• Here's its latest presentation.

"One last thing."

- Lt. Columbo

Here is the new strategy presentaiton of the business model shift at Monitise (MONIF).

• Enjoy the evening.

Thanks for reading my diary today.

I hope the message of my opening missive, "CNBC and Me," was clear -- namely, respectful criticism should not only be tolerated, it should be encouraged.

I remain hopeful that CNBC's brass accepts my olive branch to appear on Sir Larry Kudlow's last show, which would allow me to pay tribute to a great commentator and wonderful human being.

Enjoy the evening.

And god bless Uncle Vinnie.

P.S. -- I went to Jim Cramer's Mexican restaurant Bar San Miguel in Carroll Gardens Brooklyn (on Smith Street) yesterday.

Fantastic!

Great tequila and guacamole. I highly recommend the longanisa (seared longanisa pork sausage with guacamole and jalepeño mexican crema).

• 'Mo-mo, oh no!'

Today's message of the market: "Mo-mo, oh, no!"

Enough said.

• Shares bounced back from the bottom.

Nice move off of the bottom for General Motors (GM) today.

• Goldman Sachs on Monitise (MONI.L).

"MONI.LN Monitise notes share placement, shift to subscription model, and new five year targets

• Fully-underwritten Placing of 160,643,031 new Ordinary Shares by way of an accelerated bookbuild to accelerate the Group's shift from a licence/services-based business model to a subscription-based model.
• Certain major existing shareholders and new partner MasterCard (MA) have indicated their intention to participate in the Placing.
• Investment supports rapid move to subscription-based sales model, minimising upfront licence or integration costs to customers, and generating higher long-term recurring revenue for Monitise.
• New model reduces financial and technical barriers to customer on-boarding, accelerating end-user adoption at a key inflection point in demand for mobile financial services.
• Registered users expected to grow from 28m today to 200m by making it financially and technically easier for network partners to connect to the Monitise Group network.
• ARPU target of at least GBP2.50 per annum - comprising Bank Anywhere subscription revenue and Pay Anyone, Buy Anything transaction revenue.
• User-generated revenue will represent around 80% of Monitise total group revenue, the remaining amount being professional services revenue from custom-build projects including Monitise Create.
• Sustainable Gross Margin above 70% with EBITDA margin of at least 30%.
• New five-year Key Performance Indicator targets for end of FY 2018. These include:"

• I am a $1.15 buyer now of MONIF.

Break in on Monitise (MONI.L/MONIF):

* Fully-underwritten placing of 160,643,031 new shares to accelerate shift to global subscription-based business 

* Major existing shareholders and new partner MasterCard intend to participate in placing

* New partnerships announced as Monitise targets 200m registered users by FY 2018

* New model reduces financial and technical barriers to customer on-boarding

* Proceeds from placing will enable co to transition from a licence/services business model to a subscription model

* Expect FY 2014 revenue growth of approximately 40%, compared to previous guidance of 50 pct

* Arpu target of at least £2.50 per annum -comprising bank anywhere subscription revenue and pay anyone, buy anything transaction revenue.

* Sustainable gross margin above 70 pct

* Expected reduction in revenue,acceleration in operating expenses will likely result in H2 fy2014's EBITDA loss to exceed H1 FY 2014

* Barclays Bank plc and Canaccord Genuity limited are acting as joint bookrunners in connection with the placing

I view this as an important catalyst to the next up leg in Monitise's share price.

I am a $1.15 buyer now of MONIF.

• I am back to 5% net long now.

• Shares are down $5.

Green Mountain Coffee Roasters (GMCR) is down $5 today, and I just took off the short position.

• It's GM.

With today's purchases, my largest individual equity long is now General Motors (GM).

• It is now near the day's high.

Into the eye of today's decline Bon-Ton Stores (BONT) halved its gain but is now near the day's high.

A very good sign.

• I will revisit.

I am now completely out of my Tesla (TSLA) short.

I will revisit it on a rally,  which, no doubt, is inevitable!

Kidding.

• Err on the side of conservatism.

