Search results

RMORSE, I normally don't chime in on this type of thread, but I've gotta back up DEF in this debate. You are blatantly misrepresenting things and/or taking things that are a positive of being with IB and trying to turn them into a negative. IB does not have a prop trading desk. They do...

The logic behind merging the postal service into UPS and FedEx is actually quite simple and clear. Since 2006 first-class mail volume has been dropping like a rock. This trend will obviously continue as more people use other technology. This mail accounts for 80% of USPS revenue...

Actually, I doubt it would be much different. They do the same thing with their flat rate shipping. They've all (including the USPS) discovered that it increases their costs to individually charge for each small parcel. So they've all implemented some sort of tiered system like the FedEx flat...

Good news this morning and a Greece rating upgrade. Nothing unexpected from Fed. All this confirmed a technical breakout @ SPX 1378 multi-year high. Nothing more to it than that.

Historic data says otherwise. Housing serves as a de facto saving for most people. People spend the same portion of their income and save roughly the same portion of their income over time. The only thing that changes is method of savings. When shelter and transportation make up a smaller...

What would be so bad about UPS and FedEx handling all of the postage in the US?

There are pretty much just two things that will happen by suddenly requiring a 50% down payment. 1) Houses will get smaller. 2) The number of people working in residential construction will shrink. That's pretty much it. Of course that is after the immediate 50% drop in home prices...

OK, just one quick question. Is there any real difference between that person in your example paying their mortgage vs going out to dinner? What you are suggesting is that had the money been used for a mortgage payment it would not have "gone back into the economy". Do you really think...

Not true according to the contact at the NFA as well as my lawyer. ONLY discretionary accounts are required to be reported. Prop accounts are never required. You linked the NFA document that explains that very point. It clearly states that only discretionary accounts are subject to the 5...

Remember that giving up equity is not your only option. Profit sharing is much more common and would likely be a much better option for you, depending on what this person is going to be doing for you. Keep a few things in mind. Marketing -- a small fund doesn't need in house marketing. The...

This is not true according to my lawyers as well as the NFA and CFTC. The only required performance history is the most recent 5 years of every discretionary account for every principal/trading partner in the company. This EXCLUDES proprietary or hypothetical performance. Before including any...

The fact that you are referring to this person as a marketing guy suggests that you don't know much about that side of the business. Be very careful! This is not like any other business where you can simply throw your name out through traditional advertizing channels and methods. You'll get...

I don't agree with this post. Marketing consideration is a part of assembling a business plan. Don't even think about registering without a completed business plan. Registration can be expensive, and shouldn't be started until it is shown that the business is viable. The NFA is very...

AFAIK, they haven't made a decision yet, but it shouldn't matter much anyway. The $3B has to do with the "voluntary" level of participation in the bond swap. Only about 15% held out for an insurance payment.

Doesn't really even matter though. A CDS trigger would only amount to about $3 billion now, which is pennies compared to what it would have been a few months ago.

Well, they just started their meeting a couple hours ago, so we should find out shortly. They need 12 out of 15 votes in favor of a default.

Maybe this is where the 9.1% number came from. http://www.gallup.com/poll/153161/Unemployment-February.aspx

The key point is that there was never going to be a CDS default. The bond holders were not given any other choice but to participate. If they chose to fight it, they would've been forced to to participate via CAC and they situation for them would've been even worse. They still would've had to...

Seems like you are missing a key point. The bond holders were not given a choice. You are acting like they had the option of not agreeing to the swap. They were told several times over the last week that agreeing to the swap was the only option on the table. Either agree to it voluntarily or...

+1