Advertisements



MiB: Jack Schwager on Trading Wizards

    This week, we speak with Jack Schwager, author of various Market Wizard books. He is also the founder of Fund Seeder, a platform designed to match undiscovered trading talent with capital worldwide. His latest book is “Unknown Market Wizards: The best traders you’ve never heard of.” He explains his process of interviewing traders: He… Read More The post MiB: Jack Schwager on Trading Wizards appeared first on The Big Picture.     This week, we speak with Jack Schwager, author of various Market Wizard books. He is also the founder of Fund Seeder, a platform designed to match undiscovered trading talent with capital worldwide. His latest book is “Unknown Market Wizards: The best traders you’ve never heard of.” He explains his process of interviewing traders: He spends a full day or two with them, tape recorder running, having a conversation, and firing questions at the traders, He has convinced reluctant traders to speak with him by giving them final edit on their chapter to correct or counter anything. Other than minor factual corrections (dates, locations, names) no one has objected to his analysis of their trading methodologies or track record. The traders Schwager speaks with all have put up eye-popping performance numbers using very different approaches.  Markets may have changed, but they are a puzzle to be deciphered. Those who figure out the key find great riches await them. But before you give up your day job, understand how daunting the odds are: the vast majority of speculative traders go bust. A list of his favorite books is here; A transcript of our conversation is available here Monday. You can stream and download our full conversation, including the podcast extras on iTunes, Spotify, Google, Bloomberg, and Acast. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here. Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Chamath Palihapitiya, founder of Social Capital. After a career as an engineer and team leader at AOL, Facebook, and Slack, he became one of the more successful VCs. He earned the nickname “SPAC King” for numerous successful deals he has done, and today is a part-owner of the Golden State Warriors.     Jack Schwager Authored Books Market Wizards: Interviews with Top Traders by Jack Schwager The New Market Wizards: Conversations with America’s Top Traders by Jack Schwager Hedge Fund Market Wizards: How Winning Traders Win by Jack Schwager Unknown Market Wizards: The best traders you’ve never heard of by Jack Schwager   Jack Schwager Fave Books Influence, New and Expanded: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini In the Kingdom of Ice: The Grand and Terrible Polar Voyage of the USS Jeannette by Hampton Sides The River of Doubt: Theodore Roosevelt’s Darkest Journey by Candice Millard Endurance: Shackleton’s Incredible Voyage by Alfred Lansing     The post MiB: Jack Schwager on Trading Wizards appeared first on The Big Picture......»»

