• I'm viewing today's rally as the 'dead cat' kind.

As I mentioned on "Fast Money" tonight, I am taking today's rally as a "dead cat" kind. 

I believe yesterday was the first shot across the bow.

I am outta here like NBC anchor Sue Simmons.

Thanks so much for reading my diary today.

Enjoy the evening!

• I will be on the second segment of "Fast Money" tonight around 5:20 p.m. EST.

• Watch crude oil -- back to a headwind (at $106.40, up $1.70 a barrel).

• The Apple (AAPL) event has ended and Siri will not be incorporated in the new iPad.

 'Cause I remember when we used to sit

In the government yard in Trenchtown

Oba, ob-serving the hypocrites

As they would mingle with the good people we meet

Good friends we have had, oh good friends we've lost along the way

In this bright future you can't forget your past

So dry your tears I say

No woman, no cry

No woman, no cry

Little darlin' don't shed no tears

No woman, no cry.

-- Bob Marley, "No Woman No Cry"

 As I said in a prior post, I view the absence of Siri in the new iPad as a disappointment. There simply may not be enough innovation in the newest product for the consumer to trade up to it.

• Disappointed

Unless this is the "one more thing," I view the absence of a Siri announcement for the iPad as the single-most important disappointement so far in the Apple (AAPL) event.

It seems to be that there is not enough new innovation for the consumer from the last generation of iPads to rationzlaize a trade up. 

I have pressed my QQQ shorts at $64.05.

• About the iPad

9to5 Mac was right yesterday with regard to the retail availability of the iPad on Friday, March 16.

• Back shorting QQQs

At $64.15 into the Apple (AAPL) event.

• I already know I love The Bachelor.

"I care for and still do." -- (A weeping) Courtney Robertson, The Bachelor  (The Reunion Show You Will Not Want to Miss).  

Last year, I launched a column that mimics Chris Matthews' segment. -- "Tell Me Something I Dont Know."

The subject matter of this segment, as evidenced by today's "Tell Me Something I Dont Know," is always far ranging and eclectic,- from takeover stories,to politics  to sports events to popular culture!

So now that The Bachelor has really blown up as NFL quarterback Tim Tebow is in the news, denying that he wont be the next Bachelor. it is time to answer the question: Well, Dougie, tell me something I dont know?

In next week's finale, Courtney will not get the final rose and Lindzi C.  will.

And, as a bonus, Kacie B  will be the next Bachelorette after Emily Maynard.

P.S. I probably get more Bachelor questions from our subscribers than questions even about my bond short! And that's the truth. So here you go...

(Editors' note: Please stop asking ... please.)

• Apple watch

Here is the live link to the Apple event coverage, which starts at 1PM (no refresh needed).

• More on Apple from Boy Genius

The 4G technology will be available on the new iPad seems likely now.

• What I added

Today, I added to STI, PEP, IFF and BRK.B longs.

• Warrior Position

Did I mention the market has no memory from day to day?

The key, near term, is to stay flexible and balanced.

• Covering shorts

I have covered my EFA, IWM and QQQ shorts.

Will revisit later .

• And a Stock Picker's Dream?

> David Rolfe discusses his investment in Berkshire here.

I always emphasize the need to stay flexible and opportunistic in one's investment approach and strategy.

And I pay very close attention to people that I respect (because their analysis has historically been comprehensive and thoughtful), like David Einhorn, Larry Robbins, Lee Cooperman and Bill Ackman.

And that very much includes my buddy/pal/friend Whitney Tilson.

Towards that observation, in late February I was  skeptical about some of the more optimistic intrinsic value calculations of Berkshire Hathaway.

Here is what I wrote about Whitney's analysis:

We have increased our estimate of Berkshire's intrinsic value to $178,366 ($98,366 in investments/share plus 10x $8,000/share of pre-tax earnings of the operating businesses), nearly 50% above today's price of $120,000. The stock trades at close to the largest discount to intrinsic value in two decades (despite the fact that we think the company has never been stronger, with fewer risks and a better mix of earnings drivers than ever).

-- Whitney Tilson, Berkshire Hathaway Presentation (Over the Weekend)

As most know, Whitney has been a vocal supporter of Berkshire Hathaway's (BRK.A/BRK.B) shares. As an investor, Berkshire remains his largest position because of his perception that the upside to the share price dwarfs the risk.

Whitney values Berkshire's intrinsic value at $178,000 a share vs. the current share price of $120,000. In his e-mail today he explains, as he has in the past, his methodology in determining his intrinsic value calculation.

Whitney is going to appear on CNBC this morning between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. ET to discuss Buffett's letter and his investment in Berkshire.

