The Obamacare Debacle: It’s Everyone Else’s Fault

As the Congressional hearing, to apportion blame for the farce that Obamacare has already become, gathers steam the overwhelming theme from the four witnesses is "it's not our fault," and as much as the Congressmen dive deeply into the process, the more it is clear that the left hand had no idea what the right hand was doing in yet another government-funded SNAFU. The entire discussion can be summed up by CGI's comments that "our portion of the application worked as designed." Indeed, all of the contractors point the finger back at the government's Centers for Medicare and Medicaid as responsible for "end to end testing," and ultimately the #fail.

 

Live Coverage via C-SPAN (click image for link)

 

Written statements from the 4 contractors:

 

Via WSJ,

According to prepared testimony, CGI Federal, the lead contractor for HealthCare.gov, will say the federal agency in charge of the project was "the ultimate responsible party for the end-to-end performance of the overall" health exchange.

 

 

CGI also said its system passed eight technical reviews before going live and that problems came instead from a system designed by another contractor, UnitedHealth Group Inc 's Optum unit, which verifies users' identities. That "created a bottleneck that prevented the vast majority of users from accessing" the exchange, according to testimony of Cheryl Campbell, a senior vice president at CGI Federal.

 

 

Committee Chairman Fred Upton of Michigan  asks the contractors if they knew the site would have “crippling problems.” CGI’s Campbell says that “our portion of the application worked as designed” and repeated that “end-to-end testing was the responsibility of the (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid).”

 

“We anticipate that people will be able to enroll in the time that is allotted,” said CGI’s Campbell (which is Dec. 15 if you want insurance on Jan. 1). “As painful as it sounds, I know it’s a difficult system, but the system is working.”

 

In summation, it seems that the following sums it up all too poerfectly…

“If there was a silver bullet to answer that question, I would give it to you,” says CGI’s Campbell. “It’s the end-to-end aspect that is a challenge.”

In other words, whoever was running the overall project was asleep at the wheel…


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/bTfGiUFKDME/story01.htm Tyler Durden

The Obamacare Debacle: It's Everyone Else's Fault

As the Congressional hearing, to apportion blame for the farce that Obamacare has already become, gathers steam the overwhelming theme from the four witnesses is "it's not our fault," and as much as the Congressmen dive deeply into the process, the more it is clear that the left hand had no idea what the right hand was doing in yet another government-funded SNAFU. The entire discussion can be summed up by CGI's comments that "our portion of the application worked as designed." Indeed, all of the contractors point the finger back at the government's Centers for Medicare and Medicaid as responsible for "end to end testing," and ultimately the #fail.

 

Live Coverage via C-SPAN (click image for link)

 

Written statements from the 4 contractors:

 

Via WSJ,

According to prepared testimony, CGI Federal, the lead contractor for HealthCare.gov, will say the federal agency in charge of the project was "the ultimate responsible party for the end-to-end performance of the overall" health exchange.

 

 

CGI also said its system passed eight technical reviews before going live and that problems came instead from a system designed by another contractor, UnitedHealth Group Inc 's Optum unit, which verifies users' identities. That "created a bottleneck that prevented the vast majority of users from accessing" the exchange, according to testimony of Cheryl Campbell, a senior vice president at CGI Federal.

 

 

Committee Chairman Fred Upton of Michigan  asks the contractors if they knew the site would have “crippling problems.” CGI’s Campbell says that “our portion of the application worked as designed” and repeated that “end-to-end testing was the responsibility of the (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid).”

 

“We anticipate that people will be able to enroll in the time that is allotted,” said CGI’s Campbell (which is Dec. 15 if you want insurance on Jan. 1). “As painful as it sounds, I know it’s a difficult system, but the system is working.”

 

In summation, it seems that the following sums it up all too poerfectly…

“If there was a silver bullet to answer that question, I would give it to you,” says CGI’s Campbell. “It’s the end-to-end aspect that is a challenge.”

In other words, whoever was running the overall project was asleep at the wheel…


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/bTfGiUFKDME/story01.htm Tyler Durden

The Metrics That Cannot Be "Fudged" Predict 2.6% Real Annual Returns Going Forward

 

Investors need to be aware of a significant dynamic emerging in the markets.

 

That dynamic is one of corporations missing revenues estimates while beating earnings estimates.

