| 0 comments ]

US Steps Up Monitoring As FDA Warns Bird Flu Found In Pasteurized Milk From Grocery Stores

Dairy cattle moving between states must be tested for the bird flu virus, U.S. agriculture officials said Wednesday as they try to track and control the growing outbreak.

AP reports that the federal order was announced a day after health officials said they had detected inactivated remnants of the virus, known as Type A H5N1, in samples taken from milk during processing and after retail sale. They stressed that such remnants pose no known risk to people or the milk supply.

“The risk to humans remains low,” said Dawn O'Connell of the federal Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response.

The new order requires every lactating cow to be tested and post a negative result before moving to a new state. It will help the agency understand how the virus is spreading, said Michael Watson, an administrator with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.

“We believe we can do tens of thousands of tests a day,” he told reporters.

Until now, testing had been done voluntarily and only in cows with symptoms.

As The Epoch Times' Zachary Steiber reported earlier, commercially available milk from grocery stores has tested positive for highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced on April 23.

The FDA said in a statement it has been testing milk from cattle that have been sickened with the influenza, commonly known as the bird flu or H5N1, as well as milk “in the processing system, and on the shelves.”

“Based on available information, pasteurization is likely to inactivate the virus, however, the process is not expected to remove the presence of viral particles. Therefore, some of the samples collected have indicated the presence of HPAI using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) testing,” the agency said.

While samples tested positive, that does not mean they contain an intact pathogen, according to the FDA.

“Additional testing is required to determine whether intact pathogen is still present and if it remains infectious, which determines whether there is any risk of illness associated with consuming the product,” the FDA said.

The agency is injecting samples into fertilized chicken eggs to see whether any active virus replicates, among other experiments. It is also completing testing on samples taken from pasteurized milk from across the nation.

“To date, we have seen nothing that would change our assessment that the commercial milk supply is safe. Results from multiple studies will be made available in the next few days to weeks,” the FDA said.

The agency did not immediately respond to a request for comment for more details, including how many samples tested positive and which stores the milk that tested positive came from.

Bird flu has been confirmed in 33 herds of cattle in eight states after spreading to ruminants for the first time in the United States earlier this year, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. One person, a farm worker in Texas, has also tested positive for the influenza.

U.S. authorities previously said that milk from diaries with sickened animals was “being diverted or destroyed so that it does not enter the food supply” and that “pasteurization has continually proven to inactivate bacteria and viruses, like influenza, in milk,” but critics noted the authorities produced no evidence of testing to back up their position.

“There could be viruses in the milk on grocery shelves right now,” Gail Hansen, a veterinary expert who was formerly the state public health veterinarian for the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, and Andrew deCoriolis, executive director of the group Farm Forward, wrote in a recent op-ed.

Ms. Hansen said on the social media platform X that the FDA finding virus particles was “a little bit better than finding whole virus” but was “still not good.”

Rick Bright, the former director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, noted the shifting language from the government. The FDA now says that pasteurization “is very likely to effectively inactivate heat-sensitive viruses like H5N1 in milk from cows and other species.”

It also acknowledged that “no studies on the effects of pasteurization on HPAI viruses (such as H5N1) in bovine milk have previously been completed,” although it pointed to previous studies on effective pasteurization.

Yaneer Bar-Yam, president of the New England Complex Systems Institute, said the findings mean “milk from sick cows is being used” in the commercial supply. While pasteurization likely makes the milk safe, that safety is “not guaranteed,” he added.

Some experts emphasized that, at present, there were no indications that the positive tests meant the virus detected was infectious.

“There is no evidence to date that this is [an] infectious virus and the FDA is following up on that,” Lee-Ann Jaykus, an emeritus food microbiologist and virologist at North Carolina State University, told the Associated Press.

But Angela Rasmussen, a virologist, said on X that the positive samples “suggests there are undetected herds shedding virus into the milk supply” because they show intact virus “was once present.”