I continue to emphasize that we are a period of heightened market volatility (at best) and an overvalued U.S. stock market (at worst).

Higher-than-normal cash reserves is the desired strategy with global economic growth and the slope in corporate profits in question.

My advice?

Err on the side of conservatism.

The year is barely one quarter old, but there is a long way to go for 2014 and there will be plenty of opportunities on the long side.

• Stated simply, I don't understand the strength in Microsoft's shares.

I have covered my Microsoft (MSFT) short for a small loss.

In light of the companys fundamentals, I don't understand the strength in Microsoft's shares, and when I don't understand, I prefer to close out the position rather than fight the battle.

• So far.

I aggressively added to my General Motors (GM) long at $34.50 and to my ProShares UltraShort 20+ Year Treasury (TBT) long at $68.40.

• I am taking the name off my Best Ideas list.

I am down to tag ends on my Tesla (TSLA) short.

The shares are now down by nearly $50 from their 2014 high, and I am taking the name off of my Best Ideas list.

I was clearly premature in my initial short sales in this name (though the follow-ups were at attracive prices).

I have explained how my trades around a core short were instructive in terms of risk control.

I am now clearly profitable on the trade and will revisit shorting the shares on strength.

• The real estate maven has a dour forecast for home prices.

Below is a discouraging forecast for U.S. home prices from real estate maven Mark Hanson:

Beginning some time in q2'14, based on my "best-case" 2014 house price forecast of 'flat', the 1h'13 house price parabola will become a powerful sentiment, psychological, and optical headwind and headline tape-bomb that will last for the remainder of the year, likely longer.

Bottom Line:  Based on the obvious house-price parabola in 1h'13 (black line in Item 1 below), which has been grinding lower ever since;   typical seasonality that brought prices down in the fall and winter of 2013/14 (that is generally thwarted when demand returns in the spring);  and the lack of a seasonal price boost going into this spring due to investor and first-timer demand destruction, higher rates, and supply rushing to market, even if NAR average house prices get lucky and stay flat from Jan to Dec 2014, they will print lower from 4% to 8% YoY most all year beginning in 2q'14.  This will not only be ugly optically and psychologically, but it will feel like a crash to the overwhelmingly one-way consensus estimates, which have house prices up 5% to 10% in 2014 YoY.    On New Home prices, the same goes, which due to their inherent volatility, will print 1% to 11% lower YoY beginning in Q2.

House price timeline

From what I can tell right now based on 'list prices' in the CS 10 and 20 regions -- escrows that 'will close' in the next 15 to 75 days and be reported from May to July-- and homebuilder margins trending lower, best case, house prices will be flattish from present levels this year.  Worst case, resale prices will give up two-thirds of the past two-year gains and builder prices/margins will 'continue' trending lower at a more accelerated pace (again, the forecast used in this note is best-case, or 'flat').

The problem is that "best-case" (red line in the chart below) means YoY average resale and new house prices will decline beginning in April or May -- reported in May and June by NAR and April or May by the C.B. -- and continue all year. Some will say "flat is good". But, they fail to understand that "flat" means headlines beginning in q2'14 of 4% to 8% monthly YoY declines, which optically and psychologically, is not pretty.  Because the Case-Shiller is so lagging, this means it will be negative YoY through Q1 2015 at least.

1)  NAR Average House Prices 2010-14 (Red line is my best-case 2014 forecast of "flat")

Bottom Line:  Even if house prices seasonally increase but remain mostly flattish from Jan in 2014 (see red line), this means continual monthly headlines beginning in q2'14 of of 4% to 8% YoY declines, which optically and psychologically, is not pretty. Note, NAR reports these one-month lagged.

1a)  NAR 2014 monthly house price forecast YoY Chg %.

Note, NAR reports these one month lag meaning the small decline in April will be reported in May, the larger decline in May will be reported in June and so on.

2)  New Home Sales Prices 2010-14

As with Existing Sales, if builder prices remain flattish this year (see red line below for forecast) most month's in 2014 will show a considerable YoY decline.

2a)  New Home Sales 2014 monthly house price forecast Yoy Chg %.

