Oct 28, 2015 - The effect of audit on reported Schedule C income in the fifth year after audit ...... rte d. Ta xa b le. In co me. 0. 2. 4. 6. Year Relative to Audit Year.
2012 Chiquette et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd. This is an Open Access .... sured using the Multigent CRP Vario™ assay (Ilex Medical.
www.nwp.usace.army.mil/op/fishdata/home.asp. (Octo- ber 2005.) .... 1,310. 1992. 29,394. 26,793. 24,372. 24,405. 11,575. 1.81. 346. 6,704. 4,761. 5,386. 1993.
May 14, 2005 - Studies were excluded if they were duplicate reports; or preliminary reports of ... People with venous thromboembolism, i.e. deep vein thrombosis ... tomography (CT); ...... were mobilized with compression stockings from day 2.
Aug 14, 2014 - Hasbrouck, 1991a,b) or the generalized method of moments (GMM). First, maximum .... designated market makers they hire for their stock (see, .... transitory price effects in limit order markets and label it order book resiliency.
Mar 24, 2008 - One hundred and sixteen students from a large, urban university participated in ...... Omega electric wheatgrass juicer with twin gear technology.
edu). This research is partially supported by a National Science Foundation grant (No. ... these models must serve as building blocks for aggregate market models. ..... laboration between consumer behaviorists and quantitative modelers.
Jul 2, 2011 - faster than their peer group, issue additional debt, and increase capital expenditures. ... increase in debt and capital expenditures are stronger when the targets .... it holds for smaller or bigger targets, different time periods,.
From the Refinery to the Pump: A Description .... or more self-service gas pumps operated by a single cashier, possibly with a small convenience store or.
2.4.3. Conduct. 1094. 2.5. Market power in antitrust law. 1095. 3. Collusion. 1098. 3.1. ..... where MC is the firm's marginal cost, C (X), and εF ≡ dX. dP. P. X.
of different strategies for customer and inter-dealer trades. .... these days or the dealer are representative of the overall FX market. Second, during ..... 12:30 Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) and ends at around 21:00 GMT (corresponding to 7:30.
*Michal Ann Strahilevitz is Russel T. Sharpe Professor of Marketing, Ageno School of Business, Golden Gate University (e-mail: [email protected]). Terrance Odean is Rudd Family Foundation Professor of Finance, Haas School of Business, University of California– Berkeley (e-mail: [email protected]). Brad M. Barber is Gallagher Professor of Finance, Graduate School of Management, University of California, Davis (e-mail: [email protected]). The authors are listed in reverse alphabetical order, not in order of contribution. They appreciate comments from Nicholas Barberis, Matti Keloharju, Dwight Grant, and Barbara Mellers; from participants at the Behavioral Decision Research in Management Conference, Society of Consumer Psychology Conference, Association of Consumer Research Conference, JOIM conference, and the Stockholm Institute for Financial Research Conference on Portfolio Choice and Investor Behavior; and from seminar participants at Brandeis University, University of California–Berkeley, University of Illinois–Chicago, Imperial College (London), University of Miami, University of Minnesota, Golden Gate University, University of Oregon, Seattle University, University of Texas–Dallas, and University of Washington. Shane Shepherd, Shimon Kogan, and Javed Ahmed provided extensive research assistance. Martin Weber served as associate editor for this article.
Repurchase of Stocks lower subsequent returns (Odean 1998).1 One explanation for such behavior is that selling for a loss triggers strong negative emotions of regret and disappointment: regret over ever having bought the stock and disappointment over selling the stock for a loss. The act of selling focuses attention on the loss and makes it certain. The negative affect associated with continuing to hold a position for a loss may be mitigated by a lack of attention and by the hope that the stock will rebound. We analyze the trading behavior of investors who previously owned and sold a stock and investigate whether their experience with a stock affects their subsequent willingness to repurchase that stock. We depict these repurchase decisions in Figure 1. Consider the node Sold for Gain/Down since Sold. At this node, an investor is pleased with her initial purchase (having sold for a gain) and with her subsequent sale (having seen the stock drop subsequent to being sold). At this node, investors are likely to repurchase a stock, because the repurchase would intensify and prolong the positive emotions associated with the initial purchase, subsequent sale, and price change after the sale. The investor is repeating an action—buying the stock—that previously resulted in positive emotions; she is engaging in reinforcement learning. In contrast, consider the node Sold for Loss/Up since Sold. At this node, an investor regrets his initial purchase (having sold for a loss) and regrets his subsequent sale (having seen the price increase subsequent to the sale). The investor therefore avoids repurchasing because doing so intensifies and prolongs the negative emotions associated with the initial purchase, subsequent sale, and the price change after the sale. This investor is avoiding an action—buying the stock—that previously resulted in negative emotions. We develop formal hypotheses based on the assumption that investors are drawn to stocks that reinforce positive emotions and avoid purchasing stocks that reinforce negative emotions. Empirically we establish two previously undocumented patterns in the stock purchases and stock selections of individual investors. The first pattern shows that investors who previously have owned and sold a stock are less likely to buy that stock again if they lost money on the prior sale (Figure 1, Sold for Loss nodes). Analyzing trading records for 66,465 individual investors with accounts at a large discount brokerage and 596,314 individual investors with accounts at a large retail brokerage, we find that investors are significantly less likely to buy a stock that they sold in the previous year if that sale was for a loss rather than for a gain. We propose that this behavior is, at least in part, motivated by the instinct to avoid the pain of disappointment and regret. An investor who sells a stock for a loss is likely to be disappointed that the stock underperformed her expectations. She also is likely to regret having purchased the stock to begin with. Thus, the purchase of this stock leads to a painful experience, and people instinctively avoid repeating behavior that previously resulted in pain. Furthermore, repurchasing a previous loser provides a salient reminder of the previous loss whenever the investor 1 Jegadeesh and Titman (1993) show that stocks with strong (weak) returns in the recent past (3–12 months) go on to earn strong (weak) returns. This trend may help explain why stocks that individual investors sell for a gain tend to outperform the losers they keep.
ment choices are likely to be compared with two particularly salient counterfactuals: alternative outcomes that could have occurred with the same choice (e.g., an investor who buys a stock that goes down imagines that he would be wealthier if the stock had gone up) and outcomes from alternatives that could have been chosen but were not (e.g., an investor who buys a stock that goes down imagines that he would be wealthier had he not bought the stock). Comparisons of the imagined outcome with other outcomes of the chosen gamble lead to disappointment or elation; comparisons of the imagined outcome with an outcome of an unchosen gamble represent regret or rejoicing (Mellers and McGraw 2001).2 As Mellers et al. (1997, p. 423) explain, "Regret theory captures the anticipated emotional reaction 2 Throughout this article, we use the term "rejoicing" to denote the positive counterpart of regret, following Loomes and Sugden (1982). Other authors, including Shefrin and Statman (1985) and Muermann and Volkmann (2006), instead use "pride" to denote the positive counterpart of regret.
Repurchase of Stocks our sample period, though the average value of stocks sold ($13,707) was slightly higher than the average value of stocks purchased ($11,205). As a result, the aggregate values of purchases and sales were roughly equal ($12.1 and $12.2 billion, respectively). The average value of trades is positively skewed. The second data set contains information from a large retail brokerage firm with trading data for 30 months and position data for 18 months, both ending in June 1999. Using client ownership codes supplied by the brokerage firm, we limit our analysis to the 596,314 investors with nondiscretionary accounts (i.e., accounts classified as individual, joint tenants with rights of survival, or custodians for minors) and with at least one common stock trade during our sample period. Roughly 45% of the value of these accounts was held in common stocks (i.e., mutual fund and bond holdings are more common at the large retail brokerage). Trades in all securities exceeded 13.5 million; common stocks accounted for slightly more than 45% of all trades. Among the households with one common stock trade and month-end positions, the average household held 6.5 stocks with a total value of $123,413. We restrict our analysis to their common stock trades: 3,439,954 purchases with a mean value of $15,233 and an aggregate value of $52.4 billion and 2,766,543 sales with a mean value of $22,236 and an aggregate value of $61.5 billion.
Our second hypothesis posits that investors are less likely to repurchase stocks up since being sold than stocks down since being sold, which implies that the proportion of stocks up since being sold that are repurchased (PUR) is less than the proportion of stocks down since being sold that are repurchased (PDR). If past price patterns do not predict cross-sectional differences in future risk-adjusted returns, investors should be indifferent between repurchasing stocks that have gone up or down since they were sold, and our null hypothesis is PUR = PDR. Investors who sold a stock before a decline may take their fortuitous timing as evidence that they have superior information about that stock and, for this reason, buy it again. We do not dispute that some investors hold such 3 We restrict our analysis to stocks for which we know the purchase price. Thus, we analyze the same repurchases in Tables 1–3.
beliefs; however, we find no evidence that investors earn superior returns by repurchasing stocks that have lost value since they were sold. We discuss these and other alternative explanations for our findings in detail after presenting our main results. RESULTS Repurchase of Stocks Sold for a Gain Versus Stocks Sold for a Loss In Table 1, we present our calculations of PWR and PLR for both the discount broker and the retail broker data sets. Investors might be unwilling to repurchase stocks that were sold for a loss within 30 days of a sale, because doing so would prevent them from claiming the loss for tax purposes. To determine whether this or other tax considerations influence our results, we calculate the proportions separately for taxable and tax-deferred accounts.4 With both the large discount broker and the large retail broker and for both taxable and tax-deferred accounts, investors repurchase stocks previously sold for a gain at significantly higher rates than stocks previously sold for a loss. On average, the proportion of previous winners repurchased is approximately double the proportion of previous 4 In unreported analyses, we also calculate these proportions but exclude any repurchases within 30 days of the most recent sale of a stock. Doing so does not qualitatively change our results. This check supports our conclusion that the pattern is not influenced by tax considerations.
