Summers and Geithner

andrew93 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> confirmation from the White House the position is
> vacant?

> Furthermore, this contract doesn't state the need
> for 3 news media reports so the number of media
> outlets reporting something is irrelevant. I
> would only accept a statement from the White
> House

we don't need confirmation from the white house just "Departure must be announced or widely understood to be permanent." --- widely understood = presumably from the media


> Right now I do have something from someone in a
> position of authority and that is the White House.
> Today's date is January 5th and their website
> states Larry Summers is the director of the NEC.
> Source:
> [www.whitehouse.gov]
> irector

I don't think a contract is going to close on some out of date webpage that just hasn't been changed yet.

3peter Wrote:

> I don't think a contract is going to close on some
> out of date webpage that just hasn't been changed
> yet.

Where did I say the contract should close based on an out of date website? That is not what I proposed at all.

Regarding the widely understood aspect. Widely understood is a fluid concept but that seems to have eluded you given you didn't quote the relevant part of my post. We have had 4 different "widely understood" positions in the past 2 months. We had people asking for this contract to be closed many weeks ago (edit: back in October!) and thank goodness we didn't close it on the basis of media speculation given the shenanigans that have since come to fruition.

What exactly is the original source of the current version of the media interpretation? If someone can show that come from the White House, as opposed to being idle media speculation, then I'm sure it would carry more weight.

[Edit: again speaking as devil's advocate {I really don't give a toss which way this contract closes} how do we know Obama hasn't already asked Larry to stay on until an appointment is made?]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/05/2011 06:48AM by andrew93.

@andrew93
Always good to hear a possible devils advocate case.

The source referred to is the original release back in Sept regarding his departure with wording "at the end of the year". Note that this is not, "early in the new year", or "when a new appointment is made".

You erroneously say that the confusion was due to "media speculation" when in fact it stems from LS directly responding to a question saying himself that his last day would be end of the week (before Xmas). (CNN video)

It was then mentioned by the press secretary in an interview on CNN (27 Dec) that LS would work through the end of the year. Again, why not "until a new appointment is made" or "through mid January".

Now we have a Harvard release saying "until recently served as". Note the use of past tense.

Why would there be another WH press release on the matter?
If you look at other resignations (Romer etc) there has only been the one WH release.

I will comment on the 'rush' aspect later ...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2011 02:06AM by TraderV.

The staff aboard Air Force One (which is jurisdictionally the part of White House) at 10 P.M. Honolulu time om 3 Jan or 3 A.M. ET time on 4 Jan
were asking Obama about Larry's replacement, as the official title has not been stripped from Larry yet:

[www.ipredict.co.nz]

___

It is difficult to predict, especially others' predictions.

Show the full quote for context.

Quote

Q A serious question: Are you concerned you're going to get a chilly reception in Washington? Republicans, on Sunday, were talking about the first thing they’re going to do is repeal health care. They’re talking about asking you to get rid of Eric Holder, the Attorney General. It sounds like a relatively chilly reception awaiting you.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I mean, I think that there’s going to be politics. That's what happens in Washington. They are going to play to their base for a certain period of time. But I'm pretty confident that they’re going to recognize that our job is to govern and make sure that we are delivering jobs for the American people and that were creating a competitive economy for the 21st century; not just for this generation but the next one.

And so my expectation, my hope is that John Boehner and Mitch McConnell will realize that there will be plenty of time to campaign for 2012 in 2012, and that our job this year is to make sure that we build on the recovery. We started to make good progress on that during the lame duck, and I expect to build on that progress when I get back.

All right?

Q What do you think about their effort to repeal health care?

Q Anything on Larry Summers’ replacement?

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, guys. Happy New Year.

Thanks, it is the first White House release in 2011.
By not answering the question, the President upheld the status quo on Larry's position.


P.S. the wording in news media changes all the time.

___

It is difficult to predict, especially others' predictions.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/05/2011 10:10AM by dutching.

@dutching

Rubbish this release proves nothing either way.

Purely adopting the stance of devil's advocate here.....as I said previously I don't care how this closes.

Have we seen a definitive release or statement from the White House? If there is one with a defined end date then this is a non-issue and we can close the contract. I'm not sure we have seen a statement as to what exactly is his last day but I would be happy to be proved wrong if I have missed something.