Note, the Census Bureau reports this one-month lagged meaning the April YoY decline will be reported at the end of May.

• Shares are down by nearly $18.

Tesla (TSLA) is now down by nearly $18 ($211), and I am taking in some of my short.

• Dear CNBC, let's bury the hatchet so that I can pay tribute to Larry Kudlow on the last episode of 'The Kudlow Report.'

"The medium is the message. This is merely to say that the personal and social consequences of any medium -- that is, of any extension of ourselves -- result from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension of ourselves, or by any new technology."

-- Marshall McLuhan

I have for some time considered writing this morning's column, but I have held back.

Sir Larry Kudlow's retirement from "The Kudlow Report" and the actions taken by CNBC to deny my appearance on his last show, however, have precipitated the writing of today's opening missive.

Having had a close personal and business relationship with Larry and having appeared so many times on "The Kudlow Report" over the years (particularly leading up to and during the crisis in 2006-2009), I offered to appear on Larry's last show, as I wanted to pay tribute to his years of contributions on CNBC.

In early March, I paid homage to Larry in this open letter on Real Money Pro.

Larry was enthusiastic to have me on but I have been informed that CNBC's upper management has pushed back and does not want me to appear on Larry's final show.

Before I explain the apparent reason and tension between CNBC and myself that resulted in the network's refusal of my offer to appear on the final "The Kudlow Report" and why I have not appeared on CNBC since late last summer -- I have been well aware of CNBC's policy towards me for some time -- let me digress and give some perspective to my past relationship with CNBC.

Since 2003 I had been a frequent guest host on "Squawk Box," starting in the old days with Mark Haines, David Faber and Joe Kernen. As well, I appeared on over 100 occasions on "The Kudlow Report," "Fast Money," "Squawk on the Street." "Closing Bell," "Mad Money," etc., and I have been a CNBC contributor for the past four years.

In the main, I have taken a contrarian view of the capital markets in those appearances. I am not a perma-bear, as witnessed by my call of generational bottom, on "The Kudlow Report" during the first week of March in 2009 and the "buy on dip" mantras on "Fast Money" during the summers of 2010 and 2011. At periods in 2013, however, I was a very vocal bear on CNBC (reminiscent of my appearances on "Squawk Box" and "The Kudlow Report" in 2007-2008).

I like to think that my often contrarian analysis of the markets is thoughtful, well-reasoned, logical and presented clearly. Unlike some, when wrong, as I am frequently, I admit it publicly with no excuses.

Apparently, based on the frequency of my appearances, CNBC thought I provided value-added content up until August 2013.

My CNBC Friends

Though I haven't appeared on CNBC since last August, I have continued to actively exchange ideas (via email and phone) with my many friends at the network, including (but not exclusively with) Scott Wapner, Steve Liesman, Kelly Evans, Brian Sullivan, Rick Santelli, Andrew Sorkin, Becky Quick, many on "Fast Money" (Melissa Lee, Dennis Gartman, Karen Finerman, 'Chaminade' Joe Terranova, Tim Seymour, Dan Nathan, Guy Adami) and, of course, my comrades at arms on TheStreet, Jim "El Capitan" Cramer and Stephanie Link. I have also maintained close ties to a number of CNBC producers, often giving them ideas for questions to ask guests, etc.

No doubt I will continue to maintain these ties even if CNBC fails to ever invite me back on the air.

L'affaire CNBC

Last August I was interviewed by the New York Post regarding my criticism of the media's generally overblown coverage of Apple (AAPL) following Carl Icahn's initial share purchase. (Here is the story.)

The thrust of my comments to the New York Post reporter, which embodied what I viewed as constructive criticism of the business media (CNBC, Bloomberg, Fox Business Network, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, etc.), was not specific to CNBC.

The New York Post's column, however, beginning with the inflammatory title "CNBC Cheerleaders," turned out to a direct attack on CNBC. The column incorporated remarks I had made in a private email to CNBC's Scott Wapner that I did not intend to share with anyone. The reporter created the illusion that my criticism was directed solely at CNBC and failed to disclose in the New York Post column (as I told her explicitly in a telephone call) that I had written similar emails to commentators at Bloomberg and Fox Business Network.