Notes: All counts are incremented only on days with purchases. The t-statistics test the null hypotheses that differences in proportions are equal to 0, assuming that all purchases and nonpurchases result from independent decisions.
Notes: All counts are incremented only on days with purchases. The t-statistics test the null hypotheses that the differences in proportions are equal to 0, assuming that all purchases and nonpurchases result from independent decisions.
The hazard ratio, exp(Âk ), is the ratio of hazard rates for two stocks with the same covariates, except that xk is one unit larger for the stock whose hazard rate is in the numerator. Thus, if xk is a dummy variable, the hazard ratio is the ratio of the hazard when the dummy variable takes on a value of 1 to the hazard when its value is 0, and all other covariates are the same. The Cox model makes no assumptions about how the baseline hazard rate changes over time, nor does it estimate the baseline hazard rate. However, the model assumes that hazard ratios do not change with time. For example, the model makes no assumptions about how the unconditional rate of repurchasing stocks changes from day 50 to day 100, but it assumes that if having sold a stock for a gain rather than a loss increases the hazard rate of repurchase by 20% on day 50, then it increases the hazard rate of repurchase by 20% on day 100.
is up (gray line) or down (black line) since the original sale, a sharp kink appears in the hazard rates at the middle of both graphs, when stocks move from the domain of losses to the domain of gains. If a stock originally sold for a loss (left-hand side of both graphs), the likelihood of repurchase drops nearly linearly with the magnitude of that loss, whereas if the stock originally sold for a gain (righthand side of both graphs), the likelihood of repurchase does not increase (or even drops slightly) with the magnitude of the gain. If investors are not repurchasing stocks originally sold for a loss because of regret and disappointment, the magnitudes of regret and disappointment appear to matter. In contrast, investors appear equally willing to repurchase a stock that caused greater or lower rejoicing and elation. The sharp kink at the point that losses change to gains is consistent with loss aversion.
Notes: Gray dashed lines indicate the stock price increased since being sold; black solid lines indicate the stock price decreased since being sold. Dotted lines refer to the 95% confidence interval.
Notes: Gray dashed lines indicate stock sold for a gain; black solid lines indicate stocks sold for a loss. Dotted lines reflect the 95% confidence interval.
the sale is negative rather than positive but of the same absolute value (e.g., −10% versus 10%). Again the magnitudes of regret and disappointment appear to have a greater influence on investors' behavior than the magnitudes of rejoicing and elation. However, for very large drops in price since the sale, repurchase rates start to drop. It may be that though investors like to repurchase stocks at a lower price than they sold, they also believe that past returns can be indicative of future returns. Thus, the emotional gains from repurchasing a stock that has dropped 50% since it was sold in the past year may be somewhat offset by the fear that it will continue to drop. ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS FOR THE RESULTS Investors prefer to repurchase stocks that they previously sold for a gain but that have gone down in price since they were sold. We argue that this behavior is driven by negative emotions, such as disappointment and regret, as well as their positive counterpart emotions, referred to in the literature as elation and rejoicing. Investors who buy a stock and sell it for a loss experience painful emotions, and simple reinforcement learning deters them from repeating the behavior that previously caused them pain. Keeping these stocks out of their portfolios allows investors to avoid painful reminders of their past failures. If an investor sells a stock for a gain and repurchases it at a higher price, she faces two salient counterfactuals: (1) If the stock had gone down, she could have repurchased it at a lower price, and (2) if she had not sold the stock, she would hold the same portfolio that she does today but be wealthier. These counterfactuals are sources of disappointment and regret. If the investor does not repurchase the stock, these painful counterfactuals are less salient and likely less prominent in her mind. If, however, the investor sells a stock for a gain and repurchases it at a lower price, her actual situation dominates the counterfactuals that suggest (1) if the stock had gone up instead of down, she might be buying it at a higher price, and (2) if she had not sold the stock, she would own the same portfolio as she does today but be less wealthy. Buying this stock triggers emotions of elation and rejoicing. We argue the behavior we have documented is motivated by emotional drivers, but there are other plausible explanations, three of which we test in this section. One alternative explanation for our findings is that investors might repurchase stocks previously sold for a gain at a lower price because such stocks subsequently outperform the market by enough to warrant this trading activity. Another alternative explanation that we test is that investors might repurchase stocks sold for a gain at a lower price because they believe that they have superior skill or information about these stocks. Finally, a third alternative explanation is that investors may repurchase such stocks because they believe that individual stock prices are mean reverting. In the next three subsections, we provide evidence that these alternative explanations are not the primary causes of the repurchase behavior we have documented. However, we do not claim that they might not play a role in some investors' decisions.
of small stocks minus the return on a value-weighted portfolio of big stocks, HMLt is the return on a value-weighted portfolio of high book-to-market (value) stocks minus the return on a value-weighted portfolio of low book-to-market (growth) stocks, and WMLt is the return on a valueweighted portfolio of recent winners minus the return on a value-weighted portfolio of recent losers. (The WML factor is labeled UMD, up minus down, in French's data library.) We report our results in Table 4. Using the CAPM, stocks repurchased since being sold for a gain that decrease in price since the sale underperform by 2.8 basis points per day, or seven percentage points per year (p < 005). The style-adjusted results show that these repurchases tend to feature high beta, small growth stocks. With this investment style, the abnormal performance, though nominally negative, is not reliably different from 0. We conclude that these purchases are not motivated by superior skill or information. It is also worth noting that the returns we estimate in Table 4 are before-transaction costs. Barber and Odean (2000) report that at the discount brokerage house, the average round-trip trade in excess of $1,000 costs 3% in commissions and 1% in bid–ask spreads. These transaction costs would further detract from the performance of repurchased stocks. Alternative Explanation 2: Perceived Skill Versus Emotion-Driven Repurchases If an investor sells a stock that subsequently declines in value, the investor may erroneously infer that he has the ability to time trades of that specific stock (particularly if he sold for a gain). Because he believes he has the ability to time trades in this stock, he may be more inclined to buy the stock again than if the stock price had appreciated after he sold it and he had inferred his ability to be low. Thus, the tendency to repurchase stocks that have dropped in price since they were sold could be driven not by emotions, as we propose, but by an attribution bias in which investors make incorrect inferences about their ability.
To distinguish between our explanation and the alternative explanation we explore here, we consider experimental evidence provided by Weber and Welfens (2011), as well as field-based evidence about how investors behave in a different situation from which they might infer their skill levels. In Weber and Welfens's (2011) experiments, participants receive cash and make purchase and sales decisions for shares in a risky asset over three trading periods. They earn rewards according to the terminal value of their shares and their terminal cash holdings. After each period, the share price of the risky asset increases by E.12 or decreases by E.10 with equal probability. In one condition, the respondents make their own purchase and sale decisions for all three periods; in a second condition, their first- and second-period trades are mandated, and they decide only their third-period trades. In the first condition, those who sell for a gain are far more likely to repurchase a stock if it is trading at a lower price, rather than at a higher price, compared with the price at which they sold it. This finding is consistent with the behavior we document. However, the distribution of returns is known (and simple), so the experimental participants cannot learn, or reasonably believe they are learning, more about the risky asset from their own experience. In the second condition, in which respondents do not choose their first two trades, there is only a small and statistically insignificant tendency to repurchase stocks that have gone down in price since they were sold, rather than those that have gone up. In the first condition, participants likely felt regret if they repurchased at a higher price than they sold, because they could have made the choice not to sell. In the second condition, they may have felt disappointment that the stock price went up rather than down after they sold; however, they should not feel regret, because they did not make the choices that led to their current situation. Weber and Welfens's finding that regret— not disappointment—drives the repurchase effect is similar to Summers and Duxbury's (2007) finding that regret, but not disappointment, is necessary to generate the disposition effect in a laboratory setting. As a complement to Weber and Welfens's (2011) experimental evidence, we look at the tendency of the investors in our two data sets to buy additional shares of stocks they already own. If investors infer stock-specific ability from their trading outcomes, an investor who buys a stock that subsequently drops in value should infer that her ability is low, whereas an investor who buys a stock that gains value after the purchase should infer that her ability is high. Thus, an investor who receives feedback that she is a skilled stock picker (i.e., stock price rises subsequent to her purchase) is more likely to continue buying the stock than an investor who receives negative feedback about her ability (i.e., stock price drops subsequent to her purchase).5 5 Daniel, Hirshleifer, and Subramanyam (1998) theorize that if investors buy a stock on the basis of private information and that information gets confirmed by public information, investors become overconfident about their private information and drive prices higher than would have otherwise been the case. Analyzing a data set of 10,000 individual investor accounts at a large discount brokerage for the period 1987–1993, Odean (1998) finds that investors are more likely to repurchase a stock they currently own if its price has decreased, rather than increased, in value, since they purchased it. Most investors in our data sets hold extremely undiversified portfolios of common stocks, but some investors may purchase additional shares of stocks that have lost value to rebalance their portfolio.
