I bought GS, JPM and MTB last week. I see longer term opportunities in financials.

I'm feeling the same way, though it's difficult to stay convinced, right about now.
In my financials fund PRISX, I'm down since inception of the account by -17%.
I'm faring better with my single-stock bet, BHB. Down since inception by -7.5%.
I thought a regional bank serving those quiet places in northern New England might be immune. But, no. Knock-on effect, surely. The stock is down by -21% at the moment, YTD. I smell bargain.

+1.

I have to look back and see how these layoffs and cutbacks compare to other ones for GOOGL etc.
A number of my son's college friends (class of 2014) went to work there and APPL etc and crowed about how great they had it. Massages 24/7 free food all day etc. Some of them didnt bother getting an apartment, they just slept in their spacious offices, ate free showered in the gym etc.
GOOGL would let you work anywhere in the world you wanted to and I think provided low cost housing there.
They told him he was crazy for going into English and teaching
The party may be coming to an end.

Ty so much seem very bad products underthe hoods
Might as well trade weekly Tsla csp, Likely more premiums incomes if do Delta 14 12

I don't get fascination in yield for its own sake. Why would one pay (in the form of negative total return) just to get some of one's own money back as divs?
Lifetime total return of TSLY (using Yahoo's adjusted NAV figures) -1.6%
Nov 23 - Apr 3, 16.45/16.72 - 1 = -0.0161 = -1.6%
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/TSLY/history?p=TSLY
Lifetime total return of OARK (using Yahoo's adjusted NAV figures) -5.1%
Nov 25 - Apr 3, 14.46 / 17.35 - 1 = -0.0513 = -5.1%
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/OARK/history?p=OARK
A very quick glance at OARK suggests it is using a strategy similar to principal protected (structured) notes, but with additional risks.
It clearly isn't achieving its stated goal of providing long exposure to ARKK via derivatives while generating income with covered calls. ARKK is up about 11% Nov 25 - Apr 3 (36.00 to 39.58, price movement). OARK not only failed to capture any part of this gain, it lost money even after generating income with "covered" calls and Treasuries.
Even YTD, OARK is up 4.57% (total return). ARKK (price) is up over 25%. (OARK's gains are capped; how much of the shortfall is explained by this cap, and how much by its strategy and/or poor execution?)
Gut feeling is that its failure to meet objectives is due in part to daily pricing as opposed to point-to-point pricing generally used by structured notes coupled with a volatile underlying security. But that's really just a superficial reaction.
Note: the subject line has a typo: TSLY, not TSLS

Seems foolish to me: https://realmoney.thestreet.com/investing/ets/tsly-tk-16109970
These are highly volatile strategies so you have to be a smart trader or speculator to play them correctly, not a long-term investor. But also I believe the fees are 1%, very high for ETFs. Finally, if investors are sophisticated enough to trade these well, they could also design an options strategy that mimics them without paying the fees.
In fact, because of regulatory restrictions on ETFs with single security exposure like Tesla, these ETFs are actually overly complex covered call strategies. One could easily buy Tesla and write a call option on it for the income without paying these fees. Instead this TSLY creates a synthetic ownership of Tesla stock by writing put options to skirt the concentration rules in ETFs. That is not necessary if you do this yourself.

Giroux just moved GE from his Top 5, even Top 10, but GE +GEHC (spinoff) combo still had the weight of 1.84% of AUM on 12/31/22. So, that was down from 2.00-2.25% of AUM earlier (Edit: GE topped at 4.7% of AUM in early-2022) . I think that he will stick with GE until the last spinoff happens next year (Power Vernova). Since October low, GE has done quite well when mid-December spinoff GEHC is taken into account. When GE was his #4 or #5, it was just too much distraction for him in the media as he was asked about it in almost every media interview.

Yes. And frankly I think him (or anyone) holding GEHC and their Aviation group spinoff (whenever it happens) will do well in the long term. I'm interested in them myself.

Giroux just moved GE from his Top 5, even Top 10, but GE +GEHC (spinoff) combo still had the weight of 1.84% of AUM on 12/31/22. So, that was down from 2.00-2.25% of AUM earlier (Edit: GE topped at 4.7% of AUM in early-2022) . I think that he will stick with GE until the last spinoff happens next year (Power Vernova). Since October low, GE has done quite well when mid-December spinoff GEHC is taken into account. When GE was his #4 or #5, it was just too much distraction for him in the media as he was asked about it in almost every media interview.

+1
In fairness, I don’t anticipate TRP doing that. What I see is investors chasing performance and the fund has been hot and attracting interest / money for a long time now. And Giroux, for better or worse, has claimed a lofty perch next to Gabelli, Cohen and other rock stars in Barron’s “Roundtable” two years running. I was a bit surprised he was invited back a second time in light of a couple of his early 2022 calls. Specifically a fondness for AMZ (which tanked shortly thereafter) plus a prediction the 10-year wouldn’t end the year above 3% - or some silly number. One wonders if that kind of fame and public scrutiny helps, harms, or has no effect on a manager’s psyche and decision making ability.