Apparently (before the story was published), someone on the CNBC staff forwarded a personal email (without my permission) that I had sent specifically to "Fast Money: Halftime Report's" Scott Wapner (which was CC'd to the other panelists) to the reporter at the New York Post. The thrust of the email was that the excitement related to Apple share purchases -- to jog your memories, Carl Icahn announced an Apple share position of slightly over $1 billion, and the follow-up news was that Lee Cooperman's Omega Advsiors purchased 31,000 shares of Apple stock in the prior three-month reporting period -- was not that consequential. In that email I wrote to Scott that Icahn's purchase was de minimis relative to the $450 billion Apple market cap and that in the case of Omega Advisors, the 31,000 purchase represented only a few tenths of 1% of Omega's assets under management.

In the email I also suggested that a deeper dive and analysis of the possible impact of the two purchases should have been adopted by CNBC and that the excitement should be put into the proper perspective. (I believe, at the time, Lee separately communicated the limited consequences and importance of Omega's modest purchase directly to Scott as well.)

The New York Post only quoted my email to Scott (which wasn't meant to be made public and without my permission) and suggested my criticism was aimed only at CNBC, which was not accurate. (Again, I had sent similar emails about the coverage of the Apple story to Bloomberg and Fox Business Network.)

While the New York Post column centered on the personal email, the thrust of my criticism is that, too often, all of the business media slides into hyperbole and sometimes superficial reporting that has a sensationalistic title but fails to put the events in the proper perspective.

To be fair, the reporter closed her story with a quote that I had sent her in an email, but the damage had already been done with the over-the-top title of the column and the release of the aforementioned personal email:

My criticism is of the entire media business. The reason I point this out is because the small investor piles in when Apple is up 10 percent. It's caveat emptor, but the poor lemmings pay top dollar....

The job [of the business media] is not to regurgitate the headline, but to provide additional information to the retailer. These activists have learned how to basically manipulate the news purveyors and it's a very dangerous thing. It's good for people's careers and you all do it to gain favor without thinking about it. This is a very important story.

-- Doug Kass, "CNBC Cheerleaders" by Claire Atkinson (New York Post; Aug. 18, 2013)

The day the New York Post article was published, I emailed the reporter and emphasized, again (because I had sent her a previous email before the article was published and spoke to her on the phone), that my criticism was aimed at general business media reporting and not directly to CNBC.

But by that time it was too late as the column was already published.

Upon reflection, I suppose, it was the New York Post being the New York Post.

But, with the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had not even spoken to them. Since someone at CNBC sent the New York Post reporter a personal email I had sent to Scott Wapner, I wanted to clarify my general criticism of the media. That clarification was to no avail, however, as one can see from the printed New York Post story.

Again, it should be emphasized that the New York Post has had a history of writing critical, overblown and embellished columns about CNBC. Remember Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation (NWSA) founded CNBC competitor Fox Business Network and owns the New York Post -- Twenty-First Century Fox (FOX) was spun off from News Corporation in 2013, but both companies are still Murdoch controlled.

I felt after the New York Post article was published (and I still do) that I was exploited by the New York Post to continue its tradition of unjustifiably (and in a highly colored and sensational manner) taking snipes at CNBC, a competitor to the Murdoch-controlled Fox Business Network.

On the Subject of Criticism

Let me end by moving away from the New York Post column and write in general about my ideas and concepts regarding the role of criticism in the media and of those talking heads (myself included) who appear in the media.

All of us can be better at what we do; we can always improve on the quality of our job performance.

This is particularly true as it relates to the investment business, in which the mosaic and narrative are complex, ever changing and nonlinear.

Relatedly, Gail Collins quotes Gloria Steinem in Sunday's New York Times editorial op-ed section: "We're so accustomed to narratives, we expect there's going to be a conclusion, or explanation or answer to the secret.... And probably the answer is, there isn't."

I can always manage money better, I can always improve on my analysis, and I can gain greater objectivity.

