1228 replies to this topic

[MrKidd]

Yeah, but we have this magic thing called credit in this world. Again, just an observation on spending habits, but looked to me like summer was biz as usual, but disposable income became mighty scarce around September or so.

Did you read - or understand - my last post? Disposable income has been GOING DOWN since November 2007. Credit has been increasingly scarce since Aug 2007, and extremely difficult since Feb 2008. Retail sales (ie the amount of money people have been spending in stores etc) has also been decreasing for the same time period - hence people are spending LESS. This has now been traced back - officially - to December 07. With due respect your casual observations are worthless. You are wrong. Again, where do you live?

Edited by MrKidd, 02 January 2009 - 06:51 PM.

[blueman]

So what part of that decreasing disposable income was spent on lattes? Video poker? Or movies? Yeah, I get all you're saying, but again just going on what I've seen in my town (Portland, OR): cinemas were getting long lines in summer, shorter ones in December. I realize spending didn't change overnight, but "spending" happens on a lot of things, right? I would think spending on some things decreased quicker than on some others - again, casual observation, but movie-going (along with lattes, lol) always seems to be the last to go, the original "King Kong" cleaning up during the Great Depression leaps to mind.

There were multiple over-$200m earners this year - but all in the first half. Seems to me spending on movies changed significantly later in the year than earlier, that's all I'm saying.

[MrKidd]

So what part of that decreasing disposable income was spent on lattes? Video poker? Or movies? Yeah, I get all you're saying, but again just going on what I've seen in my town (Portland, OR): cinemas were getting long lines in summer, shorter ones in December. I realize spending didn't change overnight, but "spending" happens on a lot of things, right? I would think spending on some things decreased quicker than on some others - again, casual observation, but movie-going (along with lattes, lol) always seems to be the last to go, the original "King Kong" cleaning up during the Great Depression leaps to mind.

There were multiple over-$200m earners this year - but all in the first half. Seems to me spending on movies changed significantly later in the year than earlier, that's all I'm saying.

But you've said yourself that BO in total has been down this year..., therefore, its not true that the movies have been hit the last. As you know - THIS XMAS day was the most sucessful Xmas day EVER - so how does that fit into your theory? I'm afraid all you've done is confirm that recessions are not bad for BO, ie King Kong, as you correctly said, or Gone with the Wind another example - which is exactly what I stated in one of my first posts! And BTW - GWTW - inflation adjusted is the most successful movie ever and released at the back end of the Depression not the beginning. The reason there were multiple 200mm this year is that the audience liked the movie (or had alot of goodwill towards it, I'm looking at you Indiana Jones). Maybe the movies in Q4 didn't resonate as much, eh? All I'm pulling you up on is your constant referencing to the BO of QOS being a factor of the recession - when its not, or at least not to the extent that there is NO WAY it could EVER in a MILLION years have got to 200mm because of it (oops, I said I wouldn't say any more on that).

Edited by MrKidd, 02 January 2009 - 07:20 PM.

[HildebrandRarity]

I have economic data of almost every kind. And although it's true that the credit markets started getting hurt as long ago as August, 2007 and it's equally true that the US has been in an official recession since Dec, 2007 (which I actually pointed out weeks ago in this thread), it was actually during this past September and October and November that consumer confidence started to get badly shaken.

Between Monday Sept 8 and Friday Oct 10, stock markets CRASHED* and it was in October that the Fed had to send a lifeline to Mortgage lenders and Banks in the wake of Lehman going bankrupt in mid September.

Also, while it's true Nonfarm Payrolls were declining through early to mid '08 by (on avarage) - 75K per month, it was in September (- 285K), October (-320k )and November (-533K) that the decline in these Payrolls accelerated MASSIVELY...that's 1 million job losses in just three months.

I wouldn't discount the idea that it was in September and October and November where consumers (en mass) got crushed in terms of confidence.

Aug 07 to Aug 08 was a ing tea party in comparison to Sep 08 to Nov 08.

I have the battle scars to prove it!



* Dow Jones from ~ 11,500 to below 8000 intra day. An almost 22 percent decline in a VERY short time.