Yeah Hank, I agree..... and don't forget his mea culpa on GE last year, too. But he strikes me as a fairly grounded person and not exactly comfortable doing interviews (TV, anyway) so we'll see.
I suspect you're right that investors will see Giroux' name and rush into the ETF thinking it's a magic wand. Time will tell.

Japan's Sakhalin exception was done LAST YEAR while formulating the oil price-cap policy, https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2022/11/b7ea9d8ec6d2-us-excludes-oil-for-japan-from-russias-sakhalin-2-from-price-cap.html
The NEW price-cap exception for Japan is recent, https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/japan-breaks-with-western-allies-and-buys-russian-oil-above-dollar60-a-barrel-cap/ar-AA19qoFT

I thought so too that they were different, until I reread the WSJ article (April 2, 2023) that I cited and that was referenced in the Daily Mail piece (via MSN).
Check the dates. The Kyodo News piece is dated Nov 23, 2022. It says that the price cap would go into effect on Dec 5, 2022, and that the Sakhalin-2 exemption would last until Sept 30th. That must be Sept 30th of 2023, since it didn't start until Dec 2022.
The referenced WSJ piece is reporting Japanese oil imports from Russia in January and February of this year, under that Dec 5, 2022 - Sept 30, 2023 exemption.

In the first two months of this year, Japan bought about 748,000 barrels of Russian oil for a total of ¥6.9 billion, according to official trade statistics. At the current exchange rate, that translates to $52 million, or just under $70 a barrel. Russia exports millions of barrels of oil a day, making Japan’s purchases a minuscule share of total Russian output.

This was a Saturday piece in the WSJ, not picked up by most major news sources. No independent source. These facts indicate that the WSJ story is background material, not breaking news.

Currently, TRP ETF's have not garnered much in AUM. Blue Chip Growth and Dividend Growth each have +$300M and Equity Income +$100M. Otherwise, mainly $20M or so per fund.
TCAF could be a winner for them?

I recall trying to put the Equity-Income ETF in my IRA. Somehow, it would not let me do it. I do own the OEF version. I have TRP T-IRA and TRP brokerage. Other than that, my wife holds BRUFX independently, directly with the Bruce guys.
I bet lotsa folks will pile into that new TCAF thing. I think I've already decided to stick with PRWCX.

+1
In fairness, I don’t anticipate TRP doing that. What I see is investors chasing performance and the fund has been hot and attracting interest / money for a long time now. And Giroux, for better or worse, has claimed a lofty perch next to Gabelli, Cohen and other rock stars in Barron’s “Roundtable” two years running. I was a bit surprised he was invited back a second time in light of a couple of his early 2022 calls. Specifically a fondness for AMZ (which tanked shortly thereafter) plus a prediction the 10-year wouldn’t end the year above 3% - or some silly number. One wonders if that kind of fame and public scrutiny helps, harms, or has no effect on a manager’s psyche and decision making ability.

Currently, TRP ETF's have not garnered much in AUM. Blue Chip Growth and Dividend Growth each have +$300M and Equity Income +$100M. Otherwise, mainly $20M or so per fund.
TCAF could be a winner for them?

I daresay it depends on how hard they end up promoting Giroux as PM. If they really ramp up their Giroux bandwagon it would give me serious pause about remaining in PRWCX ... i don't like being involved w/PR-oriented "rock star" fund managers that are marketed out by their firms. (I like my investments, and my fund managers 'boring' and relatively anonymous.)

Currently, TRP ETF's have not garnered much in AUM. Blue Chip Growth and Dividend Growth each have +$300M and Equity Income +$100M. Otherwise, mainly $20M or so per fund.
TCAF could be a winner for them?

Japan's Sakhalin exception was done LAST YEAR while formulating the oil price-cap policy, https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2022/11/b7ea9d8ec6d2-us-excludes-oil-for-japan-from-russias-sakhalin-2-from-price-cap.html
The NEW price-cap exception for Japan is recent, https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/japan-breaks-with-western-allies-and-buys-russian-oil-above-dollar60-a-barrel-cap/ar-AA19qoFT
Here are global GDP/capita from the World Bank. Some of the countries at the top may be surprising, but China and India are FAR down in that list. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?most_recent_value_desc=true

GDP as a whole is a meaningless number. GDP per capita is the meaningful number.
India and China are not generally considered rich economies on a per capita basis, certainly nowhere close to GDP per capita levels of the G7.
No disagreement that China and India have been opportunistic but that's par for the course for most countries where national self interest ranks higher than support of Ukraine.
We were in bed with Osama when convenient and went to war against him when it was no longer convenient. If it suited US interests at this time, India would have been squeezed hard but it isn't being squeezed so...
Times change, alliances change -- shifting sands. As expressed brilliantly in the book 1984 there is always a war going on amongst all the major powers to the point that it becomes meaningless to keep track of who's at war with whom at any given point.

The price cap is no longer a real cap if the 2nd richest economy needs an exception.

Here’s a look at every country’s share of the world’s $101.6 trillion economy:
Rank	Country		GDP (Billions, USD)
#1	United States	$25,035.2
#2	China		$18,321.2
#3	Japan		$4,300.6
#4	Germany		$4,031.1
#5	India		$3,468.6

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/countries-by-share-of-global-economy/
The 2nd and 5th richest economies never participated in Russian sanctions.