 

The majority of investors focus on earnings when it comes to valuing the stock market or an individual stock. Indeed, Price to Earnings or P/E ratios might be the single most popular stock valuation metric in the world.

 

However, there is a danger to pricing the market based on earnings alone. Earnings can be massaged in countless ways to beat estimates. You can release loan loss reserves, massage depreciation numbers, implement one time charges or writedowns, reprice bonds, etc.

 

Indeed, a study performed by Duke University found that roughly 20% of publicly traded firms manipulate their earnings to make them appear better than they really are. The folks who were surveyed for this study about this practice were the actual CFOs at the firms themselves.

 

For this reason, when you look at the markets, you need to look at how many companies are beating sales estimates as opposed to simply earnings estimates.

 

Unfortunately the news is not particularly good for this today. As Bloomberg notes, of those companies who have reported results so far in 3Q13, only 38% of S&P 500 companies are beating revenues estimates. This follows just 46% who beat in 2Q13 and only 37% who beat in 1Q13.

 

Bloomberg notes that this is the first time there have been three consecutive quarters of less than 50% of corporations beating revenues estimates going back to 2009.

 

Moreover, taken as a whole, the market is trading at a Price to Sales ration of 1.6. Historically, before we entered the period of Fed-induced serial bubbles, the market has traded at an average of 0.8.

 

So the market is expensive. And the most sensitive economic indicator (sales) are falling and failing to beat estimates.

 

For a FREE Special Report outlining how to protect your portfolio a market collapse, swing by: http://phoenixcapitalmarketing.com/special-reports.html

 

Best

Phoenix Capital Research

 

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/dP0hCiX-x-o/story01.htm Phoenix Capital Research

The Metrics That Cannot Be “Fudged” Predict 2.6% Real Annual Returns Going Forward

 

Investors need to be aware of a significant dynamic emerging in the markets.

 

That dynamic is one of corporations missing revenues estimates while beating earnings estimates.

 

The majority of investors focus on earnings when it comes to valuing the stock market or an individual stock. Indeed, Price to Earnings or P/E ratios might be the single most popular stock valuation metric in the world.

 

However, there is a danger to pricing the market based on earnings alone. Earnings can be massaged in countless ways to beat estimates. You can release loan loss reserves, massage depreciation numbers, implement one time charges or writedowns, reprice bonds, etc.

 

Indeed, a study performed by Duke University found that roughly 20% of publicly traded firms manipulate their earnings to make them appear better than they really are. The folks who were surveyed for this study about this practice were the actual CFOs at the firms themselves.

 

For this reason, when you look at the markets, you need to look at how many companies are beating sales estimates as opposed to simply earnings estimates.

 

Unfortunately the news is not particularly good for this today. As Bloomberg notes, of those companies who have reported results so far in 3Q13, only 38% of S&P 500 companies are beating revenues estimates. This follows just 46% who beat in 2Q13 and only 37% who beat in 1Q13.

 

Bloomberg notes that this is the first time there have been three consecutive quarters of less than 50% of corporations beating revenues estimates going back to 2009.

 

Moreover, taken as a whole, the market is trading at a Price to Sales ration of 1.6. Historically, before we entered the period of Fed-induced serial bubbles, the market has traded at an average of 0.8.

 

So the market is expensive. And the most sensitive economic indicator (sales) are falling and failing to beat estimates.

 

For a FREE Special Report outlining how to protect your portfolio a market collapse, swing by: http://phoenixcapitalmarketing.com/special-reports.html

 

Best

Phoenix Capital Research

 

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/dP0hCiX-x-o/story01.htm Phoenix Capital Research

Are We In The 3rd (And Final) Stage Of The Bull Market?

Submitted by Lance Roberts of STA Wealth Management,

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/-BOjA8fAwB8/story01.htm Tyler Durden

President Obama To Present Ultimatum On Immigration Reform – Live Webcast

Having seen his “unconditional surrender or default” strategy work over the debt ceiling, we wonder what ‘ultimatum’ President Obama has up his sleeve to get the Immigration Bill passed…

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/dMQUH1pq89Q/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Stocks Stumble On $200bn Liquidity Shortfall From Fed’s Tougher-Than-Expected Bank Rules

In a tougher-than-expected proposal, the Fed has decided that “internationally active banks” raise their minimum liquidity standards (more than some expected, it would seem by the reaction in stocks).