[blueman]

Nothing like a few facts to shed some light on an otherwise subjective discussion. Thanks for sharing Hildy.

[HildebrandRarity]

I don't know what kind of an impact the Autumn deflation has had on Q0S's US Domestic box office, but I do know that the crash in the British Pound sliced off Q0S's UK box office - as reported in Dollars - by about $25 million. That is pure quantifyable fact and has nothing to do with opinion.

[blueman]

But back to pure, unadulterated speculation : I'd bet TDK would've garnered fewer US admissions had it been released in November, just as IMHO QOS would've had more US admissions had it been released last June. Just my read on things, FWIW.

[MrKidd]

I have economic data of almost every kind. And although it's true that the credit markets started getting hurt as long ago as August, 2007 and it's equally true that the US has been in an official recession since Dec, 2007 (which I actually pointed out weeks ago in this thread), it was actually during this past September and October and November that consumer confidence started to get badly shaken.

Between Monday Sept 8 and Friday Oct 10, stock markets CRASHED* and it was in October that the Fed had to send a lifeline to Mortgage lenders and Banks in the wake of Lehman going bankrupt in mid September.

Also, while it's true Nonfarm Payrolls were declining through early to mid '08 by (on avarage) - 75K per month, it was in September (- 285K), October (-320k )and November (-533K) that the decline in these Payrolls accelerated MASSIVELY...that's 1 million job losses in just three months.

I wouldn't discount the idea that it was in September and October and November where consumers (en mass) got crushed in terms of confidence.

Aug 07 to Aug 08 was a ing tea party in comparison to Sep 08 to Nov 08.

I have the battle scars to prove it!



* Dow Jones from ~ 11,500 to below 8000 intra day. An almost 22 percent decline in a VERY short time.

Seriously?? Didn't you say you were a bond trader??? Tell me, what curves do you trade and more importantly how long have you been doing it - because you sound very junior. How can any bond trader not consider, for instance, the monolines crashing in Feburary - thats where things started going really dicey. The recent stock market volatility is mainly to do with banks pulling their credit from hedge funds and selling to meet margin requirements, retail credit was declining way before that - sheesh. I admit in the UK things were delayed but credit and retail sharply declined in the US way earlier. The Fed bailout was months after countrywide, Bear, Wamu etc. I don't believe you are an experienced trader to argue against what I have said - you sound like a desk assistant who's picked up some words. Bond traders don't talk the way you are doing. Anyway, its a completely moot point - 2009 is going to be the worst year yet - so if any film hits 200mm then it blows your 'argument' out the water. So let's wait and see..

[HildebrandRarity]

Seriously?? Didn't you say you were a bond trader??? Tell me, what curves do you trade and more importantly how long have you been doing it - because you sound very junior.

How can any bond trader not consider, for instance, the monolines crashing in Feburary - thats where things started going really dicey.

The recent stock market volatility is mainly to do with banks pulling their credit from hedge funds and selling to meet margin requirements, retail credit was declining way before that - sheesh. I admit in the UK things were delayed but credit and retail sharply declined in the US way earlier. The Fed bailout was months after countrywide, Bear, Wamu etc. I don't believe you are an experienced trader to argue against what I have said - you sound like a desk assistant who's picked up some words. Bond traders don't talk the way you are doing. Anyway, its a completely moot point - 2009 is going to be the worst year yet - so if any film hits 200mm then it blows your 'argument' out the water. So let's wait and see..

LOL

I made my year on the steepener going into the first inter-meeting cut back in January. I called it earlier than anyone else (including Goldman, Sachs who even thought they'd wait until the scheduled FOMC meeting last Jan 30...while I was on the phone with them!)

The monolines happened way earlier in the year. The big payroll declines happened in Sep/Oct/Nov and that's when every one knew Christmas retail sales would be bad.


Bear was back in March.

Wamu was WAY later. In September. And then the bailouts and global-intermeeting cuts (which I also called, thus making another pass on Euribor futures Call spreads when the ECB cut aggressively) and TARP. So that's not months after Wamu. So you need to get your facts and timing absolutely correct if you want to go up against me.