Similarly, all of the business media can always improve upon their delivery of the news.

I frequently try to be self-critical of myself in my diary on Real Money Pro, often trying to plot how to do it better. And I am not shy in giving my opinion how others should do a better job -- always in a respectful way.

As an example, in my recent column "I Don't Know," I emphasized the importance and need of more rigorous analysis over the attraction of instantaneous entertainment in the business media:

The fact is that snark (a combination of snide and remark) and opinion far too often envelop the business media instead of facts and figures. Equally infuriating is the confidence of view in the delivery of the snark. Sometimes the reason for this is out of necessity, as the media appearances are typically brief and expected to be on point. Nevertheless, in a world characterized by an absence of certainty and an interrelated and a complicated market mosaic (and complexity of issues) without memory from day to day, too many attach self-confident reasons to randomness.

Of course, there are exceptions. Consider as an example, the preparation that Jim "El Capitan" Cramer goes through when he interviews a corporate executive on "Mad Money." Another example is CNBC's "Squawk Box" with Joe Kernen, Becky Quick and Andrew Sorkin, which provides a guest host with one to three hours to do a deeper dive in analysis (e.g., just watch Jim Grant's appearance yesterday, which was solid and thoughtful in analysis). Or Bloomberg's "Market Surveillance" in which Tom Keene shares the spotlight with an interviewee for almost a half an hour, digging into the analysis that forms the foundation of view.

Not every move in the markets is explainable, though far too many observers attach a reason for every wiggle and move. (Consider the 5% correction that was recently erased. Why? I have no clue, though many express a strong understanding in the moves.)

To some, the projection of confidence of view is seen as a validation of an intense and rigorous decision-making process. Increasingly, however, many are fooled by the abbreviated, simplistic, staccato- like explanations and conclusions, because, more often than not, the snark is shown to be wrong in short order as the curtain disclosing a mere human (not the Wizard of Oz) is revealed.

Delivering the Olive Branch

Over the past two decades my views (often contrarian) have been visible in many venues (e.g., in print, television and Twitter). Since many of my ideas/views are outside of consensus, I often attract haters who are typically shrouded in anonymity. Often I can't fight back, but it is something with which I have learned to live (particularly regarding my experience on Twitter).

Almost every media outlet serves up multiple views on a daily basis. Similar to my own views, it is natural for the media to be targets of criticism, especially since so many points of view are offered.

When I criticize the media, I don't hide; I like to think that I am open, transparent and respectful. I say what is on my mind, but I do it with a sense of fairness.

To this observer, constructive and courteous criticism should be encouraged not rejected.

If my delivery of criticism is misinterpreted as disrespectful, that is a mistake, or at least, that it was not my intention. We must all recognize that in the heat of the market's battle, it is not uncommon to say or write sharply worded views that can easily be misconstrued (and certainly be misconstrued by competing media platforms).

I expect and welcome criticism of my own analysis and decisions when others view me as misguided or wrong -- again, as long as it is respectful.

The Medium Is the Message

In response to my contribution to the New York Post story, I have not been invited on CNBC since August 2013.

I recognize that there are ample examples of talking heads being barred from appearing on CNBC, and many reasons can be cited.  In some cases (you all know who I am referring to) those disinvited guests persistently retaliate and hold a personal grudge.

But that is not my style.

To me, respectful, courteous, objective and thoughtful criticism should be at the epicenter of market and economic discourse in the business media and elsewhere.

What better example is there than Warren Buffett, who invited me ("the credentialed bear") to appear on stage at Berkshire Hathaway's (BRK.A/BRK.B) annual shareholders meeting in Omaha last May to play the role of Daniel in the lion's den by asking him and Charlie Munger some hard-hitting and critical questions.

One-sided, dogmatic views from perma-bulls and perma-bears don't necessarily provide value-added commentary. But to paraphrase Marshall McLuhan the media should acknowledge both its conformists and troublemakers in order to avoid what he said was adopting what we behold.

"In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is a hallucinating idiot ... for he sees what no one else does: things that, to everyone else, are not there."