You mentioned TraderV (as I also did) "working through the end of the year". I emphasised the word "through" in a previous post because this could be interpreted as working beyond the end of the year. Notice they didn't say 'through until' or 'through to' the end of the year, I believe the wording was 'through' which is open to interpretation. An analogy is "through" a tunnel - "through" does not necessarily involve stopping at the far end of the tunnel {possibly a bad analogy I know!! }

I don't believe any confusion has arisen due to media speculation - my position was that we have a number of conflicting statements to date - what if there is another statement tomorrow that says something entirely different? I am relying on media statements for this part given I haven't yet seen an official announcement from the White House as to the last day - so this is the context for the following comments. My understanding is the initial statements from the media (back in Sep or Oct?) was that Larry would leave before the end of the year. Then there were (media) statements about a 2 week extension. If I recall correctly, these were later clarified as being 'not official' and possibly retracted. Then we had statements he was working through the end of the year. Now we have statements that the last day was Friday (Dec 31). I don't think any of this is in dispute and I believe a number of links have been provided throughout this thread. However, I believe the media are fishing on this subject, or have been working with unofficial information, hence my reticence at closing this contract in the absence of an announcement from the White House as to what is his last day. I may be proved wrong and I'm ok with that. {Where I get prickly is if my comments are taken out of context or are purposely mis-construed}

On the basis of the conflicting media statements, I still don't see any harm in waiting - just in case there is something unforeseen / unknown that would change how this contract is closed. I realise the holders of long positions would love to clear their funds and invest them elsewhere but there are also a number of holders of short positions who would feel pretty aggrieved (and rightly so) if it transpires there was another extension that pushed the final day beyond Jan 3rd.

I'm not sure if others have tried this but I have submitted a request to the White House seeking clarification as to Larry's last day - I'm yet to get a response..........but I will be sure to let everyone know when I do!

Good health and good luck (but not too much) to the other traders here.

Cheers, Andrew



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/05/2011 10:23AM by andrew93.

The Open Government Policy.
The departure of key White House officials is announced by statements and releases,
for example in case of Press Secretary Robert Gibbs:

/15849655773cef225fbc69ac9114808a/the-press-office/2011/01/05/statement-president-departure-press-secretary-robert-gibbs

Quote

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 05, 2011
Statement by the President on the Departure of Press Secretary Robert Gibbs

“For the last six years, Robert has been a close friend, one of my closest advisers and an effective advocate from the podium for what this administration has been doing to move America forward. I think it’s natural for him to want to step back, reflect and retool. That brings up some challenges and opportunities for the White House – but it doesn’t change the important role that Robert will continue to play on our team.”

How's the same for Larry?

___

It is difficult to predict, especially others' predictions.

@andrew93: So if we see a price collapse down to 20 cents, will it be because you've gotten an answer or 'cause somebody wants folks to think you have?

@andrew93 I did the same and sent a query through. My guess is that they have been reluctant to comment on it until they've sorted out the replacement.

@ecrampton Yep, epic shorting may beginning at any moment.

@Eric haha! Yes I would short it if I had the news.....but I'm not holding my breath waiting for a reply. No I don't have enough funds to fake short news and manipulate the market......if that happens then it isn't me. I have already made a little bit of money on this contract - I bought when it collapsed the other day and bailed in the 90s. Finally a win after a string of losses.......

More news:

Politico:

Quote

His last day as director of the National Economic Council and special assistant to the president for economic policy was Friday and, later this month, he’ll be back in Cambridge in an official capacity at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, the university announced Tuesday. It was previously known that Summers would return, but the timing and his post at the university are new developments.

IBT:

Quote

Meanwhile, at the White House President Barack Obama is expected to announce a replacement for Summers any time this week. The latter's return to academics has opened up a huge vacuum in the administration and leaves a crucial decision to be made, as the economy remains at the forefront of the President's concerns.

Wash Post:

Quote

Lawrence Summers, President Obama's former top economic adviser, is returning to Harvard University this month to resume his teaching and academic research, the university announced Tuesday.

Summers will be heading back to Harvard's Kennedy School, where he taught before leaving to join the administration in early 2009, and where his teaching "will focus on the implications of changes in the global economy for public policy." Summers departed his post as director of the National Economic Council on Friday after announcing last September that he would leave the Obama administration in the new year.