  • *FED PROPOSAL CALLS FOR BANKS TO HOLD 30 DAYS OF READY ASSETS
  • *FED: US BANKS ROUGHLY $200 BILLION SHORT OF PROPOSED LIQUIDITY REQUIREMENT.
  • *BERNANKE SAYS LIQUIDITY RULE WILL MAKE FINANCIAL SYSTEM `SAFER’

The Fed seeks comments on this proposal over the next 90 days – which we presume will involve much hand-wringing and jawboning until the shortfall disappears magically with transformed collateral… but for now, it is yet another ‘tightening’ stance in global policy that will impact ‘trading’ banks considerably more than ‘deposit-taking’ banks.

 

 

Via Bloomberg,

Banks would have to hold enough easy-to-sell assets to survive a 30-day credit drought under a rule to be proposed today by the Federal Reserve that may have the greatest effect on banks with big trading operations such as JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS)

 

The demand for 30 days of liquidity is intended to satisfy global Basel III accords for strengthening the financial system. Increasing the banks’ liquid assets is meant to make them less vulnerable in a crisis like the one that struck in 2008.

 

 

“It’s always been viewed as something that had more relevance for the trading banks,” said former Fed lawyer William Sweet, adding that it will hit them harder because of their more urgent need for short-term funding. Banks’ broker-dealer units must raise money in the market because they can’t rely on deposits to finance their activities.

 

 

“The implementation by the U.S. of the Basel rules have had more rigorous requirements than those implemented elsewhere,”

 

 

The liquidity coverage ratio was at the center of an international tussle last year, as some central bankers and regulators warned that a draft version of the standard risked causing a credit crunch, while others urged against a wholesale watering down of the measure.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/ZIsmGZ6JqOM/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Stocks Stumble On $200bn Liquidity Shortfall From Fed's Tougher-Than-Expected Bank Rules

In a tougher-than-expected proposal, the Fed has decided that “internationally active banks” raise their minimum liquidity standards (more than some expected, it would seem by the reaction in stocks).

  • *FED PROPOSAL CALLS FOR BANKS TO HOLD 30 DAYS OF READY ASSETS
  • *FED: US BANKS ROUGHLY $200 BILLION SHORT OF PROPOSED LIQUIDITY REQUIREMENT.
  • *BERNANKE SAYS LIQUIDITY RULE WILL MAKE FINANCIAL SYSTEM `SAFER’

The Fed seeks comments on this proposal over the next 90 days – which we presume will involve much hand-wringing and jawboning until the shortfall disappears magically with transformed collateral… but for now, it is yet another ‘tightening’ stance in global policy that will impact ‘trading’ banks considerably more than ‘deposit-taking’ banks.

 

 

Via Bloomberg,

Banks would have to hold enough easy-to-sell assets to survive a 30-day credit drought under a rule to be proposed today by the Federal Reserve that may have the greatest effect on banks with big trading operations such as JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS)

 

The demand for 30 days of liquidity is intended to satisfy global Basel III accords for strengthening the financial system. Increasing the banks’ liquid assets is meant to make them less vulnerable in a crisis like the one that struck in 2008.

 

 

“It’s always been viewed as something that had more relevance for the trading banks,” said former Fed lawyer William Sweet, adding that it will hit them harder because of their more urgent need for short-term funding. Banks’ broker-dealer units must raise money in the market because they can’t rely on deposits to finance their activities.

 

 

“The implementation by the U.S. of the Basel rules have had more rigorous requirements than those implemented elsewhere,”

 

 

The liquidity coverage ratio was at the center of an international tussle last year, as some central bankers and regulators warned that a draft version of the standard risked causing a credit crunch, while others urged against a wholesale watering down of the measure.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/ZIsmGZ6JqOM/story01.htm Tyler Durden

PIMPCO Smack Down: Gross Vs Icahn, Or Fight Of The Book-Talking Titans

Because Icahn vs Ackman was so January 2013 (and Ackman was promtply crucified), here comes the great distraction of late-2013: Gross vs Icahn, aka the book-talking titans.

Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets.

And since the enemy of Ackman’s enemy is Ackman’s friend, does this mean that Allianz will now be funding Ackman’s imminent AAPL short?


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/S7-8Q1TE8hM/story01.htm Tyler Durden