Alternative Explanation 3: Mean Reversion Versus Emotion-Driven Repurchases Investors are more likely to repurchase a stock that they previously sold if that stock is now trading for less than the price at which they sold it. An alternative to our emotionbased explanation for this phenomenon is that investors may (rightly or wrongly) believe that stock returns are mean reverting. Investors with this belief prefer to buy stocks with poor recent performance. As we discussed previously, Weber and Welfens (2011) obtain a repurchase effect in an experimental setting in which respondents know with certainty that returns are not mean reverting. We test this alternative; if investors simply believe that stock returns are mean reverting, their belief is likely to apply to both stocks they have previously owned and other stocks. We therefore partition investors who exhibit a preference for buying stocks at a lower price than they sold them for (i.e., 6 It is unlikely that an investor who bought a stock that declined in value would take it as an indication of his or her superior information about the stock. Nevertheless, in unreported results, available on request, we calculate the CAPM and four-factor risk-adjusted returns for a portfolio of currently owned stocks repurchased at a lower price and find a negative risk-adjusted return of just over 7% per year for the CAPM (t = 2049, p < 001). The four-factor alpha is negative but not reliably so. 7 Weber and Welfens (2011) also replicate in the laboratory the tendency of investors to purchase additional shares of stocks that have gone down but not those that have gone up since being sold. As with the repurchase effect, Weber and Welfens find that this pattern is more likely when participants make their initial purchase and sale decisions and thus are vulnerable to regret.
and for tax-deferred accounts, the results are qualitatively similar and statistically significant.6 Investors exhibit a clear preference for purchasing additional stocks they currently own when the stocks are trading at a lower price than the average purchase price rather than when the stocks are trading at a higher price. This finding is consistent with the preference for repurchasing stocks that they previously sold when the stocks were trading at a lower price than the original sale price, rather than when the stocks were trading at a higher price. However, the tendency to purchase additional shares of a stock on which the investor has lost money could be at odds with the tendency to avoid repurchasing stocks sold for a loss. There is, however, a salient difference between purchasing additional shares of a stock that has decreased in value since being purchased and repurchasing a stock that the investor previously sold for a loss. Once a stock is sold for a loss, the investor can choose to put that stock out of her mind and not even consider buying it again. However, the investor who still owns a stock will find it much harder to forget about that stock. If he buys additional shares at a lower price, he can be happy that he spread his purchases out and achieved a lower average purchase price than if he had simply bought all the shares initially; if he buys additional shares at a higher price, he will regret that he did not simply buy more shares at the original price.7 Buying additional shares of stocks that went down after the initial purchase is consistent with investors choosing trades that reduce regret and disappointment but not with investors purchasing additional shares of stocks for which they have received a positive signal about their skill.
selling it for a loss. Because many investors view their portfolios regularly, they also may desire to avoid painful reminders of their prior losses. We argue that the reluctance to repurchase stocks that have increased in price since they were sold helps investors avoid disappointment and regret. Investors who buy a stock at a higher price than they previously sold it for are disappointed that the stock rose after they sold it and regret the decision to sell. Investors who buy a stock at a lower price than they previously sold it for experience the joy of knowing they are better off than if they had never sold that stock. The phenomena identified here remind us that stock trading, similar to many other economic behaviors, is affected by emotions. It makes emotional sense that investors repurchase stocks that have decreased in value since being sold. Investors who do so feel the pleasure of making a choice that results in a better outcome than what might have been had they not previously sold the stock, while investors who repurchase at higher prices feel regret from knowing that they could have done better. Similarly, avoiding what has been a source of pain in the past is one of the most basic instincts that humans possess. Investors are unlikely to wish to repeat or be reminded of actions linked to their previous failures. Thus, it is not surprising that investors are attracted to stocks that have treated them well in the past but shy away from stocks by which they were once burned. REFERENCES Ackert, Lucy and Richard Deaves (2010), Behavioral Finance: Psychology, Decision-Making and Markets. Mason, OH: Cengage Publishing. Arkes, Hal, Yi-Han Kung, and Laura Hutzel (2002), "Regret, Valuation, and Inaction Inertia," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87 (2), 371–85. Barber, Brad M., Yi-Tsung Lee, Yu-Jane Liu, and Terrance Odean (2007), "Is the Aggregate Investor Reluctant to Realize Losses? Evidence from Taiwan," European Financial Management, 13 (3), 423–47. , , , and (2009), "Just How Much Do Investors Lose from Trade?" Review of Financial Studies, 22 (2), 609–632. and Terrance Odean (2000), "Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors," Journal of Finance, 55 (2), 773–806. and (2001), "Boys Will Be Boys: Gender, Overconfidence, and Common Stock Investment," Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116 (1), 261–92. , , and Ning Zhu (2009), "Systematic Noise," Journal of Financial Markets, 12 (4), 547–69. Barberis, Nicholas and Wei Xiong (2009), "What Drives the Disposition Effect? An Analysis of a Long-Standing PreferenceBased Explanation," Journal of Finance, 64 (2), 751–84. Baucells, Manel, Martin Weber, and Frank Welfens (2011), "Reference Point Formation and Updating," Management Science, 57 (March), 506–519. Bell, David (1982), "Regret in Decision Making Under Uncertainty," Operations Research, 30 (5), 961–81. (1985), "Disappointment in Decision Making Under Uncertainty," Operations Research, 33 (1), 1–27.
S119 Kahneman, Paul Slovic, and Amos Tversky, eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 201–208. Kaustia, Markku (2010), "Prospect Theory and the Disposition Effect," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 45 (4), 791–812. and Samuli Knupfer (2008), "Do Investors Overweight Personal Experience? Evidence from IPO Subscriptions," Journal of Finance, 63 (6), 2679–702. Li, Yan and Liyan Yang (2009), "Prospect Theory, the Disposition Effect and Asset Prices," working paper, Cornell University. Loewenstein, George (2000), "Emotions in Economic Theory and Economic Behavior," American Economic Review, 90 (2), 426–32. Loomes, Graham, and Robert Sugden (1982), "Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice Under Uncertainty," Economic Journal, 92 (368), 805–824. and (1986), "Disappointment and Dynamic Consistency in Choice Under Uncertainty," Review of Economic Studies, 53 (2), 271–82. Malmendier, Ulrike and Stephan Nagel (2011), "Depression Babies: Do Macroeconomic Experiences Affect Risk Taking?" Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126 (1), 373–416. Mellers, Barbara and Peter McGraw (2001), "Anticipated Emotions as Guides to Choice," Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10 (6), 210–14. , Alan Schwartz, Katty Ho, and Ilana Ritov (1997), "Decision Affect Theory: Emotional Reactions to the Outcomes of Risky Options," Psychological Science, 8 (5), 423–29. , , and Ilana Ritov (1999), "Emotion-Based Choice," Journal of Experimental Psychology, 128 (3), 332–45. Muermann, Alexander and Jacqueline Volkman (2006), "Regret, Pride, and the Disposition Effect," paper presented at American Finance Association Meetings, Boston. Odean, Terrance (1998), "Are Investors Reluctant to Realize Their Losses?" Journal of Finance, 53 (5), 1775–79. (1999), "Do Investors Trade too Much?" American Economic Review, 89 (5), 1279–98. Roese, Neal J. and James M. Olson (1995), "Counterfactual Thinking: A Critical Overview," in What Might Have Been: The Social Psychology of Counterfactual Thinking, Neal J. Roese and James M. Olson, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1–55. Seru, Amit, Tyler Shumway, and Noah Stoffman (2010), "Learning by Trading," Review of Financial Studies, 23 (2), 705–739. Shefrin, Hersh and Meir Statman (1985), "The Disposition to Sell Winners Too Early and Ride Losers Too Long: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Finance, 40 (3), 777–90. Shumway, Tyler and Guojun Wu (2005), "Does Disposition Drive Momentum?" working paper, University of Michigan. Summers, Barbara and Darren Duxbury (2007), "Unraveling the Disposition Effect: The Role of Prospect Theory and Emotions," working paper, Leeds University Business School. Thaler, Richard (1985), "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, 4 (3), 199–214. Tsiros, Michael (2009), "Releasing the Regret Lock: Consumer Response to New Alternatives After a Sale," Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (6), 1039–1059. and Vikas Mittal (2000), "Regret: A Model of Its Antecedents and Consequences in Consumer Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (4), 401–417.
Tykocinski, Orit and Thane Pittman (1998), "The Consequences of Doing Nothing: Inaction Inertia as Avoidance of Anticipated Counterfactual Regret," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 (3), 607–616. and (2001), "Product Aversion Following a Missed Opportunity: Price Contrast or Avoidance of Anticipated Regret?" Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 23 (3), 149–56.
, , and Erin Tuttle (1995), "Inaction Inertia: Foregoing Future Benefits as a Result of an Initial Failure to Act," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68 (5), 793–803. Weber, Martin and Frank Welfens (2011), "The Follow-On Purchase and Repurchase Behavior of Individual Investors: An Experimental Investigation," Die Betriebswirtschaft, 71 (2), 139–54.