As for my experience...

I made money being short in the bear market in bonds back in '94 and made out nicely on mean reversion after LTCM blew up in 98 and was long vol in '01 and made out nicely as well. And not only did I survive this year, but I was up money while others were losing their jobs.

How long have you been trading bonds?

And how is it my 'argument', this $200 mil business for Quantum?

I never called for Q0S to make $200 mil.

If you want to chat, send me a pm and i'll send you my phone number.

[MrKidd]

Seriously?? Didn't you say you were a bond trader??? Tell me, what curves do you trade and more importantly how long have you been doing it - because you sound very junior.

How can any bond trader not consider, for instance, the monolines crashing in Feburary - thats where things started going really dicey.

The recent stock market volatility is mainly to do with banks pulling their credit from hedge funds and selling to meet margin requirements, retail credit was declining way before that - sheesh. I admit in the UK things were delayed but credit and retail sharply declined in the US way earlier. The Fed bailout was months after countrywide, Bear, Wamu etc. I don't believe you are an experienced trader to argue against what I have said - you sound like a desk assistant who's picked up some words. Bond traders don't talk the way you are doing. Anyway, its a completely moot point - 2009 is going to be the worst year yet - so if any film hits 200mm then it blows your 'argument' out the water. So let's wait and see..

LOL

I made my year on the steepener going into the first inter-meeting cut back in January. I called it earlier than anyone else (including Goldman, Sachs who even thought they'd wait until the scheduled FOMC meeting last Jan 30...while I was on the phone with them!)

The monolines happened way earlier in the year. The big payroll declines happened in Sep/Oct/Nov and that's when every one knew Christmas retail sales would be bad.


Bear was back in March.

Wamu was WAY later. In September. And then the bailouts and global-intermeeting cuts (which I also called) and TARP. So that's not months after Wamu.

As for my experience...

I made money in the bear market in Bonds back in 94 and made out nicely on mean reversion with LTCM in 98 and was long vol in '01 and made out nicely as well. And not only did I survive this year, but I was up money while others were losing their jobs.

How long have you been trading bonds?

And how is it my 'argument', this $200 mil business for Quantum?

I never called for Q0S to make $200 mil.

If you want to chat, send me a pm and i'll send you my phone number.

So as a market's guy you know how wrong the banks called it - the reality was main street were hurting way before things came to a head - hence the size of the fall as wall street caught up with what any 'rational' person had already known for months at that point - that we were in a bad recession. My point about Wamu etc was that it takes months to get to the brink so had been in trouble way before TDK made its millions!

You obviously have experience based upon what you say, (although you're not going to make millions on mean reversion now are you?!) - so sorry if I offended. Its just the fact that you and the bluething seem so adamant that the lack of 200mm is down to a recession that I figured any experienced fixed income guy would acknowledge my very (common) sensible point that the recession is actually probably not the cause - whether you felt that the BO had over or under achieved.

As for my experience (at the risk of the yield curve highjacking this thread!) - I've traded most fixed income products and derivatives from about 1994 to early last year. I'm now retired, lucky enough while still in my 30's, but still keep my eye on the market as a matter of habit.

Sorry, I don't have a pm - you in London or NY?

Edited by MrKidd, 02 January 2009 - 11:18 PM.

[Donovan Mayne-Nicholls]

Well, overall the numbers are good for QoS. When a film opens up with a nearly $70 million dollar opening weekend in the U.S., you know there's pent-up demand for the product. The anticipation and excitement for the movie was there and it was reflected in the opening weekend grosses. Everything AFTER that weekend is simply word-of-mouth and referrals (or lack thereof). As well as QoS did, it still left a lot of money on the table. It should be closing in on $200 million U.S. dollars right now, and not struggling to match CR's US gross.

This movie should have done better. The stars were aligned for it. The advertising was there. The demand was there. But the movie didn't resonate with people the way Casino Royale did and for that I fault Marc Forester and EON. Forester's mandate was to build upon the foundation that CR set, not the foundation that TND set. If we wanted TND 2.0 with an art-house flair, we would've hired Gus Van Sant for TWINE.