-- Marshall McLuhan

As an aside, I also want to mention that being occasionally wrong on the markets is not a reason to not invite guests. If that was the case, CNBC and Bloomberg would have very few guests available to appear and talk their books back in 2007 to early 2009.

Though some of my market views have been misguided recently -- I have been cautious in a bull market -- many of the stock ideas that I have delivered on CNBC (and in other media outlets) have been exceptional:

• Altisource Portfolio Solutions (ASPS), rose from $13 in 2009 to over $200 (adjusted for spin-offs).
• My "stock of the decade," Altisource Asset Management (AAMC) rose from $70 to over $1,200 last year.
• Lincoln National (LNC), often mentioned on "Fast Money," has tripled).
• Ocwen Financial (OCN), Altisource Residential (RESI), Monitise (MONI.L/MONIF, which more than doubled since last year) and closed-end municipal bond funds (14 in total, which, on average, are up 10% since late December 2013) have all handsomely rewarded investors.

To be sure, the absence of my appearances on CNBC over the past six months is not the end of the world for CNBC nor for me.

CNBC will continue to thrive as the most important business television network extant, and I certainly have numerous public media platforms in which I regularly appear or am quoted.

As I started this morning's missive, Marshall McLuhan wrote in Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man that the medium is the message.

The Bottom Line

This morning I am reaching out to CNBC to put my comments in the New York Post in the proper perspective, to discontinue the Dougie Kass CNBC embargo and to reconsider its decision not to invite me onto Larry's final show.

It would give me great pleasure in honoring a great American and good friend this week on CNBC.

As I have written today, respectful disagreement should be encouraged not discouraged.

Invite me on CNBC based on the merits of my analysis, the originality of my views and my ability to communicate an opinion clearly and succinctly. Don't continue to be influenced by a one-sided, misconstrued and biased (CNBC-hating) New York Post column published last August.

The olive branch has been offered to CNBC.

• From Buckingham.

Speaking ofBon-Ton Stores (BONT), Buckingham Research gets aggressive (for some of the same reasons I have delivered) on the name today:

We see strong underlying value in BONT as a standalone entity, but also view leadership vacuum as a potential opportunity for a strategic or financial buyer to acquire BONT; we see Belk as the most likely candidate.

1) We remain buyers of BONT and encourage investors to add to positions. While we continue to believe BONT is undervalued as a standalone entity (65% upside to our $18 PT), the recently announced CEO departure in early '15 may expose BONT to the inevitable force of industry consolidation, an ongoing theme in the sector.

2) Based on similarity in business models, geographic complementarity, and balance sheet capacity, we believe Belk is the most logical potential buyer of BONT (we think a PE buyer would be unlikely). That said, Belk is a private company and we do not know if they have the appetite to take on an acquisition of this size.

3) Based on our analysis of similar transactions, we believe there could be at least $100 mm in cost synergies if a strategic buyer such as Belk were to buy BONT, including the cost savings of $40 mm already initiated by BONT.

4) Given additional synergies, including value of NOLs and lower cost of capital, a Belk merger with BONT could be ~33% accretive to Belk shareholders over time (after synergies fully realized), while providing BONT shareholders with a significant premium to the current stock price.

5) BONT is trading at a very attractive 19.5% FCF yield '15 vs. KSS at 10.9% and M at 10.3%. BONT is also trading at 7.9x our '15 EPS, well below the peer average of 12.1x, and at 5.1x our EV/EBITDA '15. Our $18 price target reflects ~13x FY'15 EPS, ~6x EV/EBITDA '15, and a ~12% FCF '15 yield.

Bon-Ton Stores is on my Best Ideas list.

• Still.

Back on March 8 in Barron's, I warned about the speculative excesses in the biotech sector.

And on Sunday in The Wall Street Journal, I was interviewed on the same.

• I am staying liquid and opportunistic.

I start the week at market-neutral.

Though I remain market cautious, I am on baby Ava watch still, so I am staying liquid, opportunistic and very nervous.

• Perhaps better weather?

saw that Bon-Ton Stores (BONT) traded well on Friday in a down tape.