“It’s hard to say more as no raw data was shared, so we just have to take their word for it,” she added.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/24/2024 - 17:10
https://ift.tt/PkhZx9C
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/PkhZx9C
via IFTTT

US Steps Up Monitoring As FDA Warns Bird Flu Found In Pasteurized Milk From Grocery Stores SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

The Next Global Hegemon Has To Be Even Larger Than The US

By Michael Every of Rabobank

"Where it will end is very much up for grabs."

Yesterday’s manufacturing PMIs shouted “stagflation”, even if some heard “rate cuts”. German manufacturing was 42.2, French 44.9, and Eurozone 45.6, as services were 53.3, 50.5, and 52.9 - but Europe must now factor in logjams appearing at key ports due to unsold Chinese EVs and the knock-on effects of the Houthi’s blockage of Suez; the UK prints were 48.7 and 54.9; and the US both 50.9 - but its fine print said: “Manufacturing has now registered the steeper rate of price increases in three of the past four months, with factory cost pressures intensifying in April amid higher raw material and fuel prices, contrasting with the wage-related services-led price pressures seen throughout much of 2023.”

Yesterday’s bigger picture was as big as it gets. No, not the UK “putting its economy on a war footing” in raising defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2030. It’s already at 2.32% despite UK armed forces being nowhere near ready for war. (Of more interest was that a tax cut might be dropped to fund this incremental spending: a ‘guns or butter’ decision we will see lots more of.)

Rather, the ECB’s Panetta gave a speech echoing Mario Draghi’s call for “radical change. He stated for the EU to thrive it needs a de facto national-security focused POLITCAL economy centered round: reducing dependence on foreign demand (i.e., fewer net exports – sorry, Germany/Netherlands!); enhancing energy security (green protectionism); advancing production of technology (industrial policy); rethinking participation in global value chains (tariffs/subsidies); governing migration flows (so higher labour costs); enhancing external security (huge funds for defence); and joint investments in European public goods (via Eurobonds… to be bought by ECB QE for a ‘strategic bond portfolio’?) Oddly, the people who spend their time transcribing every syllable of what the ECB says when it points to a slight shift in the timing of a 25bp rate move were quiet about a speech which promised to transform the entire EU economic and market architecture!

However, this is what we said Europe would do to try to achieve strategic autonomy. It’s also what I argued Western economies would do in 2016’s pre-Brexit, pre-Trump ‘Thin Ice’, which underlined that once you remove any leg of the free market ‘table’, the whole thing topples over. So, it’s now modern-day Hamiltonian economics – unless it’s “Build Back Better” all over again.

This is a global, fundamental issue. In 2025, we get either Bidenomics 2.0 or Trump 2.0: in either case we are going to see more huge fiscal deficits, protectionism, and industrial policy, but in the latter case, perhaps on steroids. At the same time, China is going to keep being mercantilist on its own steroids. Likewise, Japan and even Australia(!) are heading in that direction. Clearly, we need some understanding of what this all means beyond monthly PMI up- or down-ticks.

Narrowly, Trump 2.0 could mean a USD and US asset meltdown, or a further USD and US asset spike and an emerging market meltdown. It depends on how it’s implemented and how the world responds.

More broadly, the global system is close to massive structural change. As the Financial Times op-eds today, the US and EU can’t embrace national-security “infant industry” arguments, seize key value chains to narrow inequality, and break the fiscal and monetary ‘rules’, while also using the IMF and World Bank --and the economics profession-- to preach free-market best practice to EM ex-China. And China can’t expect others not to copy what it does. As the FT concludes, “The shift to a new economic paradigm has begun. Where it will end if very much up for grabs.”

And “up for grabs” is the key point. As far back as 1820, Hegel argued that bourgeois society was incapable of internally solving its problems of social inequality and instability arising from its tendency to over-accumulate wealth at one pole and deprivation at the other, and a "mature" civil society was thus driven to seek external solutions through foreign trade, colonial, or imperial practices. In 2024, Europe just made the point for him – but what was their alternative?

