elizabeth warren is correct on this

[Jauronimo]

The bailout is being looked at by many and some as good enough to be a remedy with what is wrong. There still need to be work done to reduce the vulnerability of the market and heavy impact it has on the population.

 

We do not need to dumb it down, we just need to get the insiders out. Regulation and policy is just a farce for what is really happening and the corruption. There is no reason that a corporate investor in a Wall Street firm should have reasonable access to information before me, in my own home. That firms can pay the SEC for first hand knowledge is scary to me.

I'm going to ignore the fact that this post is entirely off topic and just let you know that you can access all public filings for free and take in earnings calls just like the big boys from your very own home. Firms cannot pay the SEC for insider information. The SEC is not a research firm.

[GG]

I'm going to ignore the fact that this post is entirely off topic and just let you know that you can access all public filings for free and take in earnings calls just like the big boys from your very own home. Firms cannot pay the SEC for insider information. The SEC is not a research firm.

 

I think he's referencing the feeds that high frequency traders get from the exchanges, which of course is perfectly legal and doesn't come from the SEC. But other than that ...

[boyst]

You feel like you should real time access to information, and applied market research; which investment firms have paid for, and you have not; just as they do?

 

If real time access and applied market research are free use, rather than commodities, why did those firms pay for it?

I do not have access to the information as directly as they do. The most access I have is the ticker on CNBC or other websites which can be delayed. I do not want to trust that etrade.com is going to give me accurate information every time because quite easily they could neglect to update something timely with purpose and intent to capitalize.

 

They pay because they are smart and have pooled together resources to make that happen. I guess I could pool together many of my buddies as investors and do the same thing, but that is not quite fair. It is business taking advantage of a system in place which I am all for but the system itself is not exactly fair. That's just my opinion. There is just too much manipulation in the market place by the government.

 

I have no idea of what you just wrote, other than incoherent regurgitation of Wall Street Bad tidbits.

 

If the bailout was truly the work to benefit the insiders on Wall Street, how do you explain the disappearance of 3 major, bulge bracket investment banks, dramatic shrinking of the industry, coupled with 20%+ reduction in industry-wide employment?

The market is finally righting itself after a few decades of over inflating its own importance and value.

 

I'm going to ignore the fact that this post is entirely off topic and just let you know that you can access all public filings for free and take in earnings calls just like the big boys from your very own home. Firms cannot pay the SEC for insider information. The SEC is not a research firm.

Firms can pay for information before public information and first chance to get it. It isn't the SEC, it is the Fed. Well, the point man for the Fed.

[TakeYouToTasker]

I think he's referencing the feeds that high frequency traders get from the exchanges, which of course is perfectly legal and doesn't come from the SEC. But other than that ...

I interpreted it as access to research and real time trading.

[Chef Jim]

I should have followed through with my reply. One example of how I've changed my mind on an issue by reading posted debates here is on the topic of gay marriage. I've never understood anything other than heterosexual attraction, and that inability to relate was causing me to view homosexual relationships as being less genuine than straight ones. I can't remember exactly which thread it was - it was likely over the course of several different threads - but my view on the subject has changed as a direct result of reading and considering all the points that were being made. My stance on the issue of gay marriage is now one of support, not because I see no difference between gay and straight marriages, but because equal rights apply to everyone, and shouldn't be questioned simply on the basis my own personal biases.

Ok fair enough. My original post wasn't meant as anything more than tongue in cheek.

[DC Tom]

There is no reason that a corporate investor in a Wall Street firm should have reasonable access to information before me, in my own home. That firms can pay the SEC for first hand knowledge is scary to me.

 

My brother-in-law is an analyst on The Street, and I can tell you exactly why he has access to information before you, in your own home: he goes out and gets it. And not from the SEC, either. He wouldn't get anything from the SEC that I can't get myself. He flies all over the world, meeting people to get information on capital markets.

 

But I guarantee that if he stayed home and didn't talk to people, he would have no more access to information than you do.

[TakeYouToTasker]

My brother-in-law is an analyst on The Street, and I can tell you exactly why he has access to information before you, in your own home: he goes out and gets it. And not from the SEC, either. He wouldn't get anything from the SEC that I can't get myself. He flies all over the world, meeting people to get information on capital markets.

 

But I guarantee that if he stayed home and didn't talk to people, he would have no more access to information than you do.

I'll go a step further.

