like "commodities market volatile this year, 23% chance... blue chips up this year, 10% chance... broken arrow rogue trader, 25% chance...oh, pizza's here! meeting adjourned"
― dayo, Thursday, 15 September 2011 17:42 (five years ago) Permalink
"we model so well when we're on cocaine!" *fist bumps*
― caek, Thursday, 15 September 2011 17:43 (five years ago) Permalink
sorry "I love that we can model while were on cocaine"
― buzza, Thursday, 15 September 2011 17:51 (five years ago) Permalink
But I don't care. I expect to make enough money to be out of this business in a few years. I think I would like to go back to university. I have become very interested in the humanities and philosophy.
my friend used to work for a company that designed materials to help assuage successful businessmen about their guilt at having made huge amounts of money
it was a bunch of pseudophilosophical tracts that, when boiled down, said "yes, you DESERVED to make all that money! don't feel bad! if you like, give some to charity!"
― dayo, Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:20 (five years ago) Permalink
― iatee, Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:21 (five years ago) Permalink
haha you know him! you can ask T about it sometime
― dayo, Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:22 (five years ago) Permalink
how would u even find such a company? do they leave brochures lying around hotels in st moritz
― diouf est le papa du foot galsen merde lè haters (nakhchivan), Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:23 (five years ago) Permalink
company reps on every 35th storey ledge in new york
― diouf est le papa du foot galsen merde lè haters (nakhchivan), Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:24 (five years ago) Permalink
I wish I could find the article, from the NYT I think, about a Ph.D. in math from Berkeley, a logician even, who took a quant job, made gobs of cash, fucked things up so that his company lost gobs of cash, quit, & ended up doing shark fishing in the Pacific, because it had the thrills to which he'd become accustomed on Wall Street.
― Euler, Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:24 (five years ago) Permalink
article would be from the late 1990s I think
haha wow yeah I'm gonna I want to hear more xp
― iatee, Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:25 (five years ago) Permalink
I might be misremembering but I think that's the thrust
I imagine this company was probably started by a successful businessman turned professional confessional
― dayo, Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:25 (five years ago) Permalink
pretty sure that article wasn't from the 90s cuz it would have been made into a major motion picture with cuba gooding jr in a supporting role
― diouf est le papa du foot galsen merde lè haters (nakhchivan), Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:27 (five years ago) Permalink
relevant to our interests here:
If Aristotle Ran General Motors: The New Soul of Business
written by a former Notre Dame philosophy prof who now is fantastically wealthy peddling this sorta stuff to the plutocrats
― Euler, Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:28 (five years ago) Permalink
I've looked SO LONG for that article over the last few years (shark fishing quant I mean); I think I read a scan of it on a webpage in the 90s & now I can find nothing.
― Euler, Thursday, 15 September 2011 21:29 (five years ago) Permalink
― diouf est le papa du foot galsen merde lè haters (nakhchivan), Friday, 16 September 2011 17:19 (five years ago) Permalink
the monk who sold his ferrari kinda shite
― talking heads, quiet smith (darraghmac), Friday, 16 September 2011 17:33 (five years ago) Permalink
have long pondered a book of common-sense negativity, provisional title 'feel the fear and cop the fuck on'
― talking heads, quiet smith (darraghmac), Friday, 16 September 2011 17:36 (five years ago) Permalink
Detective Superintendent Lee Neiles told the hearing: ‘Mr Birch had been redundant since September 2009 and had had difficulties in finding other means of employment, although the family were financially stable.’
god I *hate* the british use of the term 'redundant'. it's so callous.
― iatee, Friday, 16 September 2011 17:41 (five years ago) Permalink
not in the british meaning, though
― talking heads, quiet smith (darraghmac), Friday, 16 September 2011 17:43 (five years ago) Permalink
― talking heads, quiet smith (darraghmac), Friday, 16 September 2011 17:44 (five years ago) Permalink
yeah I guess I didn't think of that! but from an american's perspective it just sounds evil.
― iatee, Friday, 16 September 2011 17:44 (five years ago) Permalink
here it's like 'you were bad at your job' or 'we can't afford you' but 'redundant' gives me a sense of 'you are unnecessary as a human being'
which means it probably was correctly used w/r/t to this banker, but outside of that...
― iatee, Friday, 16 September 2011 17:47 (five years ago) Permalink
nobody rly uses redundant as a synonym for unemployed and 'laid off' is more often used instead of 'made redundant' in newspapers etc
i think it's just policemen and their strangely clunky phrasing, cf 'other means of employment' instead of 'a job'
― diouf est le papa du foot galsen merde lè haters (nakhchivan), Friday, 16 September 2011 17:48 (five years ago) Permalink
'made redundant' still common terminology iirc, though there's subtle emp. law differences between the two i think
― talking heads, quiet smith (darraghmac), Friday, 16 September 2011 17:50 (five years ago) Permalink
it is a shitty term tho, def
― diouf est le papa du foot galsen merde lè haters (nakhchivan), Friday, 16 September 2011 17:51 (five years ago) Permalink
eh i dunno, it's quite useful as a means of conveying the right tone of contempt society ought to feel for the wastrel layabouts tbh
― talking heads, quiet smith (darraghmac), Friday, 16 September 2011 17:53 (five years ago) Permalink
I have no problem w/redundant. It doesn't imply fault like 'fired' does. It implies that the employer doesn't have any meaningful/profitable work for you to do.
― em vee equals pea queue (Michael White), Friday, 16 September 2011 18:01 (five years ago) Permalink
― partistan (dayo), Friday, 16 September 2011 19:18 (five years ago) Permalink
this is typical police illiterately pretentious usage though. no one except a policeman would say "he has been redundant for a year". you get made redundant, and then you are unemployed. like how only police say "i was proceeding along oxford st" or "he asked myself how to get to piccadilly circus".
― caek, Saturday, 17 September 2011 07:51 (five years ago) Permalink
― is it shakeymostep? (cozen), Saturday, 17 September 2011 08:52 (five years ago) Permalink
Redundant is only a little better than 'managed out'. Not by much.
― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 17 September 2011 08:59 (five years ago) Permalink
further underscoring the impotency of the SEC
― partistan (dayo), Saturday, 17 September 2011 11:40 (five years ago) Permalink
ts your maddie vs our maddie
― talking heads, quiet smith (darraghmac), Saturday, 17 September 2011 14:37 (five years ago) Permalink
Adoboli (who, let me stress, has yet to enter a plea) was in exchange traded funds – which used to look like unit trusts, but have got increasingly complicated. One of the top market regulators, Mario Draghi, recently described ETFs as "reminiscent of what happened in the securitisation market before the crisis". Read that quote again: he's comparing them to sub-prime mortgages. Most of us should get very worried; rogue traders should go steaming in.
― diouf est le papa du foot galsen merde lè haters (nakhchivan), Monday, 19 September 2011 23:12 (five years ago) Permalink
― Whiney G. Blutfarten (dayo), Tuesday, 20 September 2011 12:16 (five years ago) Permalink
Republicans say Dodd-Frank is the root of some of today’s economic problems. It has stopped banks from lending to “job creators,” they contend, and is a direct cause of high unemployment. “It created such uncertainty that the bankers, instead of making loans, pulled back,” said Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, speaking at a South Carolina rally over Labor Day weekend where he again called for the law’s repeal.
― Whiney G. Blutfarten (dayo), Wednesday, 21 September 2011 10:27 (five years ago) Permalink
for this headline I am not against journalistic muckraking
― dayo, Monday, 26 September 2011 18:56 (five years ago) Permalink
Jérôme Kerviel, gambled away billions in 2010. He is still serving a three-year jail sentence.
p cool how you can lose billions and just do 3 years in a minimum security jail
that study sounds pretty weak but oh well i'm still always happy when people push the psychopath angle, cuz if there were a cultural and spiritual system that caused and possibly even mandated people who were not psychopaths to behave like psychopaths that system might benefit from review
― the-dream in the witch house (difficult listening hour), Monday, 26 September 2011 19:31 (five years ago) Permalink
never review ILM, please
― dayo, Monday, 26 September 2011 19:33 (five years ago) Permalink
― Milton Parker, Monday, 26 September 2011 19:56 (five years ago) Permalink
― runaway (Matt P), Monday, 26 September 2011 19:59 (five years ago) Permalink
hahaha! they rule! literally.
― scott seward, Monday, 26 September 2011 20:05 (five years ago) Permalink
you would think they could afford better cameras
― dayo, Monday, 26 September 2011 20:07 (five years ago) Permalink
― runaway (Matt P), Monday, 26 September 2011 20:07 (five years ago) Permalink
they should throw blood diamonds at all the passing hippies.
― scott seward, Monday, 26 September 2011 20:09 (five years ago) Permalink
i'm no help cuz i kinda hate all the people involved. the cops, the fatcats, the hippies. they all need some billy club action.
― scott seward, Monday, 26 September 2011 20:10 (five years ago) Permalink
The Hibernian Express will shave six milliseconds off that time.Of course, verifiable figures are elusive and estimates vary wildly, but it is claimed that a one millisecond advantage could be worth up to $100m (£63m) a year to the bottom line of a large hedge fund.
This is kind of the real plot of the latest William Gibson novel
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Monday, 26 September 2011 20:10 (five years ago) Permalink
US 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals seems inclined to change the rules on insider trading in a way that will make it easier for professional traders to escape liability.
― curmudgeon, Friday, April 25, 2014 8:13 AM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
fwiw, I think insider trading is probably the least terrible illegal thing that goes on on wall street
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Monday, 5 May 2014 18:22 (three years ago) Permalink
― j., Monday, 12 May 2014 21:01 (three years ago) Permalink
That author is making some awfully broad claims based on some very narrow examples, and I would want to see some more data on that.
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Monday, 12 May 2014 21:29 (three years ago) Permalink
everyone get ready to get fucked again
Michael S. Barr, a law professor at the University of Michigan who was an assistant Treasury secretary when the financial crisis was at its worst, is working on a book titled “Five Ways the Financial System Will Fail Next Time.”
The first of them, he says, is “amnesia, willful and otherwise,” regarding the causes and consequences of the crisis.
Let’s hope the others are not here yet. Amnesia was on full view this week when the House Financial Services Committee held a hearing on “the dangers” of financial regulation. Mr. Barr, who helped write the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul law, was the sole witness who thought it made sense for regulators to study the asset management and insurance industries.
In his opening statement, the chairman of the committee, Representative Jeb Hensarling, a Texas Republican, proclaimed “it is almost inconceivable that an asset manager’s failure could cause systemic risk.” He also saw no danger to the system from insurance companies, which are “heavily regulated at the state level.”
― images of war violence and historical smoking (Dr Morbius), Friday, 23 May 2014 15:44 (three years ago) Permalink
x-post- finally skimmed that Boston review piece.
Over the first decade of the twenty-first century, about 5.8 million U.S. manufacturing jobs disappeared. The most frequent explanations for this decline are productivity gains and increased trade with low-wage economies. Both of these factors have been important, but they explain far less of the picture than is usually claimed.
Since the 1980s, financial market pressures have driven companies to hive off activities that sustained manufacturing.
― curmudgeon, Friday, 23 May 2014 16:06 (three years ago) Permalink
As someone who has been following wall street's rush into the rental housing market, I found this story interesting:
http://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-headlines/SS-2-63399/SS-2-536567/Housing Investors Settle Into a Holding PatternHousing investors are retrenching by becoming landlords.Investors Turn Focus to Generating Steady Income From TenantsWith bargains less plentiful, large housing investors are slowing property purchases and turning their focus to generating steady income from tenants.
By Robbie Whelan, Conor Dougherty
After a buying binge that helped drive the housing recovery, big investors are being forced to rethink the home-rental business.
With bargains less plentiful, executives are slowing property purchases and turning their focus to generating steady income from tenants.
A spike in home prices over the past two years was quicker and more striking than many expected, squeezing returns and raising concerns about the industry’s growth prospects.
Small investors long have bought and sold homes. But two years ago when companies such as private-equity giant Blackstone Group LP got into the business, backers said it could emerge as an asset class rivaling publicly owned apartment-rental companies, which own over 600,000 units and have a stock-market value of $88 billion.
The companies jumped into distressed markets, buying foreclosed properties and other homes at depressed prices with plans to fix them up, rent them and eventually sell at a profit. But buyers have slowed their pace after acquiring roughly 140,000 homes worth about $20 billion.
The reason: the unexpectedly sharp recovery in the price of homes over the past two years. In housing markets hardest hit by the bust—places like Phoenix, Las Vegas and much of Southern California—prices have risen as much as 55% off their postcrash lows. Nationally, prices are up 11.4% in the past two years, according to Zillow Inc.
“The distressed wave has largely passed,” said Jonathan Gray, head of real estate for New York-based Blackstone, which has spent $8.6 billion on some 45,000 homes and is the biggest player in the sector.
At the peak of its buying in July 2013, Blackstone was spending about $140 million a week on homes; now it is spending roughly $30 million to $40 million. “We didn’t anticipate prices going up 20% a year,” Mr. Gray said.
Rising prices have forced many investors to accept lower returns than they originally had projected in certain markets, or to buy homes in new cities where the price appreciation has been less rapid. Two years ago, investors could buy in Sunbelt markets such as Phoenix and Las Vegas for gross yields that were in the 15% range, according to Green Street Advisors. That has fallen to around 10%, often lower.
Many investors have decided to hold onto homes for longer than they originally expected because a larger proportion of investor returns is coming from rent instead of the home’s rising value.
“The initial investment thesis was to invest in these homes, make a nice return on the way, and be positioned to sell them for a nice profit,” said Gary Beasley, co-CEO of Starwood Waypoint Residential Trust, one of four public companies in the business. “As we got into it in the first year or two, it became clear that it might be more valuable to hold onto these homes in the long term, and really treat them like a scattered-site apartment building.”
A recent Morgan Stanley report found that buy-to-rent investors have bought about $400 million worth of homes a month in the first few months of 2014, down from about $520 million a month last year.
Investor demand has cooled for stock in the four rental-home companies that went public to fund their expansion. Only American Homes 4 Rent has a stock trading above its IPO price.
Paul Puryear, director of real-estate research for Raymond James & Associates, said investors have been cool to the stocks in part because home-price growth has leveled off, and because the industry still hasn’t grown to a critical mass. “There are too many skeptics in the market,” he said.
Industry executives say there is plenty of money to be made from renting. They say more households became renters after the downturn because of the high rate of foreclosure and the inability or unwillingness of many to buy.
Indeed, apartment rents have been steadily rising for 17 quarters, according to real-estate data firm Reis Inc. They are now 11% higher than they were in late 2009 when they hit their postcrash low, Reis says.
Irvine, Calif.-based American Property Group’s search for yield in the Midwest is paying off, according to its CEO, Saman Shams. Recent acquisitions include a three-bedroom house with a big front yard on North Cherry Lake Lane in Indianapolis. About a month ago, the company paid $67,000 for the home and is spending $15,000 on renovations.
The plan is to rent the house for $1,150 a month. After costs, this will produce just under $10,000 in net income, or an annual net yield of 11.2%, much higher than the 5% to 7% net yields most investors are getting in other markets. “We’re holding these homes for the long term,” Mr. Shams said.
Analysts say the growth of the industry will depend in large part on whether investors can continue to get the better of traditional buyers. Investors have had an advantage in many markets because they have been able to pay cash and close quickly.
But that could change if the economy improves and mortgages get easier to obtain. Individuals may be able to outbid investors because they can get lower interest rates and aren’t as concerned about rate of return.
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Friday, 23 May 2014 16:20 (three years ago) Permalink
― 龜, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 19:52 (three years ago) Permalink
Ugh, and that's from a 2nd Cir. panel made up of a Clinton nominee and 2 Obama nominees.
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 21:40 (three years ago) Permalink
I like District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff based on that above link
― curmudgeon, Thursday, 5 June 2014 16:21 (three years ago) Permalink
yeah that opinion was a big deal when it came out.
― ₴HABΔZZ ¶IZZΔ (Hurting 2), Thursday, 5 June 2014 16:21 (three years ago) Permalink
It's still getting talked about (and criticized)
The banks are all paying with other people’s money.” And a $285 million fine for a bank the size of Citigroup, he noted, is so small that it barely qualifies as a cost of doing business.John C. Coffee Jr., a professor at Columbia Law School, called the ruling a “perfunctory” opinion and said it was a mystery to him why it took the court more than a year to write it. “An average law clerk could have drafted it in two days,” he said.
To my surprise, even prominent corporate defense lawyers who said they felt that Judge Rakoff had gone too far told me this week that they were troubled by the appeals court’s reasoning and its implications. (They didn’t want to be identified, since they litigate before the Second Circuit.)So, with these comments in mind, I decided to don some imaginary judicial robes and write a dissent — the opinion that, in my view, the Second Circuit should have issued. (I’ve omitted all citations and footnotes, leaving those to my equally imaginary law clerks.)...
As a matter of simple logic, Judge Rakoff’s position would seem to be unassailable. How can anyone decide a punishment is fair without knowing anything about what occurred?That’s not to say that judges shouldn’t pay deference to the decision of the parties to settle and the terms they have agreed upon. The parties should have wide latitude to settle cases as they see fit. Courts should defer to the agencies they oversee, and shouldn’t substitute their own judgments for the agencies’. Nothing is inherently wrong with allowing defendants to settle while neither admitting nor denying the accusations, although that should never be used merely as an excuse to avoid trial and might be used too often. I note that the S.E.C. itself has since said it will try to curtail the practice in appropriate cases.But neither should judges, as Judge Rakoff’s lawyer put it, be reduced to “potted plants.” To approve a settlement, judges need some facts. This court doesn’t have to decide how many are enough; that should be decided on a case-by-case basis. But I do note that in this instance, relatively few seem to be in dispute. The offering document prepared by Citigroup, which is at the center of the case, is a matter of record. It would seem relatively easy for Citigroup and the S.E.C. to stipulate to a set of facts sufficient to satisfy Judge Rakoff, especially since both seem eager to put this matter behind them.
― curmudgeon, Saturday, 14 June 2014 13:53 (three years ago) Permalink
Mr. Zucman estimates -- conservatively, in his view -- that $7.6 trillion -- 8 percent of the world's personal financial wealth -- is stashed in tax havens. If all of this illegally hidden money were properly recorded and taxed, global tax revenues would grow by more than $200 billion a year, he believes. And these numbers do not include much larger corporate tax avoidance, which usually follows the letter but hardly the spirit of the law.
― o. nate, Monday, 16 June 2014 21:23 (three years ago) Permalink
deregulation forever everywhere article
― curmudgeon, Friday, 20 June 2014 15:37 (three years ago) Permalink
WikiLeaked Doc Reveals Wall Street Plan for Global Financial Deregulation
― curmudgeon, Friday, 20 June 2014 15:41 (three years ago) Permalink
― everybody loves lana del raymond (s.clover), Monday, 30 June 2014 21:10 (two years ago) Permalink
the correct reading of the chart is: "We have software that allows us to produce this chart."
― everybody loves lana del raymond (s.clover), Monday, 30 June 2014 21:21 (two years ago) Permalink
Latest This American Life is pretty much essential listening.
― my jaw left (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 30 September 2014 03:40 (two years ago) Permalink
heard that shit this weekend, finally this american life making me mad for other reasons than usual
― owe me the shmoney (m bison), Tuesday, 30 September 2014 03:42 (two years ago) Permalink
I found myself really upset at what sniveling, spineless wimps the people who work for the NYFed sound like. And I slightly fell in love with Carmen Segarra.