In 2020, I warned we needed a new ideological “-ism” to guide our *political* economy out of the mess it was in: Hamiltonianism is it, as predicted. However, we each want it only for ourselves, not for others. There appears no likelihood of a Global New Deal to distribute value chains and green technology so everybody gets a fair share. Yet without it, we are back to a world of all vs. all, as warned in ’Thin Ice’ – and now openly with violence. That was why we dreamed the post-WW2, post-Cold War neoliberal one-world dream: it wasn’t just so the rich could feast on the poor; it also held up a simple, illusory ideology the world could buy into to end all conflicts.

Such arguments sound silly to PMI-monomaniacs, but they matter deeply for policy. For example, in the UK there was a public St. George’s Day debate over whether it was free-market capitalism or its empire that led to the UK becoming global hegemon. Free marketeers say it was all markets, so more markets please; Hamasniks on campuses say it was all the latter, so more “decolonisation”, please. The implications are enormous.

The awkward historical fact is that it was capitalism and empire that enriched the UK. Free markets and the rule of law were essential; but so was empire – in particular India. As Arrighi (2007), notes: “India's huge demographic resources buttressed British world power both commercially and militarily. Commercially, Indian workers were forcibly transformed from major competitors of European textile industries into major producers of cheap food and raw materials for Europe. Militarily…Indian manpower was organized in a European-style colonial army, funded entirely by the Indian taxpayer, and used throughout the nineteenth century in the endless series of wars through which Britain opened up Asia and Africa to Western trade and investment. As for the financial aspect, the devaluation of the Indian currency, the imposition of the infamous Home Charges through which India was made to pay for the privilege of being pillaged and exploited by Britain, and the Bank of England's control over India's foreign-exchange reserves, jointly turned India into the "pivot" of Britain's world-financial and commercial supremacy.”

In short, free markets and forcing others not to be free has worked very well: denying that won’t help. Addressing what a global structure looks like that keeps the former but doesn’t do the latter, and which doesn’t produce inequality and destabilisation, is the issue. Or, given that may be a utopia, we at least need to predict what the all vs. all world looks like. (Which is what we did in predicting Europe would embrace the “radical” policy changes now floated even at the ECB.)

On all vs. all, the global capitalist hegemon has shifted over time to a successively larger polity/geography (Italian city states > Dutch United Provinces > England/the UK > the US) through economic or real war, with the complexity of the expanding global system requiring ever greater resources to sit at its centre. However, the US alone can no longer carry the world on its shoulders. The Triffin Paradox looms over the global role of the dollar --and any would-be successor; and the US will not be the net importer for everyone, the net provider of financial assets to all savers, nor the world policeman for all who require it. Indeed, the latter three stand in fundamental contradiction to each other.

This implies the next global hegemon has to be even larger than the US (or we fragment):

  • Maybe the US will fail at a Hamiltonian relaunch and China is the next hegemon: but that implies geopolitical chaos ahead given the US won’t go home quietly.
  • Maybe the US will succeed at Hamiltonianism, and the world/markets will shift accordingly.
  • Maybe the scale needed for US hegemony involves it ‘bolting’ on Japan, South Korea, Canada, Mexico, Australia, and perhaps the UK and a ‘new look’ EU. But that implies a bifurcated world, with lots of bumps before we set up any buffers.
  • Maybe the US will prefer what Kautsky called Ultra-Imperialism: making a global deal with China and Russia to carve out spheres of influence, and setting oligopolistic rules that benefit all three. Where does ‘old look’ Europe sit if so? Very uncomfortably, in all likelihood.

These are discussions we need, but we aren’t seeing them due to a key point Arrighi makes. The late stage of a global system has a ‘false dawn’ as the economy shifts from producing things, which make ever less profit due to competition, to producing financial assets, which make money while destabilising society and the global system itself. The Dutch Golden Age was just before it was pushed off the world stage by European mercantilism and the British; the late 19th century and early 20th century British belle époque was just before WW1; the boom in US financial services was as its industrial base has rotted away – and as wars start to break out again all over.