In response to emails from several subscribers, I don't know anything substantive that contributed to the move.

The only thing I would think is that the weather has improved in the northern section of the U.S. Bon-Ton Stores are concentrated in the north.

• I added to my TBT long at $68.80.

My only trade on Friday was to add to my ProShares UltraShort 20+ Year Treasury (TBT) long (short bond position) at around $68.80.

• China's data aapear to be losing its impact on the markets.

The importance and market impact of any news event is a function of what the market is expecting.

In the case of last night's Chinese economic data, it appears that the markets were not expecting much, as U.S. stock futures and the exchanges in China and Japan moved higher on a weaker-than-expected HSBC China Manufacturing PMI, which came out at 48.1 vs. consensus of 48.7 and February's print of 48.5. (Note: The average print over the past 14 months was 50.0.)

If we go back to the January preliminary HSBC China Manufacturing PMI, it came out well below 49.6 vs. consensus of 50.5, and played a role in (along with Turkey and Argentinean peso devaluation) the near-6% six percent correction in the S&P 500 from Jan. 23- Feb. 5.

HSBC and others are painting the loss of momentum in economic growth in China as a signal for more policy moves: "Expects Chinese authorities to launch a series of policy measures to stabilize growth; likely options include lowering entry barriers for private investment, targeted spending on subways, air cleaning and public housing, and guiding lending rates lower."

The most interesting market reaction may be the slight weakening of the yen compared to the usual safe haven yen buying/yen strength and that the Australian dollar (typically sensitive to Chinese economic data) is down only fractionally.

In other words, the market's resilience to the China economic data marks a welcome change!

Here is The Lindsey Group's Peter Boockvar's analysis of the situation:

Bad news was good news in China and the rest of Asia after the Shanghai index put aside the disappointing HSBC China PMI with a .9% rally in the Shanghai index and 1.9% gain in the Hang Seng. The index fell to an 8 month low at 48.1 from 48.5 and below the estimate of 48.7. In the press release, HSBC said "weakness is broadly based with domestic demand softening further." But, this brought hopes for policy steps to offset it and HSBC also said "We expect Beijing to launch a series of policy measures to stabilize growth. Likely options include lowering entry barriers for private investment, targeted spending on subways, air cleaning and public housing and guiding lending rates lower." Markets there are also getting a boost for a 2nd day on the permission for companies to issue preferred stock so as to add diversification to their capital structure. Anyone looking for a big scale stimulus plan (notwithstanding the '08 stimulus overhang is the genesis of its current problems) is not going to see it as the Chinese foreign minister yesterday said it's the quality of growth that is their main focus, not the pace of it. The one asset missing the China stimulus hopes however is copper which is down a touch.

In other overnight news:

The manufacturing and services composite for the EU was little changed at 53.2 in March, just off the 53.3 in February, which was the best since June 2011. The internals, though, were interesting, as France saw its combined index rising back above 50 to the best level since August 2011 (measuring direction, not degree), while Germany's figures moderated but remained above 50. European stock markets are lower across the board, not following Asia and focusing more on Russia as seven of the G8 countries are today discussing what to do next with not many choices on the table.

In the U.S., with the two-year note yield (tightly tethered to the fed funds rate) rising another 3 basis points, to 0.46%, the highest since September, a multiple of Fed speak comes this week to help explain further their thoughts on when and by what gauge the Fed will start raising the fed funds rate at some point after QE ends. The problem the Fed has, though, is qualitative guidance is very unclear. So, how can it clarify something that is inherently muddy? The Fed has lost some control over influencing the long end of the curve; we'll be watching closely to see how it is on the shorter end (it will likely still hold a firm grip). Data wise this week, markit.com gives us its measure of U.S. manufacturing PMI today followed the rest of the week with housing numbers, durable goods orders and income and spending.

• 'One Shining Moment.'

For those who didn't look in the pages of my diary and Real Money Pro over the weekend, here's a link to "One Shining Moment," a column that takes us through lessons taught by the great North Carolina State coach Jim Valvano.