 

How much money do global finance houses spend on market research and infrastructure? How much money does jboyst spend on market research and infrastructure?

[boyst]

My brother-in-law is an analyst on The Street, and I can tell you exactly why he has access to information before you, in your own home: he goes out and gets it. And not from the SEC, either. He wouldn't get anything from the SEC that I can't get myself. He flies all over the world, meeting people to get information on capital markets.

 

But I guarantee that if he stayed home and didn't talk to people, he would have no more access to information than you do.

Understood. He has found an ability and developed the talent to pull together resources and information. There are many people and groups, I am sure, that would pay for what he has discovered, one already does. I am not saying his information should be public or should be granted to me as I sit in my home and click the mouse time and time again on different reports.

 

What I am trying to tell Jaur and a few others is that I cannot get the access to the trading floor and direct access to real time information. I cannot get the same access to reports before other firms when they are public. I cannot choose to invest my money with companies I would like to choose without government intervention or them manipulating which information is put out in a timely manner.

 

I'll go a step further.

 

How much money do global finance houses spend on market research and infrastructure? How much money does jboyst spend on market research and infrastructure?

Trust me, I understand your point. They pay for the right to get it because the rules allow them to do so and I will/could/might use those reports to make my own decisions.

 

However, I take issue with the fact that if I watch Kramer (that's the MSNBC guy who yells, right?) and he tells me to buy Acme Shoes because reports out of DingDong Analysts say "xyz" how can I realistically match what was said to that information? How can I check that report, even if I paid? How can I get as equal of access as DingDong in a manner which lets me compete? Even if I had the money to throw away?

 

edit: oh, and to answer your question, I spent about $1.4b on global research this year, still under my budget. My Global Research division is going to have one hell of a Christmas party because of it.

Edited December 16, 2014 by jboyst62

[GG]

 

However, I take issue with the fact that if I watch Kramer (that's the MSNBC guy who yells, right?) and he tells me to buy Acme Shoes because reports out of DingDong Analysts say "xyz" how can I realistically match what was said to that information? How can I check that report, even if I paid? How can I get as equal of access as DingDong in a manner which lets me compete? Even if I had the money to throw away?

 

 

You should stop digging right there. Anyone who bases their investment decisions on some loudmouth on TV, deserves to lose every penny he has.

[Jauronimo]

Understood. He has found an ability and developed the talent to pull together resources and information. There are many people and groups, I am sure, that would pay for what he has discovered, one already does. I am not saying his information should be public or should be granted to me as I sit in my home and click the mouse time and time again on different reports.

 

What I am trying to tell Jaur and a few others is that I cannot get the access to the trading floor and direct access to real time information. I cannot get the same access to reports before other firms when they are public. I cannot choose to invest my money with companies I would like to choose without government intervention or them manipulating which information is put out in a timely manner.

 

Trust me, I understand your point. They pay for the right to get it because the rules allow them to do so and I will/could/might use those reports to make my own decisions.

 

However, I take issue with the fact that if I watch Kramer (that's the MSNBC guy who yells, right?) and he tells me to buy Acme Shoes because reports out of DingDong Analysts say "xyz" how can I realistically match what was said to that information? How can I check that report, even if I paid? How can I get as equal of access as DingDong in a manner which lets me compete? Even if I had the money to throw away?

 

edit: oh, and to answer your question, I spent about $1.4b on global research this year, still under my budget. My Global Research division is going to have one hell of a Christmas party because of it.

And I'm telling you that you don't know what information you're talking about. You keep referencing either material, non-public information (i.e., insider info) which is illegal to trade on or you're talking about analyst reports, which are written using information which is available to you. Trading floors are not a trove of inside information. That **** is kept secret if someone has it and certainly isn't published and disseminated.

 

People who have no idea how investment decisions are made have tunnel vision on the speed of quotes as if thats driving what is being bought and sold when in actual practice, weeks of modeling, research and scrutiny using information which is largely available to you, is whats driving these decisions. Afterward its a matter of filling orders. You have access to SEC filings for free, at the same time as everyone else. Bloomberg, CapitalIQ and the fancy toys that the pros get to play with for a hefty per user fee, simply interface with these SEC filings. You can buy analyst reports, which again are written based on information available to the public, just as easily as any corporate client. You can have custom research performed by FactSet if you'd like.

 

Please tell me some more about how its going down on the Street, though. It amuses me.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Jauronimo

[DC Tom]

What I am trying to tell Jaur and a few others is that I cannot get the access to the trading floor and direct access to real time information. I cannot get the same access to reports before other firms when they are public.

 

Sure you can. You just have to pay for it.

 

It even costs less than you think, I'd bet. I've looked in to it.

 

I cannot choose to invest my money with companies I would like to choose without government intervention or them manipulating which information is put out in a timely manner.

 

I'm not even sure what that means. I invest in companies I'd like without government interference, and I've never had any issue with timely release of information.

[VABills]

Sure you can. You just have to pay for it.

 

It even costs less than you think, I'd bet. I've looked in to it.

 

[/size]

 

I'm not even sure what that means. I invest in companies I'd like without government interference, and I've never had any issue with timely release of information.

 

So I go away for a year and a half and people still don't know what the hell they are talking about. Tom, what the hell have you been doing?

[boyst]

You should stop digging right there. Anyone who bases their investment decisions on some loudmouth on TV, deserves to lose every penny he has.

Was just the first example I came up with. I don't know all the trading sites and was otherwise going to say listening to the etrade baby.

 

 

And I'm telling you that you don't know what information you're talking about. You keep referencing material, non-public information (i.e., insider info) like reports which are not yet public, which are illegal to trade on. Trading floors are not a trove of inside information. That **** is kept secret if someone has it.

To begin, and to everyone - I do realize I am a bit out of my league understanding this discussion some times but I am listening and even learning.

 

Anyway, it is not insider trading that I am referencing. It is first hand knowledge and a mechanism that allow these investment firms to move faster then anyone else. The mechanism is enabled by government handling.

 

People who have no idea how investment decisions are made have tunnel vision on the speed of quotes as if thats driving what is being bought and sold when in actual practice, weeks of modeling, research and scrutiny using information which is largely available to you, is whats driving these decisions. Afterward its a matter of filling orders. You have access to SEC filings for free, at the same time as everyone else. Bloomberg, CapitalIQ and the fancy toys that the pros get to play with for a hefty per user fee, simply interface with these SEC filings. You can buy analyst reports just as easily as any corporate client. You can have custom research performed by FactSet if you'd like.

 

Please tell me some more about how its going down on the Street, though. It amuses me.

the system has always favored itself. I can't describe it accurately very well but will attempt.

 

The investors on/of Wall Street consume a lot of resources to enable their success. The need for these resources has created an entire field of business, even. That field of business employs millions and those millions work hand in hand to keep certain clients at the front of the line and certain clients at the back. I am not arguing that I as an individual should get treated the same but am arguing that if three firms are all paying for information from XYZ Analyst Firm then those three should each be getting the same information. However, they are not and it is not simply due to the complex algorithms that have been spoke of.

 

I'm not even sure what that means. I invest in companies I'd like without government interference, and I've never had any issue with timely release of information.

I am talking about times when the government will sit on releasing information in an investigation, for example. Take Sirius, for example. There was a time when I had thought about putting some money in to them because I liked what they were doing and I used them. The merger came about with SiriusXM and for a very long time was held up by FCC and SEC regulation. To suggest that someone would have information about the timing of those investigations and the conclusions is absurd but one who is more familiar with the situation may know that the time frame in which such events would occur. In the Sirius situation I did not invest with them because the investigation scared me off making me believe that there was more to the simple merger then what appeared and if they took that much interest in it they will continue to seek more - therefore they could change the structure or method of which Sirius would operate.

 

I hope I said that as accurately as I hoped.

[Azalin]

Ok fair enough. My original post wasn't meant as anything more than tongue in cheek.

 

I probably should have recognized that.

[Jauronimo]

Was just the first example I came up with. I don't know all the trading sites and was otherwise going to say listening to the etrade baby.

 

 

To begin, and to everyone - I do realize I am a bit out of my league understanding this discussion some times but I am listening and even learning.

 

Anyway, it is not insider trading that I am referencing. It is first hand knowledge and a mechanism that allow these investment firms to move faster then anyone else. The mechanism is enabled by government handling.

 

the system has always favored itself. I can't describe it accurately very well but will attempt.