"It has been an enormous privilege to serve in the White House for the last two critical years," Summers said in a statement. "Now with the economy stabilizing, I look forward to the opportunity to think, write and teach about some of the critical economic challenges we face taking a longer view than is possible in a position with day-to-day policy responsibility."

Here's the killer one for Dutching. Harvard says Summers is no longer at NEC:

Quote

Lawrence H. Summers, who until recently served as Assistant to the President for Economic Policy and Director of the White House National Economic Council (NEC) returns to Harvard University this month. Summers, the Charles W. Eliot University Professor at Harvard University, will be based at Harvard Kennedy School (HKS), where he taught prior to taking a public service leave of absence in early 2009. His teaching and research will focus on the implications of changes in the global economy for public policy.

As director of the NEC, Summers served as the chief White House advisor to the president on the development and implementation of economic policy, led the president’s daily economic briefing, and coordinated the interagency policy process.

Anyone has got Larry's mobile number? We can send him a TXT message.
He might want to reply back as he likely interested in new prediction markets; unless he is already here under specific nickname.

___

It is difficult to predict, especially others' predictions.

Attn admin,

This is embarrassing! It seems the rest of the world believes previous white house statements but we don't...

E-Mail: [email protected]
Fax: 617-495-0436

Staff Support:
Julie Shample
Littauer 242 (KSG)
79 JFK Street
E-Mail: [email protected]
Tel: 617-495-1953
Fax: 617-495-0436

jik13 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is embarrassing! It seems the rest of the
> world believes previous white house statements but
> we don't...

Which the White House statement you don't believe?
Can you quote some, preferably about Larry Summers' official position as of the 3 January 2011.

___

It is difficult to predict, especially others' predictions.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/05/2011 11:00PM by dutching.

Harvard's press release of 4 January said that he was director "until recently".

Contract pays out if he left the job on 3 January.

You're not going to try arguing that he left the job 7 am on 4 January or something, are you?

Is dutching entertaining the idea that the white house is keeping him on, didn't tell anyone, didn't correct any media?
What's your views on roswell?

The truth is out there

-------------------------------------------------------
> This is embarrassing! It seems the rest of the
> world believes previous white house statements but
> we don't...

ECrampton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Harvard's press release of 4 January said that he
> was director "until recently".

Since when the Harvard became the part of White House?

> You're not going to try arguing that he left the
> job 7 am on 4 January or something, are you?

Effectively he left the job in April 2009 after the second time spotted taking a nap
in the White House while the President speaking.



___

It is difficult to predict, especially others' predictions.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2011 12:04AM by dutching.

Please point to where in the contract definition it requires a statement from the White House, dutching. It ain't there.

We have a departure widely understood to be permanent and reported in lots of news stories as having been effective last Friday, 31 December. Harvard, his new employer, and a place of some repute, said that, as of 4 January, he'd been on the job "until recently". Unless they meant "30 minutes ago", he was out on or prior to 3 January, which satisfies the terms of the contract.

andrew93 Wrote:


> I don't believe any confusion has arisen due to
> media speculation - my position was that we have a
> number of conflicting statements to date - what if
> there is another statement tomorrow that says
> something entirely different? I am relying on
> media statements for this part given I haven't yet
> seen an official announcement from the White House
> as to the last day - so this is the context for
> the following comments. My understanding is the
> initial statements from the media (back in Sep or
> Oct?) was that Larry would leave before the end of
> the year. Then there were (media) statements
> about a 2 week extension. If I recall correctly,
> these were later clarified as being 'not official'
> and possibly retracted. Then we had statements he
> was working through the end of the year. Now we
> have statements that the last day was Friday (Dec
> 31). I don't think any of this is in dispute and
> I believe a number of links have been provided
> throughout this thread.

> On the basis of the conflicting media statements,
> I still don't see any harm in waiting - j

I don't see any conflicting statements in what you said above they all point to a date at the end of last year.

the close date for the contract was the 4th - the contract should be closed within three days of that as there is no reason to extend.