text:
David Boreanaz stars in this horrifying thriller as a man who transforms his appearance and uses his newfound sex appeal to seduce the women who had tormented him. Adolescent indiscretions return to haunt four friends--Kate Paige, Lily, and Dorothy--who are now young adults. After a close friend's funeral, the women begin to receive strange, menacing Valentine's Day messages. When a detective links their friend's death to a boy they tormented in junior high school, each realizes she may know the vicious killer who hides behind a cherub's mask.
Jamie Blanks
Dylan Sellers
Grant Rosenberg
Bruce Berman
Donna Powers
Wayne Powers
Gretchen J. Berg
Aaron Harberts
David Boreanaz, Denise Richards, Marley Shelton, Katherine Heigl, Jessica Capshaw, Jessica Cauffiel
Critics Consensus: Valentine is basically a formulaic throwback to conventional pre-Scream slasher flicks. Critics say it doesn't offer enough suspense or scares to justify its addition to the genre.
Lisa Alspector
The contradictory sexual politics in this lightweight slasher suggest that at some point it was me...
Liam Lacey
In the new teen slasher flick Valentine, a public-school nerd, now grown up, seeks to systematical...
A cheesy horror flick that doesn't take itself too seriously.
Andrew O'Hehir
I had fun anyway.
Mick LaSalle
Valentine isn't scary, but it is unsettling; not ultimately satisfying, but arresting in the momen...
MovieFreak.com
Sara Michelle Fetters
Jamie Blanks' Valentine has aged rather well. A movie I didn't care for at the time of its release...
Daily Dead
What struck me about Valentine was just how smart the film is, and how it taps into these intrigui...
Real Queen of Horror
Zena Dixon
Valentine is far from perfect, but not a bad film.
Antagony & Ecstasy
A singularly direct and unchallenging example of the latter-day slasher film, made to a template t...
Poorly made and just stupid.
Parents need to know that kids will be upset by this horror movie's atrocious violence, the mean-spiritedness of just about every character, the lack of parental figures, and the ineffectiveness of the police. Characters are offed in grisly ways, most involving knives, but there's also an electrocution, death by iron, an axe to the back, a decapitation (off-screen), an arrow to the guts, and shooting. Women are stalked and receive threatening letters, and a young boy is unjustifiably teased and beaten. The women on display are sexually aggressive, and some of them die for it. Mature themes include murder, cruelty toward grade-school peers, alcoholism, unkindness among friends, and mocking "fat" girls.
Genre:Horror, Thriller
Release Date:February 2, 2001

