'Scrabble' the letters and you discover Omicron will also yield Moronic. Of course teasing a bit, but believed that markets were overreacting Friday, although we can't fully dismiss the risks from the latest or even yet-forthcoming variants of the virus as we work through COVID-19.

With the Fed-head trying to damper optimism in the morning, a higher high is likely deferred, but if we subsequently get one it might be with VIX below 15, again. The Omicron panic might eventually be understood as marking nearly the end of pandemic, although that's tough as viruses keep mutating and lots of people keep 'objecting' (although early vaccines were generally mediocre).

The 'authorities' want to be seen taking every tiny threat seriously, even if that is again a bit late, or early depending on what's learn about Omicron. We're of course tired of agenda politics, of COVID vaccination blame-game spin or even tired of hearing Dr. Fauci speak to everything 'but' newer antiviral treatments. Perhaps the NIH could properly fund the long-pending studies, reference how well states like Florida have done since embracing monoclonal antibodies, as well as avoid 'gain of function research' they pretend didn't occur in Wuhan. If all that happens maybe you wouldn't need 'papers' just to eat dinner in LA.

History is replete with deadly viruses or plagues that wiped out millions of people, and usually after at most a 2nd deadly wave the ensuing waves have more mutations, but often not higher mortality rates.

Does this keep the Fed at bay? Not necessarily. In a prepared statement, that sounds like it was composed last week and altered today on Omicron news awareness, Chairman Powell states (for Tuesday's testimony) that a new big COVID concern (he means lockdown, as isn't happening except new restrictive rules in Los Angeles perhaps) could contribute to 'inflation', not 'deflation', so the Fed would use its tools to fight that. Translation: he inserted that comment so they can move forward with reduced bond buying and gradual snugging-up of policy. I don't disagree with doing so, just think an explanation of 'why' they would, is a spin to make the intended actions conform with the backdrop. Put simply: they plan to do it, have blinders on to the pandemic somewhat, and at this point at least, they have insufficient motivation to modify 'existing' plans.

Why would veracity of future viruses be lower? Because they sort of neutral each other out, the host -human target in this case- has built 'some' immunity to resist, and these days a degree of anxiety fails to recognize that science is much faster to assess all the characteristics of the genomic sequence and respond accordingly...quickly. But even virologists acknowledge we need drug treatments not praying for the miraculous one-shot forever vaccine. Officials I suspect are not that 'moronic about Omicron', but they aren't addressing drugs rather than 'just' vaccines to the extent they should. Hold them to the fire on it.

SARS-Cov-2 (also known as the Chinese Communist Party virus because not only was it likely lab-created, but purposely allowed to interact globally despite Chinese officials welding people in their Wuhan homes or restricting domestic but not international travel during initial outbreaks) in South Africa mutated -perhaps- because its initial host there was an HIV patient (weak immunity).

Recall that Thailand's / US Army research institute noted 2 strands of HIV in the Sars-Cov-2 sample they had. This was written about (as mentioned here) in January 2020 as Dr. Read of Leicester University in the UK speculated that meant it had to be from a lab. I don't know if this means COVID expands faster in HIV patients, but benign HIV remains heavily prevalent in Southern Africa.

I'm not being melodramatic at all about this. Remember: the upcoming Pfizer (PFE) COVID antiviral is a two-med cocktail of which half 'is' a current HIV medication .. hence it's a so-called 'cocktail'. This alone (and that's pre-Omicron) testifies to the similarities between COVID and HIV, or how you address it, which is part of why (again perhaps) Dr. Read said the combination couldn't naturally occur.

So I'm not beating on the Chinese Communist Party (though they deserve it), just pointing out how little we are really hearing from officials who don't want to panic the public about this particular (and lab) relationship, as if that would evoke the old societal stigma about HIV or worse, endanger global stability if it could be proven (probably is part of the secret documents to be released oh about 50 years hence) that this was/is an out-of-control Chinese bioweapon.