Those illusory good times, for some, take the market’s eyes off the prize: it’s no wonder few want to read Hamilton rather than a headline about rate cuts, and few seriously engage with what strategic decoupling and reindustrialisation might look like even when we are already seeing it via tariffs, the CHIPS Act, and the IRA. Not even when Trump may do far more, and the ECB says the EU should do it too!

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/24/2024 - 16:20
https://ift.tt/VH74R0g
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/VH74R0g
via IFTTT

The Next Global Hegemon Has To Be Even Larger Than The US SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

Tesla Soars: Misses Across The Board, But Is "Accelerating" Rollout Of "More Affordable Models"

As previewed earlier, today's TSLA print is likely to be ugly: the company is the only Mag7 member expected to reported negative earnings growth...

... as a result of anemic Q1 sales, where the (growing) delta between production and deliveries was 46,000+ cars. Since then, CEO Elon Musk has doubled down on his robotaxi vision and vowed to unveil said robotaxi on August 8th. He also laid off more than 10% of the workforce and lost two key executives, while over the weekend, Tesla slashed prices across its lineup yet again and also reduced the cost of Full Self-Driving, or FSD -- which despite the name requires attentive drivers to keep their hands on the wheel.

For those who missed it, this is what Wall Street is looking for, starting with the first quarter:

  • Q1 Revenue estimate $22.3 billion
  • Q1 Adjusted EPS estimate 52c
  • Automotive gross margin estimate 17.6%
  • Free cash flow estimate $651.7 million
  • Gross margin estimate 16.5%
  • Capital expenditure estimate $2.4 billion
  • Cash and cash equivalents estimate $23.24 billion

Turning to the next quarter:

  • Q2 Automotive gross margin estimate 17.9%

And the full year

  • Deliveries estimate 1.94 million
  • Automotive gross margin estimate 17.9%
  • Capital expenditure estimate $9.91 billion

Goldman cautions that while there is clearly skepticism on both TSLA and the EV market as a whole, with deliveries already announced for 1Q (stock was down 5% on this and another -14% additionally since), much of this has been priced in with short interest is at 3-year highs. Goldman thinks the key focus for investors will be

  1. Can they grow volumes in 2024? Goldman thinks investors were at +10-15% y/y to start the year and are now in the 1-2% range, and
  2. What are gross margins and how low do they need to go? Consensus looks to be 15.8% (ex-credits) and bogey seems to be below 15% for the quarter.

The one thing that everyone -- from the Wall Street giant to the retail investor -- wants from this earnings print and call, is simple: Clarity. Each group historically assigns different importance to different things and never before has the dichotomy of a robotaxi thesis vs. the pursuit of an affordable EV been so important. So Elon better give the people (investors) what they want, unless he wants to see what is already a record-matching stretch of stock price declines extend further.

Musk has also given us plenty of hints on his focus (spoiler: it’s Robotaxi). And sure enough, the call with Musk will be more important than the print itself. As Bloomberg notes, do we get an expansive, optimistic Musk who sells investors on the robotaxi? Or is he testy and curt with Wall Street analysts?

While Tesla shares closed up 1.8% ahead of the results, snapping a seven day losing streak, and joining the other mega-cap names that also rose, Tesla earnings haven’t been a happy event for investors for a long time now: shares of the company have dropped at least 9% the day after its results in each of the past four quarters. Tuesday’s announcement can also lead to a volatile reaction, with options trading implying that investors are pricing in an 8.3% move in either direction.

Meanwhile, technical strategists, who analyze moves in share prices to predict their future path, are also warning that the stock currently has little support and there’s risk that any disappointment in Tuesday’s report or Musk’s conference call could snowball into a much larger decline.