China and India, both of which have declined to condemn Russia or impose sanctions over the war, became the biggest buyers of Russian crude oil last year as Western countries restricted imports and imposed sanctions.
China’s imports of Russian crude oil spiked 8 percent in 2022, the equivalent of 1.72 million barrels per day (bpd), according to Chinese customs data, making Russia the East Asian giant’s second-biggest supplier.

Al Jazeera, How China and India’s appetite for oil and gas kept Russia afloat, February 24, 2023.
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2023/2/24/how-china-and-indias-appetite-for-oil-and-gas-kept-russia-afloat

Also helping Europe is an accelerated shift to renewables as well as an offsetting return to coal.

European Union leaders said the war has had a silver lining in terms of moving the bloc forward on targets for renewable energy. Countries that were previously reluctant to get on board with expanding renewables are finally doing so, and those on the wagon are investing more. As a result, as part of its REPowerEU package, the EU agreed to increase its targets for renewable energy to 45 percent by 2030 this week, up from a prior target of 40 percent. (The EU gets just over 20 percent of its total energy from renewables right now.) A new report from the International Energy Agency suggests the world could add as much renewable energy in the next five years as it did in the last 20 years.
...
But you can’t make silver without getting some dross. In an effort to replace Russian oil and gas in the short term, countries like Germany are reactivating some old coal-fired power plants to fill the energy gap. Countries including France, Austria, the Netherlands, and Italy are putting mothballed coal plants back into service. And EU countries are negotiating long-term contracts for gas with countries like Qatar, which policymakers said could ultimately lock these countries into buying more gas than they hope to need by the time 2030 rolls around.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/21/europe-russia-energy-climate-change-policy-renewable/
See also World Economic Forum, Can Europe’s rush for renewables solve its energy crisis?, Feb 10, 2023.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/02/eu-renewables-energy-crisis/
Second, G7 recently issued an exception on G7-ban to Japan because it needs oil badly - so 6 more exceptions to go?
Does Japan really need oil badly?

[Japanese] Government data released on Thursday [Jan 19, 2023] showed that oil imports from Russia fell around 56% last year, while coal imports were reduced by 41%.
But imports of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) were up more than 4% in 2022.
Sakhalin-1 produces oil, while Sakhalin-2 produces both crude and LNG, and experts say access to Russian gas is what Japan is most concerned about protecting.
Last year, 9.5% of Japan’s total LNG imports came from Russia, up from 8.8% in 2021 — most of it from Sakhalin-2.
So when Japan joined a price cap on Russian oil last year with its G7 allies, the European Union and Australia, it obtained an exemption for Sakhalin-2.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/sakhalin-exception-the-russian-energy-japan-cant-quit/

Japan has almost no fossil fuel of its own and relies on imported natural gas and coal for much of its electricity.
...
“It’s not as if Japan can’t manage without this. They can. They simply don’t want to,” said James Brown, a professor at Temple University’s Japan campus. Prof. Brown, who studies Russia-Japan relations, said Japan should move to withdraw from the Sakhalin projects eventually “if they’re really serious about supporting Ukraine.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/japan-breaks-with-u-s-allies-buys-russian-oil-at-prices-above-cap-1395accb

Mr. Snowball and my fellow named firms:
I would like to have a gentleman wager of a dinner between all parties for the fund is considered the best based on the next 12 months in which David Snowball judges as well as determines criteria. Winner pays. Losers show up with winner at Mr. Snowball's restaurant selection in Davenport environs, New York City, San Francisco or Santa Fe. We can make it an annual event.
"What could go wrong?"
David Sherman

TD has told me (on the phone) that one can buy I-bonds electronically with refunds. I have no doubt one is able to purchase bonds electronically this way. But I remain skeptical about this procedure enabling one to purchase additional $5K in savings bonds above and beyond one's $10K/year limit.
What you quoted sounds like the standard way of buying electronic savings bonds. One deposits money into a TD account. Then one uses the money in that account to purchase electronic savings bonds.
Here's a two page piece from TD on "Buying Savings Bonds ..."
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/forms/mar0023.pdf
On the first page is a description of how you fund your TD account to buy savings bonds:
"How do I buy savings bonds? ... Have your bank or employer send funds directly to your TreasuryDirect account, or send IRS Form 8888 with your federal tax return and direct your refund to your TreasuryDirect account."
There's no verbiage in this section about actually buying savings bonds with this money. This is the way you buy any electronic savings bonds, Series I or Series EE. Nor is any distinction drawn between money in your account that came from your bank, your payroll department, or the IRS.
On the second page is a box that reads:

---

Series I Bonds                             Series EE Bonds
Sold electronically at face              [sold $25 to $10,000]
value in any amount from
$25 to 10,000. Sold in
paper at face value, in
multiples of $50, up to
$5,000. Use IRS Form 8888.
...

---

Each year, buy as much as $10,000 of electronic Series I,
$10,000 of electronic Series EE, and $5,000 of paper Series I.

---