 

The investors on/of Wall Street consume a lot of resources to enable their success. The need for these resources has created an entire field of business, even. That field of business employs millions and those millions work hand in hand to keep certain clients at the front of the line and certain clients at the back. I am not arguing that I as an individual should get treated the same but am arguing that if three firms are all paying for information from XYZ Analyst Firm then those three should each be getting the same information. However, they are not and it is not simply due to the complex algorithms that have been spoke of.

 

I am talking about times when the government will sit on releasing information in an investigation, for example. Take Sirius, for example. There was a time when I had thought about putting some money in to them because I liked what they were doing and I used them. The merger came about with SiriusXM and for a very long time was held up by FCC and SEC regulation. To suggest that someone would have information about the timing of those investigations and the conclusions is absurd but one who is more familiar with the situation may know that the time frame in which such events would occur. In the Sirius situation I did not invest with them because the investigation scared me off making me believe that there was more to the simple merger then what appeared and if they took that much interest in it they will continue to seek more - therefore they could change the structure or method of which Sirius would operate.

 

I hope I said that as accurately as I hoped.

If they aren't its because theres different levels of service and subscription or they're ordering custom reports from third parties like FactSet. Analyst reports are not altered based on the purchaser. You are wildly off base here again. The proprietary algorithms you're referencing have nothing to do with the research operation.

 

The SEC doesn't govern or enforce anti trust laws. Anti trust inquiries are not government manipulation of capital markets. Your trepidation about playing Sirius XM merger arbitrage is again, wildly off base.

[/dev/null]

The SEC doesn't govern or enforce anti trust laws.

But they do dominate FCS

[OCinBuffalo]

I think the PPP Finance Jedi Council is missing something here.

 

Of course, John Stienbeck could easily see what they are missing, why, and told us both in the Grapes of Wrath.

 

There's absolutely nothing wrong with what any of the Jedis here are saying(and once again birdog is getting a free education)...but it misses the psychology of the situation completely.

 

Jboyst, whether he likes it or not, knows that there's this thing called Wall Street, he knows his life can be significantly effected by it, he has little idea why it works, how it works, or why his life can be significantly effected by it. He feels a little trapped, but not totally paranoid. The best he can do is draw dashed, not solid, lines to those who may be responsible for this feeling. If he had a choice, he'd rather not have anything to do with this. But he doesn't see a choice.

 

This is daunting because, why should a farmer be effected by any of this? What right does anyone have to cause the economy to fail/receed on such a large scale that it effects a farmer? Put simply, when they fail, what right do they have to pass their failure onto anyone else but themselves, or worse, the entire economy?

 

When the farmer tries to express these feelings(which is what they are, they are not informed/educated thoughts), he gets finance-babble from the Jedis, because they don't understand WHY Jboyst is saying what he is saying, and asking what he's asking.

 

There are a hell of lot more Jboysts out there than Jedis...and Wall Street might want to consider that it's not hard to make the case: "no one has been held responsible for 2007, they got away with it". And that certainly doesn't help the feeling that Jboyst has. Jboyst isn't actively talking schit about Wall Street, but others are.

 

The Jedis here need to wise up:

1. you have a PR problem that remains easily exploitable,

2. none of you have done anything publicly to reassure anyone that you are responsible adults, not greedy, petulant children

3. instead, you have used politicians privately to achieve your aims.

 

Not helpful. Quite stupid in fact, and shows that some pre-2007 arrogance remains, when there should be 0.

 

Elizabeth Warren can easily rally the willfully ignorant(bridog) against you. Jboyst isn't one of them, but, if you don't solve your PR problem with action, not talk? The millions of Jboysts are going to be as indifferent and dismissive of you in repsonse Warren's batshit crazy, as you have been to their feelings since 2007, and of Jboyst in this thread. And, don't forget, the Rs have the right to turn on you at any time as well, because of the billlions of $ you've been giving Democrats to keep them from going full-Warren on you.

Edited December 16, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[Chef Jim]

Understood. He has found an ability and developed the talent to pull together resources and information. There are many people and groups, I am sure, that would pay for what he has discovered, one already does. I am not saying his information should be public or should be granted to me as I sit in my home and click the mouse time and time again on different reports.

 

What I am trying to tell Jaur and a few others is that I cannot get the access to the trading floor and direct access to real time information. I cannot get the same access to reports before other firms when they are public. I cannot choose to invest my money with companies I would like to choose without government intervention or them manipulating which information is put out in a timely manner.

 

Trust me, I understand your point. They pay for the right to get it because the rules allow them to do so and I will/could/might use those reports to make my own decisions.

 

However, I take issue with the fact that if I watch Kramer (that's the MSNBC guy who yells, right?) and he tells me to buy Acme Shoes because reports out of DingDong Analysts say "xyz" how can I realistically match what was said to that information? How can I check that report, even if I paid? How can I get as equal of access as DingDong in a manner which lets me compete? Even if I had the money to throw away?

 

edit: oh, and to answer your question, I spent about $1.4b on global research this year, still under my budget. My Global Research division is going to have one hell of a Christmas party because of it.

So buy a mutual fund and STFU.

 

I probably should have recognized that.

But of course.

[/dev/null]

So buy a mutual fund and STFU.

I don't see STFU listed on either the New York Stock Exchange or NASDAQ

[boyst]

So buy a mutual fund and STFU.

I have a mutual fund. I have like 6, i think I lost count.

 

I think the PPP Finance Jedi Council is missing something here.

 

Of course, John Stienbeck could easily see what they are missing, why, and told us both in the Grapes of Wrath.

 

There's absolutely nothing wrong with what any of the Jedis here are saying(and once again birdog is getting a free education)...but it misses the psychology of the situation completely.

 

Jboyst, whether he likes it or not, knows that there's this thing called Wall Street, he knows his life can be significantly effected by it, he has little idea why it works, how it works, or why his life can be significantly effected by it. He feels a little trapped, but not totally paranoid. The best he can do is draw dashed, not solid, lines to those who may be responsible for this feeling. If he had a choice, he'd rather not have anything to do with this. But he doesn't see a choice.

 

This is daunting because, why should a farmer be effected by any of this? What right does anyone have to cause the economy to fail/receed on such a large scale that it effects a farmer? Put simply, when they fail, what right do they have to pass their failure onto anyone else but themselves, or worse, the entire economy?

 

When the farmer tries to express these feelings(which is what they are, they are not informed/educated thoughts), he gets finance-babble from the Jedis, because they don't understand WHY Jboyst is saying what he is saying, and asking what he's asking.

 

There are a hell of lot more Jboysts out there than Jedis...and Wall Street might want to consider that it's not hard to make the case: "no one has been held responsible for 2007, they got away with it". And that certainly doesn't help the feeling that Jboyst has. Jboyst isn't actively talking schit about Wall Street, but others are.

 

The Jedis here need to wise up:

1. you have a PR problem that remains easily exploitable,

2. none of you have done anything publicly to reassure anyone that you are responsible adults, not greedy, petulant children

3. instead, you have used politicians privately to achieve your aims.

 

Not helpful. Quite stupid in fact, and shows that some pre-2007 arrogance remains, when there should be 0.

 

Elizabeth Warren can easily rally the willfully ignorant(bridog) against you. Jboyst isn't one of them, but, if you don't solve your PR problem with action, not talk? The millions of Jboysts are going to be as indifferent and dismissive of you in repsonse Warren's batshit crazy, as you have been to their feelings since 2007, and of Jboyst in this thread. And, don't forget, the Rs have the right to turn on you at any time as well, because of the billlions of $ you've been giving Democrats to keep them from going full-Warren on you.

Thanks for putting it as you did. I think it accurately reflects the situation. The naive, the ignorant, the farmers, the jboyst's, the majority, the 99%... whatever anyone would call my classification/group/population is large. We know enough to know 2007 was a goof up and look back on the 90's when things were better. We look back and see what was done under Reagan and Clinton and then what was done under Bush and Obama. We know it will happen again because it happened to our parents and it happened to our grandparents. We're the working class that this keeps happening to ruin. We are more enlightened now with information readily available 24/7 and more voices and channels/sites/sources for them then ever. Eventually, we're going to start listening to one voice or two and that is going to be the first one we start seeing making a difference.

 

If Wall Street thinks it is making a difference by telling us that Bank of America needs more money, more of my money already invested which they're charging me ridiculous fees for so that some guy can sit in an office and earn millions for ruining his company and then politicians back that decision - we will turn on that politician. It happened in the last election and the election before that.

 

Eventually what must happen is something that many people are crying for: a third party. That or simply remove the politics from business. This is a free market capitalism. Let it be free and get the government out of it. If cheating and stealing occurs let the individual pay for it and don't make the entire industry at fault and then pass regulation to fix it. It's too late.