.com

Stock Man Marc

Alex Bossert's Thoughts

Triaging My Way To Financial Success

The Zar Report

StockBlogs.com

Stock Rookie

Stock Rake

Ragnar Is A Pirate

Million Dollar Goal

Internet Plays Blog

Intelligent Speculator

Gannon On Investing

Financial Politico

Dividends4Life

Buy Like Buffett

Buttonwood Tree: Stock Market News

Contrarian Value Investing

Low PE Stocks

Stock Picks Bob's Advice

TIMlinks

Monday, February 2, 2009

Gold Penny Stocks List

I think depending on how good one is at forecasting gold prices in the future a lot of these in this gold penny stock list could be long-term holds. However, I think the recent run-up in gold stocks could allow them to fall just as fast as they rose. I only like this gold stocks list for possibly finding short-term trades. I like to use a tight stop loss and quick profit taking because buying penny stocks can be risky.

Gold Stocks List
Augusta Resource Corp. AZC $80 mil market cap has been a little left behind in the gold and metal frenzy until these past few days.













Golden Star Resources GSS $427 mil gold penny stock













Great Basin Gold GBG $402 mil Nice hammer. Buyers look like they want a lot more.













US Gold UXG volume could be a little overdone soon














Vista Gold Corp. VGZ Interesting hammer. Volume doesn't look overdone.














So I think these may turn out to be cheap penny stocks if gold is up and they can be a speculative trade with good risk management. I really love penny stocks and penny stock picks. Are penny stocks a good investment? In most cases in my opinion no. Profits should always be taken or losses cut in my opinion.

If you're asking yourself,how do I buy a gold etf? or how do I buy gold as an investment? you will need a stock broker. These accounts are easy to set up by oneself. This is my favorite penny stock broker and the one that I use right now because of the low flat commission.



Related
New analysis in this Gold Video

Some Gold Market key levels to watch for.

Friday, November 16, 2007

1907 Crash and Banking Panic: Will History Repeat?

The banking panic of 1907 brought a crisis to the financial heart of the U.S. The stock market saw a thirty-seven percent fall in price.1 The decline was short lived. In late 1907 the stock market began to rise year over year and by the fall of 1909 had made back the losses.2 There have been different interpretations of the causes and impact over the one hundred years following the crisis. Its effects had significant consequences not only then but as government sought to prevent similar future problems.

It is important to get a sense of the background in the financial economy prior to the panic. There was San Fransisco’s major earthquake and fire in 1906 coupled with strong anti-trust political movement. At that time England was the global center for capital. Half of the San Francisco’s fire insurance was covered in England. The biggest blow was that most people were not covered against earthquakes. England saw trouble. As winter came in 1906 a major credit deficit was in effect in New York as the two countries financial systems were intertwined.3 Coming into 1907 there was already a negative atmosphere. There was a burden on monetary conditions thanks to a recent flood of new companies mostly in railway and industrials.4 In response to the boom of big business and trusts, Standard Oil, American Tobacco and Du Pont were sued in late 1906 and in 1907 prior to the panic.5 There was nervousness among businesses and in all of the U.S. capital markets.

Throughout 1907 F. Augustus Heinze, a new arrival to Wall Street began buying stock in his company at many brokerages. The company was United Copper and he was buying $2 million worth of these stock options on borrowed money to manipulatively boost the stock price.6 The attempt failed and forced Mercantile National Bank, which had given $1 million for the scheme into insolvency and prompted a panic run on the bank.7 The failure spread to national banks and to many trusts like the Knickerbocker Trust and the Trust Company of America. In the end, the most prominent businessman J.P. Morgan saved the trusts and economy with an infusion of money. This was not the first time J. P. Morgan supported the government. In 1893 he came through for then president Grover Cleveland in the mist of a worsening liquidity problem.8

There were many different factors that contributed to the 1907 panic. In The Economic Journal in September of 1908, only about a year after the panic O. M. W. Sprague believed that unlike the 1893 crisis 1907 could have been better contained. Looking at the broad nation-wide picture, he noted that agriculture was strong and farmers were in good financial condition in 1907. There were not any banks going under in agricultural parts of the country. This contrasts to previous crises.9 He says that the government’s control of companies like railways resulted in a drop in stock prices in March and August of 1907. He also notes that people in finance believed the crisis was caused by government involvement in economics.10 Written very close in time to the crisis he focuses a lot on the banks, especially in New York.

Bruner and Carr in The Panic of 1907: Lessons Learned from the Market’s Perfect Storm do a good job of reconstructing the events prior to the fallout with a lot of primary evidence. They highlight that Sprague believed “the most important financial factor in the panic of 1907” was the trouble in the summer of 1907 when the Bank of England blocked U.S. finance bills and brought down gold reserves causing a “national liquidity drought.”11 They see the crisis being caused by a variety of things including poor leadership, lack of transparency, an unsafe system and the end of the business cycle among others.