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


The Wandering Scott was established in 2007 by Caroline and John Kohler, with Caroline running the day to day operations.
Caroline was born and raised in Ayrshire, Scotland and emigrated to Canada in 1995. Caroline regularly travelled out of town to satisfy her need for treats from back home. Caroline was searching for a variety of British products, more than what is generally available in Canadian retailers and other British food shops. This prompted her to start the journey to fulfill her dream of becoming a shop owner offering a wide selection of products.
The quest for the name of the shop was not a difficult one. Caroline wanted to include her family name "Scott", and "Wandering" seemed fitting to represent all the Scots, English, Irish and Welsh who have also "wandered" over the pond.
Copyright © 2011, The Wandering Scott, All Rights Reserved.


Apple closed at 105.68 on Thursday (short week due to Good Friday), after having closed the previous week at 105.92. Two of our AAPL strategies had in-the-money options near the close so we bought them back and sold new options for the Apr 1 expiration. We also rolled two strategies that had out of the money options expiring on Thursday.
With that, we knew that to get 12% return for the year (which includes unpaid, but expected, dividends) we need 19 cents per week for the 40 remaining weeks in time premium. When examining the choices just before Thursday's close we saw the deepest in-the-money option we could sell that provided at least 19 cents of time premium was the 103-strike.
To stay on track for a 24% return for the year (which includes unpaid, but expected, dividends) we need 41 cents per week for the remaining 40 weeks in time premium. When examining the choices just before Thursday's close we saw the deepest in-the-money option we could sell that provided at least 41 cents of time premium was the 104-strike.
This strategy is simple to implement and track. Each Friday we either let the option expire (if OTM) and wait until the following Monday morning to write a new option, or buy the option back (if ITM) and then sell another option right away. The reason we treat OTM and ITM slightly differently is to optimize for transaction costs -- rather than buy back the OTM option for 5 cents at the close on Friday we just let it expire.
This strategy is also simple to implement and track. Each Friday we either let the option expire (if OTM) and wait until the following Monday morning to write a new option, or buy the option back (if ITM) and then sell another option right away.


text:
Meghan and Harry spend their first Thanksgiving in the US with Archie and Doria
Victoria Ward
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex - Max Mumby/Indigo
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex celebrated their first Thanksgiving as a family in the US on Thursday, sitting down to homegrown vegetables from the garden.
The couple were looking forward to a "quiet dinner" with their one-year-old son Archie at their home in Monetcito, California, after the Duchess garnered widespread praise for speaking out about the pain of suffering a miscarriage.
They were also joined by the Duchess's mother, Doria Ragland, who lives in Los Angeles.
A source said: "They are going to have a quiet dinner at home and are looking forward to celebrating their first American Thanksgiving in the states as a family.
"They plan to enjoy a home cooked meal with traditional Thanksgiving dishes, including recipes made with fresh vegetables from their garden."
The family is likely to have sat down to the traditional meal of roast turkey, stuffing, mashed potatoes, gravy, green beans, corn, cranberry sauce and pumpkin pie. It has been a tumultuous year since the Sussexes left the UK last November to spend their first Thanksgiving as a family-of-three in Canada.
They published a Happy Thanksgiving message on their now defunct SussexRoyal Instagram account and later released a photograph, taken that day, of a beaming Duke holding Archie at the waterfront home they had rented on Vancouver Island.
Prince Harry with Archie on Thanksgiving in 2019 - SussexRoyal
At the time it was billed as an extended, six-week break but the family would never return to live in the UK, only popping back to tie up loose ends having decided to step away from their lives as working royals.
The Duchess was this week widely praised for publishing a deeply personal account of the miscarriage she suffered in July.
Baby loss charities said the article, published in the New York Times, would send a "powerful message" to others who have gone through similar trauma. The Duchess noted that the subject remained "taboo" despite being experienced by so many.
Lalu Yadav slams Bihar govt over increasing crime rate
New Delhi [India], January 18 (ANI): Slamming the National Democratic Alliance government in Bihar, former Chief Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav on Monday said crime has doubled in the state under Chief Minister Nitish Kumar's rule.


text:
Q: SQL Express 2014 instance not removed on uninstall I am trying to set up an installation, with sql express 2014 as a prerequisite. The installation itself works fine, but when uninstalling, the instance is not removed. I can still access it through my sql manager and find it in the registry.
This is my Chain:
<Chain>
        <ExePackage
            Id="Netfx4Full"
            Name="dotNetFx40_Full_x86_x64.exe"
            Cache="no"
            Compressed="no"
            PerMachine="yes"
            Permanent="yes"
            Vital="yes"
            SourceFile="packages\dotNetFx40_Full_x86_x64.exe"
            DownloadUrl="https://download.microsoft.com/download/9/5/A/95A9616B-7A37-4AF6-BC36-D6EA96C8DAAE/dotNetFx40_Full_x86_x64.exe"
            DetectCondition="Net4FullVersion AND (NOT VersionNT64 OR Net4x64FullVersion)"
            InstallCondition="(VersionNT < v6.0 OR VersionNT64 < v6.0) AND (NOT (Net4FullVersion OR Net4x64FullVersion))">
        </ExePackage>

        <PackageGroupRef Id="Sql2014Express"/>

        <RollbackBoundary />

        <MsiPackage Id="MainPackage" SourceFile="MyApplication.msi" DisplayInternalUI="yes" Compressed="yes" Vital="yes" />
    </Chain>

This is my ExePackage:
<PackageGroup Id="Sql2014Express">
    <ExePackage Id="SQL2014Expressx64"
                InstallCondition="VersionNT64 AND NOT SQL2014x64InstanceInstalled"
                SourceFile="packages\SQLEXPR_x64_ENU.exe"
                DownloadUrl="$(var.SqlWebLink64)"
                DisplayName="Installing Microsoft SQL Express 2014"
                InstallCommand="/ACTION=Install /INSTANCENAME=$(var.InstanceName) /FEATURES=SQLENGINE /Q /HIDECONSOLE /SkipRules=RebootRequiredCheck /IAcceptSQLServerLicenseTerms /SQLSVCSTARTUPTYPE=Automatic /SQLSVCACCOUNT="NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE" /AGTSVCACCOUNT="NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE" /ASSYSADMINACCOUNTS=BUILTIN\Administrators /SQLSYSADMINACCOUNTS=BUILTIN\Administrators /BROWSERSVCSTARTUPTYPE=Disabled /ADDCURRENTUSERASSQLADMIN=true /TCPENABLED=1"
                UninstallCommand="/Action=Uninstall /INSTANCENAME=$(var.InstanceName) /FEATURES=SQLENGINE /Q /HIDECONSOLE"
                Cache="yes"
                    Vital="yes"
                Compressed="no"
                PerMachine="yes"
                Permanent="no"/>
...
        </PackageGroup>

From what i understand, the Permanent="no", should take care of removing the package on uninstall. I have even included and UninstallCommand, but this does not remove the instance either.
What am I missing here?
Let me know if any other info is required to solve this. - Thx!