* * *

With all that in mind, here is what the company reported for the first quarter:

  • Q1 Revenue $21.3BN, down 9% YoY, and missing estimates of $22.3BN
  • Q1 Adj EPS 45c, down 47% YoY, and missing estimates of 52x
  • Q1 Operating income $1.17BN, down 56% YoY and missing estimates of $1.53BN
  • Q1 Automotive Gross Margin Ex-Regulatory Credits 16.4%, missing estimates of 17.6%
  • Q1 Free Cash Flow -$2.53BN, vs +$441MM YoY and missing estimates of +653.6MM

In short: a hot mess as summarized below:

Some more details on the results, starting with revenue which declined 9% YoY in Q1 to $21.3B. YoY. revenue was impacted by the following items:

  • - reduced vehicle average selling price (ASP) YoY (excl. FX impact), including unfavorable impact of mix
  • - decline in vehicle deliveries, partially due to the Model 3 update in the Fremont factory and Giga Berlin production disruptions
  • - negative FX impact of $0.2B1
  • + growth in other parts of the business
  • + higher FSD revenue recognition YoY due to release of Autopark feature in North America

Turning to operating income, that decreased YoY to $1.2B in Q1, resulting in a 5.5% operating margin. YoY, operating income was primarily impacted by the following items:

  • - reduced vehicle ASP due to pricing and mix- increase in operating expenses partly driven by AI, cell advancements and other R&D projects
  • - cost of Cybertruck production ramp
  • - decline in vehicle deliveries, partially due to the Model 3 update in the Fremont factory and Giga Berlin production disruptions
  • + lower cost per vehicle, including lower raw material costs, freight and duties
  • + gross profit growth in Energy Generation and Storage including IRA credit benefit
  • + higher FSD revenue recognition YoY due to release of Autopark feature in North America

The company's cash at quarter-end was $26.9B, a sequential decrease of $2.2B which was the result of negative free cash flow of $2.5B, driven by an inventory increase of $2.7B and AI infrastructure capex of $1.0B in Q1.

While we already knew the operating summary, here it is again:

Charted, the results are anything but pretty:

And while the disappointing results would likely have been enough to hammer the stock even more after hours, TSLA is soaring due to these four paragraphs in the company's "product outlook" section, which promise what everyone has been hoping for: cheaper cars are coming and sooner than expected, meaning Reuters indeed lied (it also mentions the robotaxi whose August 8 unveil Musk hinted at recently):

We have updated our future vehicle line-up to accelerate the launch of new models ahead of our previously communicated start of production in the second half of 2025.

These new vehicles, including more affordable models, will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms, and will be able to be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.

This update may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected but enables us to prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a more capex efficient manner during uncertain times. This would help us fully utilize our current expected maximum capacity of close to three million vehicles, enabling more than 50% growth over 2023 production before investing in new manufacturing lines.

Our purpose-built robotaxi product will continue to pursue a revolutionary “unboxed” manufacturing strategy.

An earlier launch of cheaper EVs would be a reversal of the Reuters news around a cheaper Tesla model being pushed back, which musk already pushed back on. Arguably Tesla does not need to just release a model to compete with a Toyota Camry to see further growth. BYD, for example, has dozens of models out there for consumers to choose from. Tesla, meanwhile, has opted for less model variety and that has contributed to some of the challenges they’ve faced.

Here are some other highlights from the company's Outlook section:

  • Volume: Our company is currently between two major growth waves: the first one began with the global expansion of the Model 3/Y platform and we believe the next one will be initiated by advances in autonomy and introduction of new products, including those built on our next generation vehicle platform. In 2024, our vehicle volume growth rate may be notably lower than the growth rate achieved in 2023, as our teams work on the launch of the next generation vehicle and other products. In 2024, the growth rates of energy storage deployments and revenue in our Energy Generation and Storage business should outpace the Automotive business.
  • Cash: We have sufficient liquidity to fund our product roadmap, long-term capacity expansion plans and other expenses. Furthermore, we will manage the business such that we maintain a strong balance sheet during this uncertain period.
  • Profit: While we continue to execute on innovations to reduce the cost of manufacturing and operations, over time, we expect our hardware-related profits to be accompanied by an acceleration of AI, software and fleet-based profits.