EON needs to do better for BOND23. Bring back Martin Campbell. Pay him whatever he wants. The one good thing that has come out of QoS, though, is the affirmation that Craig is indeed the star and guiding force of this franchise for the foreseeable future. He is EON's ace, and they better make sure he's comfortable with the script and the director for Bond23, because as Craig goes so goes the fortunes of the series. The audiences seemed to be willing to go along with Craig on this film even though the film itself wasn't as good as previous entries.

Totally agree. Audiences aren't as dumb as fans. QoS was carried by CR's success but didn't build on it. While people here are still trying to convince themselves of what a brilliantly groundbreaking film it was, etc, all the feedback I've received from average moviegoers is that QoS is a disappointment, even that it looked kinda cheap. Eon will INDEED have to try harder next time around.

[blueman]

Its just the fact that you and the bluething seem so adamant that the lack of 200mm is down to a recession that I figured any experienced fixed income guy would acknowledge my very (common) sensible point that the recession is actually probably not the cause - whether you felt that the BO had over or under achieved.

That's it in a nutshell, isn't it? And I'm fine with a Bond film selling a few less tickets for being less cheesy (kids love cheese) AND being released in a down market. But claims that QOS hasn't resonated with the general public cuz it's made "only" $165.7m (so far) just don't sound accurate to me, given the circumstances. That's my issue, and yes it's totally subjective. I just look at other factors besides the film itself (if there are any), and recent economic events do seem worth putting into the equation. IMHO and FWIW.

Also FWThisisW: QOS finished #9 at the BO for the year in the US, and #7 worldwide. That's on the higher side of modern era Bonds, so nice.

[HildebrandRarity]

(although you're not going to make millions on mean reversion now are you?!) - so sorry if I offended. Its just the fact that you and the bluething seem so adamant that the lack of 200mm is down to a recession that I figured any experienced fixed income guy would acknowledge my very (common) sensible point that the recession is actually probably not the cause - whether you felt that the BO had over or under achieved.

You certainly can make a few million on mean-reversion as long as you're highly-levereaged up and you can repo longs/borrow shorts at reasonably tight bid-offer spread, especially when LTCM-forced unwinds/liquidations took certain stuff out 7, 8 or 9 standard deviations. My book was more than 50 times leveraged for the notional capital I was allocated.

And, yes, I found your earlier post to be quite offensive and immature. As a retort, I was going to make the type of comment that got me banned from CBn back in 2002 and then again in 2004...but I chose to play it straight and not ridicule you the way you tried ridiculing me because i've actually matured since then and don't want to get banned again.

What is also offensive is your continued insistence that i'm being "adamant" about Q0S not taking $200 Mil because of the recession. Where did I write that? Not only are you attributing comments to me, but then you turn around and say an experienced market professional with sense wouldn't make those comments and instead would agree with you!

Pathetic!

I was insistant in earlier pages that I thought Q0S might make it to $180 Mil level and that $175 - $180 would be a very good level of performance for a second outing by a newer Bond, especially if movie ticket prices were also experiencing deflation like other consumer-oriented goods and services (other than Rolls Royces and Ferraris).

That's what I have been saying.

...And then there's the pirated dvd thing. I know one New York fixed income sales guy who I talk to every day (and who is married to a doctor) who has seen Q0S only on a pirated dvd. These people aren't on the bread line by any means but they still didn't contribute to the box office! It's had/having some effect, imo.

[blueman]

What is also offensive is your continued insistence that i'm being "adamant" about Q0S not taking $200 Mil because of the recession. Where did I write that? Not only are you attributing comments to me, but then you turn around and say an experienced market professional with sense wouldn't make those comments and instead would agree with you!

But unless one creates a simplistic argument, how can one be expected to win?

[HildebrandRarity]

Ya.

QOS has ... made "only" $165.7m (so far) ...

Q0S is on the verge of eclipsing CR's grand total by Sunday night.