The global risk and consequences are not fully known, but might be severe if it is the 'programmed' phase of highly-infectious distribution.. to an enemy. Of course China 'probably' only reacted inhumanely after an accidental release, as they would not want to 'cull' their own population significantly, would they? I think not, as a study from a Beijing University released just today, basically is pleading with the Chinese Government not to open society because of known possibilities of mass 'catastrophe' until there are better treatments and drugs.

All 3 major drug companies that have vaccines in the US are working on that. Others, like Sorrento (SRNE), have candidates nobody knows much about in the key real-world environment, although they have one pill that is in testing now that is the one that caused 10 people in a California (little noticed by officials) trial who were very sick to walk out of hospital within a couple weeks. It's in Brazil trials now ('slorento' took too long to finally get this underway), and let's see if they speed up aggregating data from outcomes there, as soon as this Dec. I'd noticed they posted a sort of 'teaser' about how large markets are that may be addressed, presumably seeking a partner, but the stock took little notice.

Meanwhile, EV stocks calmed down, except for the always-wild Tesla (TSLA), and a scrappy newcomer getting some attention: Canoo (GOEV). There are few sellers with a presumed majority of tax-selling behind, and buyers panting at prospects. It is too early to say this is another Tesla, but wisely they are going after market segments Tesla is not, at least not in the same price range, well, 'for now'.

For a few years Tesla has always been slow between announcing the product looming, and have it enter production, and almost always behind schedule. Of course they plan a cheaper 'Model 2' by around 2025, but it's conventional as to styling and not as novel as what Canoo is bringing at a lower price-point. If Canoo can establish a marketing network with almost zero cost to them, there is the prospect that the shares would see a multi-fold gain over a few years. It may happen sooner if they don't need to dilute shareholder equity, and 'if' they do a deal with a known outlet or reseller than captures investor imagination. If that centers around rumors regarding Apple or Walmart, we can't help that, as it is logical in either case, and Canoo hasn't tried to squelch all rumors.

(I realize this has limited luggage space in prototypes so far.. again this is a modular vehicle which can be configured when ordered.. online.. in many ways when time comes for a customer to do so. One way probably will be a conventional 2nd row seating and cargo can go when you see this seat.)

Shares would likely have been available at very low prices if not for shakeups in the Company internally earlier this year, or the firing (or defection, unclear) of the former CEO who now works for Apple. The Chairman (new CEO) just invested millions more personally, which showed confidence in their future as well as announced the 'Arkansas' facility coming, in Walmart's home town. Of course make of that what you will, we simply don't know if a deal's afoot (AAPL, WMT).

So...the diminishing impact of COVID variant news basically countered excessive drops last Friday, while a period of uncertain remains. Yes, given monetary policy this past year, the majority of investors have a big exposure to equities. Some still encouraged investors to venture more in the mega-caps, which are rising, but overall that's the least attractive valuation sector, in my thinking.

For-instance still retaining a majority of AMD bought around 16-17, incredibly nearly 3 years ago. Raised targets a few times, took 'some' money back but definitely retain most optimistically (Taiwan the wild-card aspect), but wouldn't buy here. At the same time if things continue going well, of course eventually it pressing 200 is attainable. At that point we would be suggesting owning the least portion of a portfolio, not the most, in the 'grand dames'. AMD is a great example of high stocks that can run higher, but why would a new buyer come in at these prices? Sure glad they are, and suspect it is primarily huge money managers who have to move millions at a time. I'd tread lightly in big-caps (AMD).

In-sum: 

What all the Omicron anxiety (or of course denial) means is that the scientific community knows this is problematic and is trying not to be alarming as they sound the alarm (that's a moronic part, as when invoking travel bans while telling the public sort of 'don't worry', you are actually saying...'worry'). A synopsis for now (and it may change): this is very contagious but not as lethal as the Delta variant but increases the need for antiviral treatments and testing more so than vaccines. Some researchers have said all along that viruses do mutate and you'll not likely contain it properly without antiviral treatments.