Some more details from the presentation:

  • Tesla notes (on page 7) that it produced 1,000 Cybertrucks in a single week in April. Positive ramping signs, although the Cybertrucks were recently recalled due to issues with its pedal.
  • Working capital remains a big issue: global vehicle inventory rose to 28 days, a huge jump from the 15 days at the end of the last quarter.
  • Tesla said that production at Gigafactory Shanghai was down sequentially due to seasonality and planned shutdowns around Chinese New Year in Q1. It also notes that demand typically improves throughout the year, and as it enters new markets, "such as Chile, many of them will be supplied from Gigafactory Shanghai.”
  • There was the following interesting acknowledgmenet: “Global EV sales continue to be under pressure as many carmakers prioritize hybrids over EVs. While positive for our regulatory credits business, we prefer the industry to continue pushing EV adoption, which is in-line with our mission.”

Turning to the company's battery division, Tesla deployed a record amount of energy storage for the quarter – 4,053 megawatt-hours – topping its prior record by 2%. Tesla has become a dominant force in the storage business, vying with competitors such as Fluence Energy and Sungrow Power Supply to deploy big batteries that can back up solar plants or prevent blackouts on the electric grid. That market is growing at breakneck speed, with US deployments in the fourth quarter jumping 358% compared to the same period of 2022, according to Wood Mackenzie.

Still, as Bloomberg notes, probably for the first time since it bought SolarCity, Tesla didn’t disclose its quarterly deployments of solar, instead noting the following: "In its Energy Generation and Storage business: “Revenues were up 7% YoY and gross profit was up 140% YoY, driven by increased Megapack deployments, partially offset by a decrease in solar deployments." In Q4, the company deployed 41 megawatts.

Another notable highlight: the company has previewed what ride-hailing will look like using the TSLA app. Watch out Waymo and Uber, TSLA is coming for you:

And so, with the stock having cratered in the past week, sliding for a record-matching 7 consecutive days, the market is finally happy with what Musk revealed and the stock is sharply higher after hours, surging some 6% and erasing the 4 most recent days of losses...

... although much will depend on Musk's tone during the earnings call, where TSLA's overtime fate will be decided.

Tyler Durden Tue, 04/23/2024 - 16:25
https://ift.tt/J4njUfY
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/J4njUfY
via IFTTT

Tesla Soars: Misses Across The Board, But Is "Accelerating" Rollout Of "More Affordable Models" SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

Bonds & Stocks Bid As 'Bad News'-Buyers Trump CTA-Sellers

'Bad news' was certainly good news today as 'soft' survey data showed the US Manufacturing sector dropping back into contraction (<50) and Services sliding too (with pries rising), sending US MAcro Surprise dats slumping..

Source: Bloomberg

That gave 2024 rate-cut odds a small lift...

Source: Bloomberg

..which seemed all the markets wanted to be able to extend yesterday's big squeeze as stocks soared from the open... The Dow was the laggard on the day with Small Caps the biggest gainer, but all the majors ended green...

0-DTE traders faded the opening ramp aggressively but were force to cover as the afternoon wore on. Notably the positive delta flow from 0-DTE did nothing to boost stocks suggesting there were 'fundamental' sellers offsetting that flow...

Source: SpotGamma

Yesterday's 'short squeeze' was dwarfed by today's extending the gains from yesterday's lows in the 'most shorted' basket to today's highs to over 6%... - the biggest two-day squeeze since late-Feb. We do note that in context, this is not so impressive, but every trend starts as a reversal...

Source: Bloomberg

MAG7 stocks rallied again, but were unable to get back to even on the week and started to run out of steam into close ahead of TSLA's earnings...

Source: Bloomberg

Continuing the trend of the last two days, Goldman's trading desk noted that hedgies were buying and long-only's were selling:

  • Our floor is skewed 6% better to buy overall with HFs driving most of our flows. The HF demand is a function of Info Tech Buying (again... mix of LC Tech, semis, select SW), Discretionary demand (mostly e-commerce), Industrials, Comms Svcs, Energy, and Staples... Hcare is the only Sector being sold by HFs. Short Ratios are moderate to low today

  • LOs are selling Info Tech (pockets of SW), Energy selling, Comm Svcs, Fins.