It's at $165.7 Mil after 49 days in comparison to CR's $156.8 million after it's 49th day.

[Qwerty]

Now on the CBn main page...

'Quantum of Solace' Included In US Top Ten Box Office Of 2008

22nd James Bond film grabs ninth place

[[dark]]

Don't forget that Quantum of Solace is the seventh highest grossing film of 2008 worldwide, Qwerty!

[HildebrandRarity]

And since it's a 2008 release, the Japan figures will end up elevating it up to 6th place when final figures are tallied.

[MrKidd]

(although you're not going to make millions on mean reversion now are you?!) - so sorry if I offended. Its just the fact that you and the bluething seem so adamant that the lack of 200mm is down to a recession that I figured any experienced fixed income guy would acknowledge my very (common) sensible point that the recession is actually probably not the cause - whether you felt that the BO had over or under achieved.

You certainly can make a few million on mean-reversion as long as you're highly-levereaged up and you can repo longs/borrow shorts at reasonably tight bid-offer spread, especially when LTCM-forced unwinds/liquidations took certain stuff out 7, 8 or 9 standard deviations. My book was more than 50 times leveraged for the notional capital I was allocated.

And, yes, I found your earlier post to be quite offensive and immature. As a retort, I was going to make the type of comment that got me banned from CBn back in 2002 and then again in 2004...but I chose to play it straight and not ridicule you the way you tried ridiculing me because i've actually matured since then and don't want to get banned again.

What is also offensive is your continued insistence that i'm being "adamant" about Q0S not taking $200 Mil because of the recession. Where did I write that? Not only are you attributing comments to me, but then you turn around and say an experienced market professional with sense wouldn't make those comments and instead would agree with you!

Pathetic!

I was insistant in earlier pages that I thought Q0S might make it to $180 Mil level and that $175 - $180 would be a very good level of performance for a second outing by a newer Bond, especially if movie ticket prices were also experiencing deflation like other consumer-oriented goods and services (other than Rolls Royces and Ferraris).

That's what I have been saying.

...And then there's the pirated dvd thing. I know one New York fixed income sales guy who I talk to every day (and who is married to a doctor) who has seen Q0S only on a pirated dvd. These people aren't on the bread line by any means but they still didn't contribute to the box office! It's had/having some effect, imo.

1. Great that's all we need - another punter using obscene amounts of leverage on a basic well known trade! And sorry to dissapoint but every Tom, Dick and Harry made money at LTCM's expense, who were sitting ducks at the time. Unless of course you were UBS. Not impressed.
2. Thank you for not reverting to calling me names. I was sarcastic to you and I know that can be hurtful
3. Fair cop - you never said it would hit 200mm - and the fact you stated from the start is indeed a good shout. BUT - I never said you were wrong if you disagreed with me that it would. My whole point was that the argument that it's the recession's fault is incorrect and an experienced bond trader would know the simple economics, past and present, to understand this.
4. Pirates - Come on..CR was on You Tube!! Always been with us - not an issue - how many pirate copies of TDK did you come across?? Lots and lots. And your bond trader friend should have known better - or did he get so hosed this year while using an absurd amount of leverage (50:1 - jeeez!)it's now the only way he can now afford to watch it
5. You were banned from CBn were you? You must have said some very naughty things! Get this, I was fined 50 quid in a magistrates court for possession while at university. True. Been on the straight and narrow ever since. You?

BTW - Happpy New Year

Edited by MrKidd, 03 January 2009 - 05:27 AM.

[Qwerty]

Don't forget that Quantum of Solace is the seventh highest grossing film of 2008 worldwide, Qwerty!

Ah, thanks [dark] - will add that in!

[MrKidd]

Ya.

QOS has ... made "only" $165.7m (so far) ...

Q0S is on the verge of eclipsing CR's grand total by Sunday night.


It's at $165.7 Mil after 49 days in comparison to CR's $156.8 million after it's 49th day.

Even though I have no doubt that the BO is a slight dissapointment to the producers and that the film didn't live up to the heights of CR - I'm really pleased it will beat CR's 167mm. I love Bond, and I think DC is great in the role - can't wait to see him in the next one.