> case there is something unforeseen / unknown that
> would change how this contract is closed. I
> realise the holders of long positions would love
> to clear their funds and invest them elsewhere but
> there are also a number of holders of short
> positions who would feel pretty aggrieved (and
> rightly so) if it transpires there was another
> extension that pushed the final day beyond Jan
> 3rd.

we can't wait for some crazy event until the end of time before closing a contract, as soon as the criteria are met it should close. this one should have closed months ago, like the anderton not to stand contract did, even though he still conceivably could.

ECrampton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please point to where in the contract definition
> it requires a statement from the White House,
> dutching. It ain't there.
>
> We have a departure widely understood to be
> permanent and reported in lots of news stories as
> having been effective last Friday, 31 December.
> Harvard, his new employer, and a place of some
> repute, said that, as of 4 January, he'd been on
> the job "until recently". Unless they meant "30
> minutes ago", he was out on or prior to 3 January,
> which satisfies the terms of the contract.

Every time if there are key staff leaving the US government and administration,
it is sent to the Congress in the list of Presidential Nominations, for example:
/15849655773cef225fbc69ac9114808a/the-press-office/2011/01/05/presidential-nominations-sent-senate
Could you find the Larry in these?

What if the President ask Larry to stay in the position while the Congress approve his new nominee?

___

It is difficult to predict, especially others' predictions.

What if a freaking meteor hits Washington, kills the new appointee, and Larry Summers is declared the new de facto head of post-apocalypse NEC?

What if somebody hijacks AirForce One and says he'll force the President to eat Vegemite unless Larry Summers is kept on as head of NEC?

What if what if what if we just close the damned contract.

ECrampton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What if a freaking meteor hits Washington, kills
> the new appointee, and Larry Summers is declared
> the new de facto head of post-apocalypse NEC?
>
> What if somebody hijacks AirForce One and says
> he'll force the President to eat Vegemite unless
> Larry Summers is kept on as head of NEC?
>
> What if what if what if we just close the damned
> contract.

We need a like button.

I love this thread. Oh if only it would never close

Larry is still there:

[www.whitehouse.gov]

Quote

Lawrence H. Summers

Director of the National Economic Council and Assistant to the President for Economic Policy

Lawrence H. Summers is Assistant to the President for Economic Policy and Director of the National Economic Council. He was appointed by President Barack H. Obama on November 24, 2008.

___

It is difficult to predict, especially others' predictions.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2011 01:17AM by dutching.

Quote
@dutching
Every time if there are key staff leaving the US government and administration,
it is sent to the Congress in the list of Presidential Nominations, for example:
[www.whitehouse.gov]
Could you find the Larry in these?

What if the President ask Larry to stay in the position while the Congress approve his new nominee?

You are actually wrong, the NEC Director is not approved by congress he is appointed directly by POTUS.

This can be verified here.
Also if you search the list of 'nominations and appointments' at the website you love so much you will see there was no confirmation for anybody by the name of Lawrence H. Summers.
Does this mean he himself was not appointed? - of course not.

Time for round 9? Or is this the final round? Or has the final bell already sounded?

Ok so we have a position where it is 'widely understood' that Larry has departed. This is one of the 'or' criteria for closing this contract.

IMO we won't see any more announcements concerning Larry from the White House. The only way is if the term of Larry is mentioned during the announcement for the new director - a bit like obiter dictum. This is the part that concerns me. You might ask why?

There is one thing I keep reading on this and that is Obama is about to appoint a replacement for Larry Summers. Does this imply Larry is still in the job? I personally believe the position is vacant at the moment, but the media don't report on 'filling a vacancy'; they keep saying 'replace Larry'. This could just be sloppy/lazy journalism. So, is the position officially vacant or not? I'm not sure we know the answer at the moment.

So do we close this now at $1 at the risk of getting it wrong? Or do we wait until we know for sure? (for instance at the time of the announcement of the new director, after which I'm assuming there will be no new news on this subject)

Is there a risk we will get this wrong if we close it now?

Fence-sittingly yours,
Andrew



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2011 11:16PM by andrew93.

andrew93 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok so we have a position where it is 'widely
> understood' that Larry has departed. This is one
> of the 'or' criteria for closing this contract.

Since when it became 'widely understood' that Larry departed?
Any particular date in mind as it is required for the judging?

___

It is difficult to predict, especially others' predictions.