Below are two questions that I would like to ask (and I hope Carl, Mel or Jimmy do!) Whitney today:

1. Whit, in your intrinsic value calculation, why should we still pay full value of Berkshire's investment portfolio (or $98,366 a share) given the following factors:

• Warren Buffett's age
• The fact that Buffett has begun to delegate investment portfolio selection to (two) others
• Berkshire's portfolio size makes it difficult to find that diamond in the rough (so he is basically buying what the other funds are buying)
• Given the above, most closed-end publicly traded investment funds trade at about an 8% discount to net asset value?

2. Why, in your intrinsic value calculation, do you value Berkshire's noninvestment businesses at a rich 10x pretax earnings (or about 14x after-tax earnings), when a large amount of Berkshire's business portfolio is in the financial sector (banking and insurance), which, in today's markets, is accorded a relatively low P/E multiple of well under 14x (actually closer to 10x to 11x)?

All that said, I DIDN'T say that Berkshire's intrinsic value was not well above the current share price. What I said is that Whit's calculation (and the calculation of some other Berkshire bulls) seemed aggressive.

As it happens, Wedgewood Partners' Sir David Rolfe passed on to me an e-mail that piqued my interest in which he wrote that while "Berkshire wont repurchase shares above 1.1x book value, but that rule doesn't apply to Berkshire's directors." He then highlighted thatinsider Ron Olson has recently purchased stock. 

That tipped me over the edge and I went back to the Berkshire drawing board.

I calculate Berkshire's intrinsic value by taking an 8% haircut (Whit took 100% of investment value) to the companys' investment/share value ($98.36 billion) and use a 7.5x multiplier (not 10x that Whit uses) to the company's pre-tax noninvestment profits ($8 billion). This produces an intrinsic value of  $90,500 (investment portfolio value) and $60,000  (operating profits), or $150,500 (on the A shares), vs. $118,000 current share price (an upside of 27.5%). This compares to Whit's estimate of intrinsic value of $178,000.

As a result of this, I took a starter position (averaged under $78.50) in Berkshire on yesterday's profit taking.

Ideally, I would fill my position below $77.50, which would give an investor an even more attractive risk/reward ratio.

• Apple updating

Apple (AAPL) Store is updating its store. There is a "we'll be back soon" note up the site.

This could mean the new iPad will come sooner than expected.

• Getting Fresh Prince

My long rental from yesterday, Caterpillar (CAT), is getting jiggy to the upside this morning.

I am staying with the trade for now.

• Taking a rental

Based on the rising possibiity that Broadcom (BRCM) could win the wireless chip design award in the next-generation Amazon (AMZN) Kindle Fire, coupled with the positive technical setup highlighted yesterday by Gary  Morrow, I took a long rental in Broadcom on Tuesday.

For more detailed information, Lazard has a good writeup on the company this morning.

• and Living On a Prayer

"She says: We've got to hold on to what we've got

'Cause it doesn't make a difference if we make it or not.

We've got each other and that's a lot for love -

We'll give it a shot.

We're half way there - Livin' on a prayer."

 - Bon Jovi, Living on a Prayer

Miller Tabak's Peter Boockvar chimes in with a Greece update this morning:

"While the deadline to participate in the Greek debt exchange is later tomorrow, the IIF seems to be giving us a play by play as this morning they are saying the participation rate is up to 39%, hopefully on there way to north of 75%. Italian and Spanish bonds are rallying in anticipation of an orderly process but the Spanish stock market traded lower for a 3rd day to the lowest since Nov, continuing its underperformance on economic growth concerns. With respect to US stocks, while some thought yesterday's stock market selloff was nervousness about Greece, it was more concerns with global growth, post China's news, and this sets us up for a key test for stocks."

• The room of 7 requirements

"Me on the Ed Sullivan show?

Me, Henry McAfee appearing with

Ed-Ed-Sullivan

We're gonna be on Ed Sullivan

How could any fam'ly be

Half as fortunate as we?

We'll be coast to coast

With our fav'rite host,

Ed Sullivan."

-- "Hymn for a Sunday Evening," Bye Bye Birdie

I was back with my fav'rite host Sir Larry Kudlow on Tuesday night with new CNBC contributor Kelly Evans (the hardest working commentator on the network; I know as we were emailing each other at 6 a.m. on a story she was to do later on in the day regarding profit margins) and my longtime buddy/pal/friend and all around good guy, Mikey Holland.

Let's go directly to the tape!

As usual, I am going to expand on my views beyond what was discussed, but with the basic bones of the segment's conversation.

Did Greece Cause the Market Drop Tuesday?

Sir Larry started by asking us whether Greece's problems were the proximate cause for the market's schmeissing on Tuesday. I said no.

Greece has already defaulted. Its debt load is overwhelming and its economy is in freefall. How else can one explain the 700% yield on one-year Greek debt?