[blueman]

Ya.

QOS has ... made "only" $165.7m (so far) ...

Q0S is on the verge of eclipsing CR's grand total by Sunday night.


It's at $165.7 Mil after 49 days in comparison to CR's $156.8 million after it's 49th day.

Even though I have no doubt that the BO is a slight dissapointment to the producers and that the film didn't live up to the heights of CR - I'm really pleased it will beat CR's 167mm. I love Bond, and I think DC is great in the role - can't wait to see him in the next one.

Question (from the curious): do you think QOS would've had more US admissions, and hence a higher US BO, had it been released this past summer? Why or why not (or even, exactly the same)?

[HildebrandRarity]

1. Great that's all we need - another punter using obscene amounts of leverage on a basic well known trade! And sorry to dissapoint but every Tom, Dick and Harry made money at LTCM's expense, who were sitting ducks at the time. Unless of course you were UBS. Not impressed.

BTW - Happpy New Year

Ha.

I have no interest in impressing you or anyone else. The fact that i've been through the bond wars since 1993 and made out nicely from them every single time (and am standing tall right now while others got ed this past year) is good enough for me.

I love what I do. I'm good at it. And I'm getting paid even in a year like we've had. There's no more pure satisfaction and joy than that. That's more than 95 percent of people in the business can say as of today. I prefer not gloating, so that's why I didn't expand in my previous post.

I did well enough over the years to go beyond merely prop trading bonds. I run rates for a large fund and the CSFBs, Deutches, Goldmans, HSBCs and JP Morgans of this world are bending over to do my business.

At this second, you're nothing more to me than just someone out there in cyberspace who uses the name of a homosexual villian from a James Bond movie who's tried his best to insult someone who's providing some facts. So you mean absolutely nothing to me.

Enjoy your new year, MrKidd.

[MrKidd]

Ya.

QOS has ... made "only" $165.7m (so far) ...

Q0S is on the verge of eclipsing CR's grand total by Sunday night.


It's at $165.7 Mil after 49 days in comparison to CR's $156.8 million after it's 49th day.

Even though I have no doubt that the BO is a slight dissapointment to the producers and that the film didn't live up to the heights of CR - I'm really pleased it will beat CR's 167mm. I love Bond, and I think DC is great in the role - can't wait to see him in the next one.

Question (from the curious): do you think QOS would've had more US admissions, and hence a higher US BO, had it been released this past summer? Why or why not (or even, exactly the same)?

Mmmm - good question. Very possibly yes - released as a summer blockbuster when attendance is at its highest could have led to higher attendance. On the other hand it may have been crowded out by the competition and done worse. Impossible to speculate really, release dates are an agonizing decision for the production house - you get it wrong and you're done for! I for one like its winter release date - makes it stand out once the summer blockbusters are starting to fade.

[blueman]

Ya.

QOS has ... made "only" $165.7m (so far) ...

Q0S is on the verge of eclipsing CR's grand total by Sunday night.


It's at $165.7 Mil after 49 days in comparison to CR's $156.8 million after it's 49th day.

Even though I have no doubt that the BO is a slight dissapointment to the producers and that the film didn't live up to the heights of CR - I'm really pleased it will beat CR's 167mm. I love Bond, and I think DC is great in the role - can't wait to see him in the next one.

Question (from the curious): do you think QOS would've had more US admissions, and hence a higher US BO, had it been released this past summer? Why or why not (or even, exactly the same)?

Mmmm - good question. Very possibly yes - released as a summer blockbuster when attendance is at its highest could have led to higher attendance. On the other hand it may have been crowded out by the competition and done worse. Impossible to speculate really, release dates are an agonizing decision for the production house - you get it wrong and you're done for! I for one like its winter release date - makes it stand out once the summer blockbusters are starting to fade.

So... remind me not to invest money with you.

[MrKidd]

1. Great that's all we need - another punter using obscene amounts of leverage on a basic well known trade! And sorry to dissapoint but every Tom, Dick and Harry made money at LTCM's expense, who were sitting ducks at the time. Unless of course you were UBS. Not impressed.