Additionally, they highlighted the following chart showing the number of Nasdaq components below their 50DMA was at the same levels as the October 2023 swing lows as we rip here...

Source: Bloomberg

Notably, Goldman's 'Vol Panic' Index is off the highs... but not by much (ahead of thee big event risk this week)...

Source: Bloomberg

Treasuries were mixed by the close (with 30Y +1bps, 2Y -5bps), but all well off their overnight (pre-bad-news) high yields of the day...

Source: Bloomberg

Once again, 5.00% was too much for the 2Y yield to handle...

Source: Bloomberg

The yield curve steepened dramatically, off pre-CPI levels from last week...

Source: Bloomberg

The dollar dived on the (dovish) bad news, back to Thursday's lows...

Source: Bloomberg

USDJPY just couldn't get it together. Twice they tried to rally the JPY against the USD and twice they failed (just look at last Friday too)... Jawboning is just not doing it guys...

Source: Bloomberg

Gold ended the day basically unchanged having recovered from yesterday evening's puke...

Source: Bloomberg

Bitcoin also ended the day unchanged, around $67,000...

Source: Bloomberg

Oil prices traded a perfect 'V' today, dumping overnight *WTI testing an $80 handle) before finding support and ramping up above $83...

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, tonight brings us TSLA earnings... 0-DTE traders were buying into the close...

Source: SpotGamma

...and the vol market is ready!!

Source: Bloomberg

...implying a one-day move in stocks of +/-8%-plus!

Tyler Durden Tue, 04/23/2024 - 16:00
https://ift.tt/T2iLqkC
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/T2iLqkC
via IFTTT

Bonds & Stocks Bid As 'Bad News'-Buyers Trump CTA-Sellers SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

"Gross Abuse Of Power" - Two SEC Lawyers Resign After Judge's Rebuke In Anti-Crypto Case

Score one for 'the law'...

In mid-March, a federal judge in Utah took the extremely unusual step of sanctioning the SEC, saying that the regulator abused its authority in a case against crypto platform Digital Licensing Inc., known as DEBT Box.

The SEC’s conduct “constitutes a gross abuse of the power entrusted to it by Congress and substantially undermined the integrity of these proceedings and the judicial process,” Robert Shelby, a federal district court judge in Salt Lake City, said in an 80-page legal filing on Monday.

He also ordered the agency to pay DEBT Box’s attorney’s fees and other costs related to the restraining order that the regulator had sought against the crypto platform.

The SEC sued DEBT Box in July 2023, accusing the crypto platform of defrauding investors of at least $49 million. The same month, Shelby froze the company’s assets and put the company into receivership at the SEC’s request.

However, the freeze was later reversed after the court found that the SEC may have made “materially false and misleading representations” in the process.

A month later, and Bloomberg reports, according to people familiar with the matter, that two SEC lawyers - Michael Welsh and Joseph Watkins - stepped down this month after an SEC official told them that they would be terminated if they stayed.

The pair were lead attorneys on a case against DEBT Box.

The judge had faulted arguments from Welsh, the SEC’s lead trial attorney on the matter, and evidence provided by Watkins and his team.

Watkins was the agency’s lead investigative attorney on the case.

In one instance, Welsh told the judge that Draper, Utah-based DEBT Box was closing bank accounts and transferring assets overseas.

The court found that this wasn’t happening.

An SEC investigator later said that a miscommunication led to the error, and Welsh apologized to the court.

SEC enforcement chief Gurbir Grewal apologized to the court for his department’s conduct.

Gurbir Grewal

He said that he had appointed new attorneys to the case and mandated training for the agency’s enforcement staff.

Last week, attorneys for DEBT Box and other parties filed motions requesting that the SEC pay more than $1.5 million in fees and other costs incurred in the case.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/22/2024 - 14:45
https://ift.tt/J2zt5nG
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/J2zt5nG
via IFTTT

"Gross Abuse Of Power" - Two SEC Lawyers Resign After Judge's Rebuke In Anti-Crypto Case SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend