Jump to content

Languorous loitering


Recommended Posts

Posted

Looking a bit iffy for the early openers: Kiwis +0.5%, Aussies +0.2%, Nikkers and Sth Korea flat and Singers -0.1%.

 

Aussie market sectors are scrambled: Financials +0.6% is leading the green end with IT -1.4% at the other.

 

 

t?s=%5ENZ50

 

 

t?s=%5EAORD

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted

w?s=%5EAORD

 

 

Taking it easy today. All Ords closed -0.1% with IT -1.7% down the most. Gains were modest for the green sectors: Financials +0.6% and Utilities +0.4%.

 

Asia static: China flat, Honkers +0.1%, India +0.3% and Nikkers -0.8%.

 

 

On to UK/Europe:

 

 

image;size=239x110

 

 

 

image;size=239x110

 

 

 

image;size=239x110

Posted

I still can't get my head around this. When GS makes money with it's own capital they take 50% of it. They will be real lucky to get 10% of OPM.

 

Say what? Where are those figures from? When they prop trade the firms money, they get all the P&L.

 

I figured GS would just drop the commercial bank disguise. How does GS work as a commercial bank. One that doesn't take deposits no less.

 

Access to the Fed window for 0% bags-O-cash. Plus implied Fed backing lowers debt cost. Plus I believe they have a bunch of debt out there that is Fed or FDIC insured or something like that.

 

It's a somewhat different issue for JPM but as I asked, how in the hell do they just drop their $XX trillion derivatives book? Is there some semantic trick here about what comprises proprietary trading?

 

The deriv book is obviously staying with the firm. I seriously doubt the 20 folks they had in prop were running that. If the derivs are the other side of customer positions -- that ain't prop, that's flow.

 

 

A week after the JPM news there still is almost no commentary on this that I have seen.

 

 

Lastly, I am sure Rationalize can offer a better response, and in the process make me look like a complete douche. A 2 fer !!!

 

Nice job. B)

 

post-2117-12838634445638.png

Posted
The ultra rich, or those with investable assets of at least $30 million, increased their wealth by 21.5 percent last year

 

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/10/08/0831_expensive_new_homes/index.htm?campaign_id=rss_topSlideShows

 

funny how that statistic is buried in the middle of the article. I'm sure it will give all of the newly and probably permanently unemployed former middle class professionals a lot of comfort :angry: if only they knew this.

 

So the question is, how much of that is real wealth i.e. money in the bank, and how much of it is appreciated stocks, "wealth" that can vanish in an instant.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Stool Pigeons Wire Message Board? Tell a friend!
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • ×
    • Create New...