BTW - Happpy New Year

Ha.

I have no interest in impressing you or anyone else. The fact that i've been through the bond wars since 1993 and made out nicely from them every single time (and am standing tall right now while others got ed this past year) is good enough for me.

I love what I do. I'm good at it. And I'm getting paid even in a year like we've had. There's no more pure satisfaction and joy than that. That's more than 95 percent of people in the business can say as of today. I prefer not gloating, so that's why I didn't expand in my previous post.

I did well enough over the years to go beyond merely prop trading bonds. I run rates for a large fund and the CSFBs, Deutches, Goldmans, HSBCs and JP Morgans of this world are bending over to do my business.

You're no more than just someone out there in cyberspace who uses the name of a homosexual villian from a James Bond movie. So you mean absolutely nothing to me.

Enjoy your new year, MrKidd.

You're making money this year then you've done well. You're obviously a smart guy which is more than I can say for 99% of the bond (or equity) traders I've fleeced in the past.
But I don't buy that you weren't trying to impress someone by your posts - using all those fancy words and stuff - you got quite a shock when someone actually called you out on them. Come on..admit it..you weren't expecting that!
Completely agree - I am just someone in cyberspace (as you are) - and I have chosen the name of a homosexual Bond villian. Do I sense any deep seated suppression in the vitriol to my chosen handle? But don't you find them incredibly funny and way underestimated as Bond characters? I do - homosexual or not. But my real name is Jonathan and I'm not really a homosexual Bond villian.
Was that 'Happy New Year' from your heart? Did you really mean it? Are we friends now?

Ya.

QOS has ... made "only" $165.7m (so far) ...

Q0S is on the verge of eclipsing CR's grand total by Sunday night.


It's at $165.7 Mil after 49 days in comparison to CR's $156.8 million after it's 49th day.

Even though I have no doubt that the BO is a slight dissapointment to the producers and that the film didn't live up to the heights of CR - I'm really pleased it will beat CR's 167mm. I love Bond, and I think DC is great in the role - can't wait to see him in the next one.

Question (from the curious): do you think QOS would've had more US admissions, and hence a higher US BO, had it been released this past summer? Why or why not (or even, exactly the same)?

Mmmm - good question. Very possibly yes - released as a summer blockbuster when attendance is at its highest could have led to higher attendance. On the other hand it may have been crowded out by the competition and done worse. Impossible to speculate really, release dates are an agonizing decision for the production house - you get it wrong and you're done for! I for one like its winter release date - makes it stand out once the summer blockbusters are starting to fade.

So... remind me not to invest money with you.

Sorry blueman - that last one went over my head. Were you referring to the fact that I didn't know? Word of warning, any person who absolutely knows what's going to happen is either stupid or telling lies. Absolutes are usually wrong.

[Jim]

Are we friends now?

I bloody hope so.

Beginning to understand why half my pension's disappeared if this is the manner in which financial persons conduct themselves.

[MrKidd]

Are we friends now?

I bloody hope so.

Beginning to understand why half my pension's disappeared if this is the manner in which financial persons conduct themselves.

Jim - you are so right! You are spot on! The uneducated sharks that work on wall street beggers belief! Anyway, I'm through, I want to kiss and make up (but not in a homosexual Bond villian kind of way). I respect Hildy's Bond knowledge and fandom - I want to love without the fear of rejection. Am I just dreaming?

[Jim]

Are we friends now?

I bloody hope so.

Beginning to understand why half my pension's disappeared if this is the manner in which financial persons conduct themselves.

Jim - you are so right! You are spot on! The uneducated sharks that work on wall street beggers belief! Anyway, I'm through, I want to kiss and make up (but not in a homosexual Bond villian kind of way). I respect Hildy's Bond knowledge and fandom - I want to love without the fear of rejection. Am I just dreaming?

No, but you are beginning to annoy.

[blueman]

I guess I'd want more than a "Who knows?" throwing up of the hands. Seems cop-outty for someone so in-the-know about finanicialmacal-type stuff.