In The Bank Panic of 1907: The Role of Trust Companies published in The Journal of Economic History, Jon Moen and Ellis W. Tallman find fault with O. M. W. Sprague and others who stressed national banks in their research. Rather, they find trusts at the root of the problem. They believe the problems that took over the country originated in trusts risky portfolios. They say they were “less regulated” than different operations in similar markets. In addition to the risky nature of the trusts “the lack of direct access to the clearinghouse, and lower reserves against deposits must be the main reasons why the Panic of 1907 was concentrated in the trust companies.”12 They say that trust companies had more collateralized loans than national banks. They make the case that trusts suffered greater than national banks due to these loans.13

George Bittlingmayer in The Stock Market and Early Antitrust Enforcement attributes declines in the Dow Jones index to anti-trust legislation. The Dow Jones tracked the major companies stock prices in an index. The Dow gave a good representation of the overall stock market. On March 14, 1907 the day of Roosevelt's ICC directive the Dow dropped 8.65% to recover most of those losses the next day of trading up 6.48%.14 With this volatility a sense of the fear driven trading can be seen leading up to the crash. However, this volatility does not compare with what was scene from 1929 to 1939 during the Great Depression according to William G. Schwert.15 With anti-trust enforcement in full force during Roosevelt’s term it was ironic that it was the reckless business practices of the Knickerbocker Trust Company that set off the panic.

In Bittlingmuyer’s Antitrust and Business Activity: The First Quarter Century he finds correlation with anti- trust initiates and business confidence and the business cycle. He takes the side of those that find fault with Roosevelt’s anti-trust stance. These are the people who thought government had interfered with the economy that Sprague mentions in 1908. He looks at quarterly changes in aggregate output and to gauge investment changes in pig iron productions. He found that in “each case against a large industrial firm or railroad was accompanied by a decline in output of -4.5 percent.”16 He says there is no “decisive proof” to come from his analysis. He says the view is not certain because there is no way to know for sure and that it could just be chance.17 One of the key ideas of Bittlingmayer’s argument is that the uncertainty such anti-trust moves had on the business environment was significant because companies might hold off, wondering who would be the next target of anti-trust regulation.

In 1915, Minnie Throop England in Promotion as the Cause of Crises sees a correlation in the movements of gold between England. She says that reserves go down as gold is shipped.18 This is what Sprague believed was key in leading to the crisis. She shows how psychology is behind the shrinkage of liquidity and looks at data in 1907. The most important idea she relates is that money is readably available“before” the crisis but the shrinkage of credit begins “after” the crisis.19 Moen and Tallman draw fault from the risky portfolios of trust companies. England further substantiates this assertion with the idea that to much optimism during rapidly growing economies sets the stage for the fear driven pessimism that is a crisis. It can also be seen in the stock market as prices are brought down beyond what is reasonable.20 She says,“Crises are the price of progress. The more rapid the progress, the more severe the crises.”21 This has great relevance to 1907 as their had been a rise in big business and trust companies that were getting out of control.

Looking at Jack W. Wilson and Charles P. Jones A Comparison of Annual Common Stock Returns: 1871-1925 with 1926-85, the rise and fall attributed to psychology can be seen in stocks with the annual capital appreciation of –33.3% in 1907. This was the greatest decline from 1871 to 1825.22 It is interesting to put this into perspective though as Bruner and Carr’s chart show that the market had made back the losses in less than 3 years in a steady bull market. This shows the emotional over-reaction as the gains were redeemed quickly. In that sense the long-term economic consequences of the panic on stock prices were not serious. This contrasts to the steady bear and slow bull markets that appeared before, during and after the Great Depression.

Trust companies played a big role in the panic. It is imperative to understand how they came about and what went wrong. Larry Neal in Trust Companies and Financial Innovation, 1897-1914 believes the most important thing to develop in the financial world during the consolidation years of 1898-1902 was the fast appearance of the trust companies.23 This position supports the works of Moen and Tillman among others. Trust companies originally sprung up to offer wealthier clients a savings bank. They got the privilege to get deposits and buy stock in companies. Going back as far as 1874 there were issues taken with how what they did changed and how they competed with the banking structure.24 In Banker’s Magazine in 1874 there was a report that people were concerned with their involvement in stock investors.25 This is exactly what triggered the crisis with Mercantile National and Knickerbocker. Their deal with Heinze and his corner of United Copper was what open pandora’s box.

In Andrew A. Piatt’s The United States Treasury and the Money Market. The Partial Responsibility of Secretaries Gage and Shaw for the Crisis of 1907 he makes the case against Secretary’s Shaw and Gage, holding them responsible for the crisis. He says that Mr. Shaw in face of the rising stock market of 1905 and strong business growth made no intervention.26 When New York bank reserves were negative in 1906 he privately allowed New York banks to import gold for possibly up to months before in making the same deal for other banks. He did the same thing “adding oil to the fire” in the summer as the stock market was over-heated pumping money into New York to take the place of gold.27 These were his final attempts to stop the credit contraction and then after these failed attempts and disappearance “had withdrawn from public life and had been welcomed to other fields of usefulness.”28