The problem was that despite technical fundamental political and geopolitical issues, The Bull Market Of Complacency continued until there was an  ah-ha moment.

That's how (and why) markets drop. It was not Greece. Iit was a confluence of technical, economic, political and geopolitical issues that were ignored until they reached a tipping point.

The Most Important Thing

The more important question all investors have to ask today is: given (1) the $500 billion of fiscal drag starting on January 1, 2013, (2) structural unemployment, (3) our fiscal imbalances and (4) our political divide (that has frozen pro-growth fiscal policy), should investors be willing to pay only about 1.5 multiples less than the five-decade average, or about 13.5x, when corporate profit margins are vulnerable and at near 60-year highs?

To this, I say 13.5x seems fair (indeed the current S&P Index price is almost exactly my fair market valuation, though ideally I would like to see more skepticism build up (though I am surprised how quickly some talking heads have shifted to the dark side) and for Mr. Market to go through a normal, garden-variety correction for even better entry points and reward/risk ratios than are available today.

In order for valuations to normalize and to move convincingly back towards 2007 high in the S& P Index (1550+) (which I previously suggested as possible on Larry's show in December) a lot of things must go right in order for a revival of the animal spirits to cause the two dominant investors (individuals and hedge funds) to jump in and buy stocks.

Until those things begin to move in the right direction, I suspect the S&P index will be in a trading range (my guess is between 1320-1400).

I hope that helps to explain why I made some short covers yesterday.

To fulfill the requirements necessary for the next bull-market leg to commence, we need the following seven factors to fall in place:

• A good technical setup that lacks divergences.
• The odds of the Republican party regaining the presidency must improve.
• Our politicians must address our fiscal imbalances and institute pro-growth policies. More cowbell (quantitative easing) is no longer the answer, as its impact is dwindling and we are hurting the savings class.
• We need to see support of the EU debt plan.
• We need the domestic economic indicators to be unambiguous in terms of indicating self sustaining growth.
• We need to see a clear path to global growth led by India and China.
• We need do not need any triggers or exogenous shocks.

What I see today suggests the seven issues are still unresolved or moving in the wrong direction. That is why, last week I suggested that a market correction (of about 5%) was in order:

• The technical position (low volume, lower new highs, a Transport and Russell Index that is lagging/breaking down) are not positive for the near term.
• A Democratic win in November seems likely. Intrade has Obama's odds up to 61%.
• Our government is not addressing our fiscal imbalances. The pressure is entirely on the Fed. And with a likely Democratic win, a Republican House win and a toss-up in the Senate, we might have gridlock for another four years.
• I am concerned that the French election, in which Socialist Party leader Francois Hollande is leading Nicolas Sarkozy, could jeopardize the debt plan.
• U.S. growth is growing more ambiguous. (National ISM, durable goods, income/spending weakening). Warm weather and tax policy has apparently "pulled forward" sales. The fiscal drag of higher taxes and reduced spending on Jan. 1, 2013 looms larger.
• Economic growth in China and India is becoming more vague. The PMIs in China are mixed and the governmentt just lowered its growth forecasts to +7.5% for 2012.
• The rising price of crude and intensified Iran/Israel confrontation raises the chance that oil is the next Black Swan.

Super Tuesday

One final note since yesterday was Super Tuesday. I originally thought that Mitt Romney would unseat Barack Obama in the November election (though I am a Dem, I view a Republican win as more market and business friendly).

My view had been that Romney was destined to win all five battleground states from 2008 (Florida, Indiana, Ohio, Missouri, North Carolina) and that he would also win New Hampshire and Virginia (two relatively close contests from 2008), giving him a slim, two vote electoral college advantage.

I now think the Republicans have squandered this possibility as the continued candidacy of Paul, Santorum and Gingrich (which seem to be more about agendas not about winning) are serving to reduce the chances of a Republican win.

In support of that view, on Intrade President Obama's probability of winning the  election stands at 61% now. 

The political factor influencing the markets will then fall into which party wins the House and Senate.

Stay tuned.

• Short-covering answers coming

Those subscribers that have been with us for some time know that I view my primary responsibility as delivering hard hitting, thorough and CONSISTENT analysis of views on the market, sectors and individual stocks.

I try to be logical in argument and specific in strategy (e.g. describing the specific context in which I determine the fair market value of the S&P Index).

And when I am wrong I say so  and try to give an explanation as to why I think I was wrong.

To these ends there was some questions by subscribers who didn't understand why I covered my Spyder (SPY) (common and calls) and several individual stock shorts into the teeth of yesterday's market decline.

I hope today's opener, which expands on my comments last night on "The Kudlow Report" serves to explain my moves in the market yesterday.

If not ,feel free to write your questions in the comments section. As always I will respond in a timely fashion.

Thanks!