A: Exe packages require a DetectCondition to be able to verify whether or not the package is installed. If you notice in your .net exepackage you have
DetectCondition="Net4FullVersion AND (NOT VersionNT64 OR Net4x64FullVersion)"

This tells the installer that this package is installed iff the condition is true. You have to do the same thing in your SQL exe package.
DetectCondition is

A condition that determines if the package is present on the target system. This condition can use built-in variables and variables returned by searches. This condition is necessary because Windows doesn't provide a method to detect the presence of an ExePackage. Burn uses this condition to determine how to treat this package during a bundle action; for example, if this condition is false or omitted and the bundle is being installed, Burn will install this package.

You can do this by creating some registry searches which set some variables. Try this registry search
<util:RegistrySearch
        Id='MicrosoftSQLInstalledCheck'
        Root='HKLM'
        Key='SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Microsoft SQL Server\$(var.InstanceName)\Setup'
        Win64='yes'
        Value='SQLPath'
        Result='exists'
        Variable='MicrosoftSQLInstalled'/>

Then in your ExePackage for SQL you can put DetectCondition="MicrosoftSQLInstalled" and that will be true if the registry search found the SQLPath registry entry in the key specified.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Friday Buff Bites
By Bob_Bell May 29, 2009, 12:00pm MDT
Share All sharing options for: Friday Buff Bites
First up, former Buff QB Matt Ballenger will sign with College of Idaho to play basketball.
The College of Idaho announced that former Skyview High standout and University of Colorado quarterback Matt Ballenger will sign an NAIA letter of intent to play basketball beginning next season at the College of Idaho.
Best of luck to Matt playing basketball.
Kyle Ringo from the Boulder Daily Camera caught up with Kendrick Celestine, former Buffs wide receiver who is coming back to Boulder and hoping to walk-on in the future. He has got his personal issues figured out and under control which is always the first priority. Now, if he wants to come back, it is about getting eligible and getting back in shape. Bad news is that if he does come back, he will not be ready for 2009, according to Ringo:
Asked via e-mail this week about the possibility of Celestine rejoining the program, Hawkins said he hadn't even heard from his former wideout recently.
There is no hope of Celestine playing this fall because he has so much ground to make up academically. He said he hopes to treat the next year as a redshirt year because he hasn't done much in the weight room either since quitting the team.
This is a good public service link that reminds us high school and college athletes read these blogs, these boards, etc. A 2010 Wisconsin commit has decommitted based on what he read on a message board of Wisconsin. The commit has had some struggles academically in high school, as most have, which somehow led Badger fans to question the kid's integrity, character, attitude or whatever. Like Gary Parrish of CBS sports says, it isn't an indictment on Wisconsin fans, it is just evident that we need to watch who we criticize and how we do it in our posts and in your comments. Not saying we are bad at that or we need to work on it, just a reminder though because I certainly don't want to run a site that might make the Buffs lose a commit.
IInside Bay Area.com has an article on Cal's ability to recruit top quarterbacks, most notably known as the Elite 11. With the commit of Hinder, the Bears now have four Elite 11 (known as the best eleven high school quarterbacks in a given year) quarterbacks.
With the oral commitment earlier this week of Steamboat Springs, Colo., quarterback Austin Hinder, the Bears are on pace to have a gaggle of former prep All-America signal-callers in 2010. If they all remain at Cal, the Bears could have four players who were selected for the Elite 11 camp, an honor reserved for the best high school quarterbacks in the country.
"They are probably the only school that seems like every year they get an Elite 11 guy," ESPNRISE.com recruiting analyst Greg Biggins said. "They definitely have the most guys."
A shakeup has to happen right? Hopefully we are there to catch them as the fall.


Time Machine lets you restore files from local snapshots of the files on your Mac, even when your Time Machine backup disk isn't available.
Your Time Machine backup disk might not always be available, so Time Machine also stores some of its backups on your Mac. These backups are called local snapshots.
If you enter Time Machine when your backup disk isn't available, Time Machine automatically uses local snapshots to help you restore files. Reconnect your backup disk to make even more backups available.
You don't need to think about how much storage space local snapshots are using, because they don't use space needed for tasks like downloading files, copying files, or installing new software.
Your Mac counts the space used by snapshots as available storage. Even so, Time Machine stores snapshots only on disks that have plenty of free space, and it automatically deletes snapshots as they age or as space is needed for other things.
Open Time Machine preferences from the Time Machine menu in the menu bar. Or choose Apple menu  > System Preferences, then click Time Machine.
Deselect "Back Up Automatically" or click the Off/On switch, depending on what you see in Time Machine preferences.
Wait a few minutes to allow the local snapshots to be deleted. Then turn on Time Machine again. It remembers your backup disks.
Time Machine saves one snapshot of your startup disk approximately every hour, and keeps it for 24 hours. It keeps an additional snapshot of your last successful Time Machine backup until space is needed. And in High Sierra or later, another snapshot is saved before installing any macOS update.


Type 1's run on insulin. We need it to live, every moment of every day, without lapse. And we are all acutely aware of the skyrocketing prices for all insulins … and there are NO generic options available. We have NO CHOICE!
The chart below shows the % rise in prices over the past five, til 2015 … 2016 isn't even in this chart! 325% increase for Humulin?
Here's a great and very frustrating article by Mike Hoskins of DiabetesMine, who approached the Big Three Insulin Makers (Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi) for some "straight answers" to the issue of skyrocketing insulin prices. It's a long post but so very telling … without any suggestions for any way to remedy the situation.
From Craig Idlebrook's InsulinNation, March 24, 2015, here is a small guide to resources and suggestions on how to pay for diabetes treatment. As Craig says at the end of his article: This list in no way should be considered complete. If you know of other resources out there, email our editor at cidlebrook@insulinnation.com and we'll add them.
What New Diabetes Technologies by Mid-2017 in the US?


The Nokia N810 comes from the Internet Tablet breed, in other words, it's a device tweaked for Web browsing, or, putting it simply, a portable Internet browser with a handful of multimedia features thrown in for good measure.
The variety of device types aimed at one particular niche normally signifies that this market is currently emerging.
Brought about as a promising branch, Internet Tablet devices became the proving grounds for quite a bunch of innovations that will be embedded into mass-market devices down the road.
Nokia is trying to create a portable device for accessing the Web, easy communications, and, somewhere down the road, a complement to the mobile phone, a very potent secondary device.
This niche appears to have some potential, but where the market will go is being decided these days already – whether Internet Tablets will become widely adopted in the next few years, or they won't make it as mass-market devices and will rather hand over their functionality to mobile phones. But regardless of the way it goes, Nokia's Internet Tablets are among this segment's strongest players today.