Possibly adding to historians seeing negative effects coming from the increase in anti-trust activity while backing the psychological nature of the markets that England asserted, Francis B. Forbes shows the stock quotes of eight railroad and eight industrial stocks from January 1907 through January 1908. The biggest declines were in the industrials.29 Interestingly, the recovery is rather quick. This sudden recovery is also touched on by Alexander D. Noyes in 1909. He has a quote from a city branch president, “Let the people resume business the way they mere doing twelve months ago, start everything with a hurrah, and we will forget all about the panic in a day or two."30 Like others, Noyes notices the speculation that had occurred in the years prior to the crisis and lays blame on it. The cause he says, “was not an imperfect American currency, nor "President Roosevelt," nor even, primarily, unsound banking practices at New York, but the extravagant over-exploiting of capital and credit throughout the industrial world.”31

Following the evidence there is a lot to take away from the panic. The economy and the banking system would have benefited enormously from a Federal Reserve System. A central bank may have been able to stabilize the banks and could have allowed for a soft landing without the widespread depositor panic. By pumping liquidity into the system the government would have been able to take on the role of J.P. Morgan. Moen and Tallman have it right. Understanding the role of the trusts like Knickerbocker is the key to unlocking the mystery around the panic. Trust companies were not as safe as national banks. The trust company and their risky structures were one of the main causes of the panic. There needed to be more regulation in the securities market. Heinze should never have been able to pull such a stunt without transparency. Furthermore, Bruner and Carr having published their book in 2007 have the most comprehensive view taking into account all the pieces of 1907.

As an avid commentator and investor in equity markets I see parallels from 1907 to 2007. The trend of horizontal consolidation is still alive and well in the banking industry today though now flirting with anti-trust law. Big U.S. banks like Bank of America and Citigroup, though limited in their market share are making up for it by diving into speculative areas like mortgage backed securities. This is exactly like what the trusts in the late 19th early 20th century were doing. They were diversified but ended up taking on too much risk. The Banking Act of 1933 sought to limit banks in the scope of services like commercial and investment banking. When key financial institutions are involved in risky investments like in 1907 and the mortgage arena in the years leading up to 2007 there is going to be trouble. With portions of it lifted in 1999 this trend may have serious consequences.Risky, manic speculation driven by greed existed in the years before both. The current U.S. sub-prime loan crisis, which relates to risky loans granted during the recent housing bubble, is having an effect on the large financial institutions. This is strikingly similar to the risky loans issued by trusts in 1907. No one is sure how much the current crisis will spread into the credit markets. Where was the Federal Reserve and government regulation to reign in the capitalist environment? How can all these ridiculously risky loans be approved? Speculative investments fueled by greed will always exist. We cannot forget the Panic of 1907.



Notes
1. Robert F. Bruner, Sean D. Carr, The Panic of 1907: Lessons Learned from the Market’s Perfect Storm (John Wiley and Sons Inc., 2007), 2.
2. Bruner, Carr, 144.
3. Bruner, Carr, 14,15.
4. Bruner, Carr, 16.
5. George Bittlingmayer, “Antitrust and Business Activity: The First Quarter Century,” The Business History Review, 70, no. 3 (1996): 364.
6. Bruner, Carr, 44.
7. Bruner, Carr, 54, 55.
8. Bruner, Carr, 11.
9. O. M. W. Sprague, “The American Crisis of 1907,” The Economic Journal 18 no. 37 (1908): 354, 355.
10. O. M.W. Sprague, 356,357.
11. Bruner, Carr, 30.
12. Jon Moen, Ellis W. Tallman, “The Bank Panic of 1907: The Role of Trust Companies,” The Journal of Economic History 52, no. 3 (1992): 628.
13. Ibid., 628.
14. George Bittlingmayer, “The Stock Market and Early Antitrust Enforcement,” The Journal of Law and Economics 36, no. 1 (1993): 5.
15. William G. Schwert, “Indexes of U.S. Stock Prices from 1802 to 1987,” The Journal of Business 63, no. 3 (1990): 424.
16. George Bittlingmayer, “Antitrust and Business Activity: The First Quarter Century,” The Business History Review 70, no. 3 (1996): 365.366.
17. Ibid., 366.
18. Minnie Throop England, “Promotion as the Cause of Crises,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 29, no. 4 (1915): 762.
19. England, 764,765.
20. England, 766.
21. England, 767.
22. Jack W. Wilson, Charles P. Jones, “A Comparison of Annual Common Stock Returns: 1871-1925 with 1926-85,” The Journal of Business 60, No. 2 (1987): 255.
23. Larry Neal, “Trust Companies and Financial Innovation, 1897-1914,” The Business History Review 45, No. 1 (1971): 37.
24. Ibid., 37.
25. Ibid., 37.
26. Andrew A. Piatt, “The United States Treasury and the Money Market. The Partial Responsibility of Secretaries Gage and Shaw for the Crisis of 1907,” American Economic Association Quarterly 3rd series, 9, no. 1 (1908): 224.
27. Piatt, 225.
28. Ibid., 225.
29. Francis B. Forbes, “Notes on the Financial Panic of 1907,” Publications of the American Statistical Association 11, no. 81 (1908): 1-5.
30. Alexander D. Noyes, “A Year After the Panic of 1907,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 23, no. 2 (1909): 211.
31. Noyes, 212.