― my jaw left (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 30 September 2014 04:07 (two years ago) Permalink
I caught most of this while cooking supper over the weekend. I agree entirely. Was enraged by the jaw-dropping timidity of "Let's send Goldman Sachs a scolding letter; worst case is they ignore it." And the subsequent self-congratulation of "we fussed at them pretty good".
― Aimless, Tuesday, 30 September 2014 05:10 (two years ago) Permalink
Very weird to me how Wells Fargo can get fined $185 million for opening fake bank accounts and issuing fake credit cards and the stock price basically doesn't budge. I realize that the $185 million itself is not a lot in the grand scheme of their earnings, but I would think the fake accounts part would matter. Maybe it's balanced out by their firing of 5300 employees -- wall street loves layoffs!
― the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Friday, 9 September 2016 14:09 (nine months ago) Permalink
vxx (etf based on volatility index) is shooting up today. Wonder if we're seeing the beginnings of a big fall selloff.
― the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Friday, 9 September 2016 16:01 (nine months ago) Permalink
Yesterday’s Senate Banking Committee hearing on Wells Fargo should have ended with CEO John Stumpf hauled off in handcuffs. In a little over two hours, Stumpf revealed enough information, combined with what was already known in public records and filings, to make a powerful case for securities fraud. Specifically, that he touted fraudulent sales figures to investors as evidence of the bank’s growth, boosting the stock price and personally benefiting by $200 million. Worst of all, Stumpf used low-paid workers as the raw materials for this scheme, and as the scapegoats when it unraveled....
If the SEC and the Justice Department don’t get involved here, they might as well not even exist. CFPB’s Cordray and OCC’s Thomas Curry wouldn’t say whether they issued criminal referrals to law enforcement in this case, though Cordray hinted at it. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, if she wants to emerge from wherever she’s been hiding on this issue, has enough information to bring cases.
Will President Barack Obama’s administration end its tenure as it began, by refusing to prosecute systemic fraud in the financial markets? That’s the unavoidable conclusion so far.
― The Hon. J. Piedmont Mumblethunder (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 15:39 (nine months ago) Permalink
saw some of Elizabeth Warren's leveling of Stumpf on CNN yesterday, kinda made me want to cheer at my cubicle in the big bank I work for
― Dominique, Wednesday, 21 September 2016 15:50 (nine months ago) Permalink
Obama's doing $34,000 a plate fundraising dinners and then imploring money to get out of politics a day later. Sure, it's good theater to watch Warren put him on the hotspot but she'd never publicly go after the person who could actually launch an investigation: Lynch has always been a stooge.
― Brevs Mekis (dandydonweiner), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 15:53 (nine months ago) Permalink
Wells Fargo has multiple ex-cabinet members on its Board. Get politics out of money is more like it.
― the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 16:10 (nine months ago) Permalink
the amount of money involved in this huge fraud.... 2.6 million dollars.
― Gatemouth, Wednesday, 21 September 2016 16:14 (nine months ago) Permalink
Does that include the lost wages for all of the people WFB threw under the bus?
― schwantz, Wednesday, 21 September 2016 16:16 (nine months ago) Permalink
5300 people * $50k per annum is $250MM.
― Brevs Mekis (dandydonweiner), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 16:18 (nine months ago) Permalink
Supposedly (according to the informational memo WF "helpfully" provided employees about this crisis) WF goes through 100k branch employees a year. I'm not sure how that was intended to reassure.. Branch employees (tellers, personal bankers, even sales managers) get treated like crap and not paid a living wage, yes, but that's an even larger issue than the small amount of people that were fired in connection with this.
― Gatemouth, Wednesday, 21 September 2016 16:22 (nine months ago) Permalink
I'm not even convinced that all of those layoffs were really due to "bad acting" tbh, given that their MO is to fire people after like two months if they don't meet their sales targets.
― the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 17:08 (nine months ago) Permalink