Bell 's palsy causes inability to close the eye because of paralysis of the muscle called 'Orbicularis Oculi'.
This can lead to dryness of the cornea, ulceration of the cornea and even blindness. Goldweight implant is a flat metallic implant that is placed under the skin and muscle of the upper eyelid. With the increased weight of the upper eyelid gravity pulls the lid down to close it.
My approach: I like to use only light sedation for this procedure and keep the patient reclined but not completely flat. This allows easy assessment of complete eyelid closure.
Q. How soon after a Bell's Palsy can I have a goldweight implant?
A. After one month. If the Bell's Palsy does not resolve in 2 to 3 weeks, then it might take up to a year to resolve. In this situation the sooner the eye is protected the better.
Q. Which doctor should I see for this procedure?
A. You should first see your Ophthalmologist to rule out any immediate issues. After that you will be referred to either an Oculplastic Surgeon or a Facial Plastic Surgeon.
Q. I am allergic to gold, can I still get goldweight?
A. No, you cannot but there is a similar platinum based implant that can be used.


Our A2 book scanner fixture is made with 1/2" lightweight Sintra and is hinged for up to 180-degree openings. Magnetic catches prevent inadvertent opening. Each comes with two Device level targets and eight satellite SFR targets for measuring resolution, SFR, and illumination non-uniformity over the entire platen area. Finger pull depressions are provided to allow easy removal and replacement of each target element. Target elements are also held in place with neodymium magnets to prevent targets from falling out during transport or vertical mounting.
Note: This size target is suitable for most book scanning units such as Atiz BookDrives, DigitalTransitions BCS, Qidenus, and most other book cradle devices.
It is NOT suitable for Kirtas/Kabis automatic book scanning stations or Triventus Book Scanners. For Kirtas/Kabis Book scanners see 11 x 14 in size Book Scanner Fixture.


To renew a huddle or complete registration of a new huddle, please enter your huddle name below and click button to continue.
To start a new huddle, please contact us. We would love to sit down with you and talk about how to start a new huddle and connect you with one of our local staff people.


text:
PQ Systems turns to the Reprise License Manager (RLM) for concurrent-user Licensing Solution
Summary: "The license sharing feature provided in RLM's product was another important component of PQ Systems' decision-making. The company wanted to consume only one license token even when a user runs multiple instances of a protected application on a computer. Other vendors did not offer the license sharing, nor did they allow sharing licenses on a per-user basis under terminal services."
About PQ Systems:
When PQ Systems, Inc. needed a solution that would allow the software development company to offer concurrent-user licenses to customers, the firm turned to RLM.
"We looked at a number of potential licensing vendors," says Bob Sledge, software developer, "but RLM offered the product that best fit our needs."
One consideration was the appeal of a local license server, rather than a "license server in the cloud," Sledge points out. "We did not want our customers to require internet access in order to use our software."
The license sharing feature provided in RLM's product was another important component of PQ Systems' decision-making. The company wanted to consume only one license token even when a user runs multiple instances of a protected application on a computer. Other vendors did not offer the license sharing, nor did they allow sharing licenses on a per-user basis under terminal services. "This was a big plus for us," says Sledge.
A final consideration was the cost of RLM, which unlike some of its competitors, does not require the vendor to "sell an organ to be able to afford it," Sledge says.
PQ Systems, Inc., is a developer of software products that support improvement of products and processes in a variety of industries. PQ Systems was incorporated in 1984, when the first version of its popular SQCpack software program was released, concomitant to its consulting services to help companies improve products and services using data analysis. Since that time, the firm has expanded its product line to include software programs for measurement systems analysis, design of experiments, and charting from existing databases. Its markets, too, have broadened, from manufacturing to healthcare and education, as organizations have increasingly realized the benefits of process analysis for quality improvement. Among its technology customers are Agilent Technologies, Raytheon, Texas Instruments, and Medtronic.
With headquarters in Dayton, OH, the company has offices in Australia and UK as well. Among its best-selling process control and charting products are SQCpack and CHARTrunner, as well as GAGEpack. Committed to helping customers improve, the company provides on-site and general subscription training services and training materials. Website: http://www.pqsystems.com.
Computer Modeling Group, LTD Licenses The Reprise License Manager (RLM)
Kineo Licenses the Reprise License Manager (RLM)


Recording of Session IV, "Borderlife and the Religious Imagination" by Daisy L. Machado at the Spring Institute for Lived Theology in San Diego, California. This presentation, held in San Diego's Peace and Justice Theatre, was open to the public. During her talk, Machado explores the intersections of race, religion, and the U.S./Mexico border to show how these have come together in popular religious beliefs and practices to both respond to and shape life for Latino communities in the borderlands. Attention is given to the themes of curanderismo and healing as found in traditional curandero figures such as Niño Fidencio, Teresita Urrea, Don Pedro Jaramillo and the more contemporary unorthodox figure of Santa Muerte. Machado addresses how these religious beliefs and practices also respond to the realities of borderlands life such as poverty, displacement, immigration, invisibility and violence.


Even as the Supreme Court has dismissed a petition filed by Ramesh C Bawa, former chief executive officer (CEO) of IL&FS Financial Services (IFIN), the man himself appears to have given investigation agencies like the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) the slip.
According to sources, Mr Bawa has stopped using his old mobile number and is not traceable. Sources close to Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services (IL&FS) told us that he had changed his SIM card.
When Moneylife tried calling Mr Bawa on his mobile number, it was, indeed, switched off. Mr Bawa lives at Greater Kailash Part 1 in New Delhi. On enquiring at his home landline number, we were told that he was not at home. The person who answered the call, passed the phone to 'madam', who we assume was his wife. She informed us that she was unaware of Mr Bawa's whereabouts and that she had no idea if he had plans for any other legal action.
However, it is surprising that the SFIO and other government agencies, that are investigating the fraud, have lost track of him. Highly placed sources tell us that there are frantic attempts to track him down at various places where he is known to have assets, including Chandigarh and Pithampur.
The SFIO, which is probing the IL&FS fraud, had issued summons to several former senior executives of IL&FS, including Mr Bawa. As much as 90% of the loans advanced by IFIN, the lending arm of the infrastructure conglomerate IL&FS, have turned bad. Interpol notices have been issued against all the key members of the management cabal that worked closely with Ravi Parthasarathy, founder of IL&FS, who ruled the 346 company conglomerate with unfettered powers and pliant boards for over 25 years.
Corporate observers are also stunned that the government seems to be treating those associated with IL&FS with kid gloves, especially when ordinary investors in mutual funds have begun to bear the brunt of investments made in IL&FS companies.
So far, only the former vice-chairman Hari Sankaran, has been arrested, that too only last month. His arrest saw Mr Bawa hiring some of the most expensive lawyers in the country to challenge the SFIO's powers to arrest and to get protection for himself from the courts. However, his plea was not entertained either by the Bombay High Court or the Supreme Court.
On Wednesday, a bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi told senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, "We are sorry to deny you any relief in the matter. Petition to be dismissed." Mr Rohatgi, the counsel for Mr Bawa told the Court that his client fears arrest in the case, as "SFIO proceedings under Companies Act was completely illegal".
As reported by Moneylife , almost 90% of the loans advanced by IFIN have turned bad underlining the deep corruption and culpability of the previous management. Of its loan book of Rs18,805 crore, Rs10,656 crore was lent to third-party borrowers and nearly Rs7,000 crore to group companies, N Sivaraman, chief operating officer at IL&FS group, has revealed.
The ex senior management of the ILFS is indeed being treated with kidgloves by the Govt and regulatory authorities. The situation at ILFS ( and every other major such cases coming to light ) are not overnight developments. These have been the outcome of the crises building up over the years and decades, sadly due to the attitude of greed, apathy , ticking all the checkboxes approach followed by the statutory & regulatory authorities following the law in letter and not in spirit by the people who were to act in Fiduciary capacity. The impact of the ILFS, may still be unravelling, and probably the worst is yet to be seen ! Its going to be the gullible small investors who end up bearing the brunt- as we do not know when and if at all the crooks will be brought to book and how will the investors be compensated.


RNC is a multi-asset mineral resource company focused primarily on the acquisition, exploration, evaluation and development of base metal and precious metal properties. RNC's principal assets are a 28% stake in the JV that owns the Dumont Nickel Project located in the established Abitibi mining camp in Quebec, 100% ownership of the producing Beta Hunt gold and nickel mine in Western Australia, and a 27% stake in the producing Reed Mine in the Flin Flon-Snow Lake region of Manitoba, Canada. RNC also owns a 35% interest in Orford Mining Corporation, a mineral explorer focused on highly prospective and underexplored areas of Northern Quebec and the Carolina Gold Belt in the United States. RNC has a strong management team and Board with more than 100 years of mining experience. RNC's common shares trade on the TSX under the symbol RNX. RNC also trades on the OTCQX market under the symbol RNKLF.


Add some flare to spark the holiday spirit. We use fresh Southern Magnolia to create each of our unique wreaths.
Our wreaths are made with fresh Southern Magnolia.
Your choice of ribbon is included. Available in two sizes.


A glorious May afternoon in Unst, warm but breezy, so I went for a walk along Sandwick Beach.
A beautiful sandy beach for a walk, but also lots of interest to see.
Evidence of an otter about, and a very brief glimpse before he disappeared into a burrow to rest up in the heat of the day, postprandial rest maybe!
The Sandwick area has been occupied throughout history and traces of the various occupants (pictish/late iron age, norse) have been documented.
Excavations have unearthed some of the stories (see the Sandwick Report).
An earlier excavation further along the beach shows a Viking longhouse.
Much later there was a settlement of crofts above the beach, until those were cleared or abandoned.
"Rudgings" – heaps of stones that have been carefully gathered off the rigs (fields).
Further along from the end of the beach, along the headland, there is a churchyard with a chapel at Framgord.
Sandwick burial ground – Some of the headstones date to medieval times.
In a corner of the yard there are three graves, three members of the crew of S/S "Hop" from Bergen, torpedoed 4.2.1940. The small Norwegian freighter had a crew of 15 and all were lost.
Well worth walking through the area, glimpsing traces of the history.
A trail for the area can be downloaded at the Shetland Amenity Website.
This entry was posted in Unst Shetland. Bookmark the permalink.
It was a really lovely walk Tracey.
When one knows the history of the area as you do, Rhoda, the walk has a deeper meaning. These photos are so clear and detailed I felt like you were guiding me along the way.
I love that walk, and have done it many times.
Love your posts Morag. Just about to investigate your take on Family trees. I see you have a little snippet there.
I have various little snippets of family trees in posts that are about discoveries as I build the Unst Family Tree. Do you have Unst (or Shetland) heritage?


text:
Q: Android battery level intent crashes with java.util.UnknownFormatConversionException: Conversion = 'p' I have a really strange crash quite hard to reproduce as my code works 99,999999% of the time.
I'm on Android API 25. I read the battery level thanks to the Battery changed intents:
class BatteryService {
    val batteryLevelPercent = Observable.using(
        {
            val rxObserver = BehaviorSubject.create<Int>()

            val receiver = object : BroadcastReceiver() {
                override fun onReceive(arg0: Context, intent: Intent) {
                    val level = intent.getIntExtra(BatteryManager.EXTRA_LEVEL, 0)
                    rxObserver.onNext(level)
                    Timber.i("battery level = $level")
                }
            }

            context.registerReceiver(receiver, IntentFilter(Intent.ACTION_BATTERY_CHANGED))

            receiver to rxObserver
        },
        { (_, observer) -> observer },
        { (receiver, _) ->
            context.unregisterReceiver(receiver)
        }
    ).replay(1)
        .refCount()

Easy, but in the rare cases I got crashes the battery was very low, about 0 to 1%. I got this exception:
io.reactivex.internal.functions.Functions$Array2Func.apply Functions.java, line 529
java.util.UnknownFormatConversionException: Conversion = 'p'
java.util.Formatter$FormatSpecifier.conversion Formatter.java:2730
java.util.Formatter$FormatSpecifier.<init> Formatter.java:2759
java.util.Formatter$FormatSpecifierParser.<init> Formatter.java:2591
java.util.Formatter.parse Formatter.java:2524
java.util.Formatter.format Formatter.java:2472
java.util.Formatter.format Formatter.java:2426
java.lang.String.format String.java:2626
com.telecomdesign.amelia.settings.menu.advanced.systemUpdate.SystemUpdateViewModel$$special$$inlined$combineLatest$1.apply Observables.kt:252
io.reactivex.internal.functions.Functions$Array2Func.apply Functions.java:529
io.reactivex.internal.functions.Functions$Array2Func.apply Functions.java:516
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableCombineLatest$LatestCoordinator.drain ObservableCombineLatest.java:197
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableCombineLatest$LatestCoordinator.innerNext ObservableCombineLatest.java:237
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableCombineLatest$CombinerObserver.onNext ObservableCombineLatest.java:306
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableCombineLatest$LatestCoordinator.drain ObservableCombineLatest.java:208
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableCombineLatest$LatestCoordinator.innerNext ObservableCombineLatest.java:237
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableCombineLatest$CombinerObserver.onNext ObservableCombineLatest.java:306
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableMap$MapObserver.onNext ObservableMap.java:62
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableRefCount$RefCountObserver.onNext ObservableRefCount.java:208
io.reactivex.internal.util.NotificationLite.accept NotificationLite.java:246
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableReplay$BoundedReplayBuffer.replay ObservableReplay.java:698
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableReplay$ReplayObserver.replay ObservableReplay.java:401
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableReplay$ReplayObserver.onNext ObservableReplay.java:366
io.reactivex.internal.operators.observable.ObservableUsing$UsingObserver.onNext ObservableUsing.java:104
io.reactivex.internal.util.NotificationLite.accept NotificationLite.java:246
io.reactivex.subjects.BehaviorSubject$BehaviorDisposable.test BehaviorSubject.java:569
io.reactivex.subjects.BehaviorSubject$BehaviorDisposable.emitNext BehaviorSubject.java:564
io.reactivex.subjects.BehaviorSubject.onNext BehaviorSubject.java:268
com.mypackage.BatteryServiceDefault$batteryLevelPercent$1$receiver$1.onReceive BatteryService.kt:29

The "BatteryService.kt:29" line is rxObserver.onNext(level). I suppose the crash does not come from RX but from the intent as it has certainly be inlined by the compiler. My theory is that the intent extra level is not properly formatted but contains a p instead of an integer that it can't convert string to int.
Did someone already report that ? Might it be an android bug in the battery level border cases ?
Thanks in advance if you have any clue.


My ADSL modem is a Netgear DG384, it's a relatively old thing, but still does the job it's meant to do pretty well.
My ISP limits my bandwidth if I use too much, so I wanted to be able to monitor my usage.
To get this information into a database I added some tables to my "house" database, one table for each interface.
The script gets the data from the DG384, pipes it through sed to convert the colon to a space, pipes that through awk to extract the fields I'm interested in and then pipes that to mysql to put the data into a database. Note that the name of the interface, i.e. $1 is used as the name of the table.