Category: blogSource: TheBigPictureOct 3rd, 2021

The Perfect Con Job

The Perfect Con Job Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via DailyReckoning.com, One of the most famous examples of smart people being sucked into a bubble and losing a packet as a result is Isaac Newton’s forays in and out of the 1720 South Sea Bubble that is estimated to have sucked in 80–90% of the entire pool of investors in England. Some have claimed that Newton did not buy early in 1711, sell in April 1720 for a nice profit and then sink the majority of his substantial fortune in the bubble as it peaked in summer, then suffering heavy losses as the bubble popped in September, but evidence supports this chain of events. Newton “bought the dip” on the way up and then added to his position as the mania rolled over, making his final fatal purchase as a “buy the dip” just before the “last chance to exit” spike — which is precisely the point the current bubble has finally reached, when everyone is all in and “buying the dip” to increase the profits that everyone agrees are essentially guaranteed because the Fed. Not Even a Genius Can See a Bubble Isaac Newton was a very smart man. Newton was not just smart and wealthy, but he was financially sophisticated and a very successful investor who favored financial instruments such as bonds over land. He was the ultimate experienced, savvy investor who would not be bamboozled by specious math. The problem is, alas, smart people are still humans, and humans run with the herd when the herd is minting money. The Herd Is in for a Rude Awakening Absurdly farfetched claims are gussied up with “mathiness” and narratives that are powerfully simplistic, with just enough common-sense credibility to enliven the excessive greed that lies dormant but ready in every human heart. Despite Newton’s tremendous intelligence and experience, he fell victim to the bubble along with the vast herd of credulous greedy punters. Newton died a wealthy man in 1727, so his bubble misadventure did not ruin him, though it did lop a huge chunk off his net worth. Many in the herd, then and now, won’t be as fortunate. In fact, right now they’re being set up for a massive fall. And the financially intelligent could make fortunes as a result. Let me explain… An Opportunity to Scoop up Mega-Millions An extraordinary opportunity to scoop up mega-millions in profits has arisen, and grabbing all this free money makes perfect financial sense. Now the question is: Will those who have the means to grab the dough have the guts to do so? Here’s the opportunity: Retail punters (those who attempt to make fast profits from an investment regardless of its underlying fundamentals) have gone wild for call options, churning $2.6 trillion in mostly short-term calls — bets on gains now, not later. This expansion of retail options exposure is unprecedented not just in its volume but in its concentration in short-term bets (options that expire in a few days) and in mega-cap tech companies that are commanding rich premiums for options. The options market is like every other market only more so. The price of an option — a bet that a stock, ETF or index will go up or down before the option expires — is sensitive to the volatility of the underlying equity, the demand of other punters for options and the premium being demanded for time: The further out the expiration date, the higher the cost of the option. Anyone with 100 shares of the underlying equity can write/originate an option. Each option controls 100 shares, so a call option that is listed at $1 costs the buyer of the call $100. This is very sweet leverage if the market goes your way. You get all the gains of the 100 shares for a cost considerably less than buying the 100 shares outright. No wonder retail punters are going crazy for this cheap leverage to maximize gains in “can’t lose” trades. There’s a Catch But options have one funny trait: They can expire worthless and the punter loses the entire bet. Each option has an expiration date and a strike price — the price of the underlying equity that’s the pivot point for the bet. Calls gain value if the equity’s price moves above the strike price and puts gain value if the equity’s price falls below the strike price. The entity that sold the option gets to keep the money if it expires without any value. Here’s an example: Let’s say you have 100 shares of Engulf & Devour and you sell me a call for $500 at a strike price of $100. If Engulf & Devour closes below $100 at expiration, you keep the $500 as pure profit and I lose the entire bet. Now, it would be extraordinarily profitable to sell a huge number of calls — bets on a move higher — and then pull the rug out by crashing the market just as all those options expire. It would be criminally foolish not to crash the market and scoop up all that free money. Here’s what makes the opportunity so extraordinary… All Bulls, No Bears The options universe is extremely lopsided. Bearish bets have dried up as the market has melted higher month after month; short bets are at record lows and the put-call ratio reflects the same capitulation of bears and bulls’ supreme confidence in near-term gains. This means a crash will cost very little in terms of puts gaining value because there are so few puts out there to reap enormous gains as the vast majority of call options will expire worthless, leaving those who wrote the calls immensely wealthier. In previous eras with lower retail option volume and a less lopsided options market, it wouldn’t be worth the trouble to flash-crash the market to scoop up retail calls. But a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you’re talking real money. Buyers of “can’t lose” calls may be unaware that the tail can wag the dog. Mega-cap tech companies appear invulnerable to declines, but they are now the 800-pound gorillas in all the indexes (Dow 30, S&P 500, Nasdaq) and a boatload of ETFs. So triggering a mass sell-off in an index play such as SPY will trigger a sell-off in all the components of that index, including the invulnerable mega-cap tech names. Mass Exodus The opportunity here is amplified by the dominance of computer trading algorithms. Once a crash begins, the algos will trend-follow and liquidate exposure to lower risk. This sets up a self-reinforcing chain of selling as every drop triggers more sell programs. Volumes are so low that it won’t take that big of a leveraged sell order to start the rug-pull. Add up the extraordinary size of retail options bets, the lopsided bullish bias in calls and the short duration of the calls and you have an unprecedented opportunity to scoop mega-millions of dollars by doing a rug-pull of the market via selling leveraged index instruments. Retail call buyers are basically begging the big players to take their money via a flash crash, and the players would be insanely incompetent not to take the money lying on the table. The Perfect Con It has all the moving parts of a perfect con: Convince the retail punters that they can’t lose by buying calls, jack up the premium they’re paying to own that beautiful leverage for a few days or weeks, lead them on with little rallies, “proving” they can’t lose and encouraging them to buy more high-priced calls, crush volatility to show the futility of buying puts and persuade the punters they have no need for any hedge, as the market can only loft higher because the Fed, etc. Then bang, pull the rug out and crash the market limit down for a few days. It’s a gorgeous setup, literally picture-perfect. It makes perfect financial sense to crash the market and no sense to reward the retail options marks by pushing it higher. Let’s see who gets to be the Road Runner and who ends up as Wile E. Coyote. Tyler Durden Tue, 11/30/2021 - 21:05.....»»

Category: blogSource: zerohedgeNov 30th, 2021

Jack Dorsey has stepped down as Twitter CEO

The founder has been replaced as chief executive by CTO Parag Agrawal, who has been with the company for more than a decade. MARCO BELLO/AFP via Getty Images Jack Dorsey has stepped down from his role as CEO of Twitter, the company said Monday. Twitter CTO Parag Agrawal has replaced Dorsey as CEO of the social media giant. Dorsey, who founded the company, became Twitter CEO in 2006. Jack Dorsey has stepped down as Twitter CEO, the company said Monday.CTO Parag Agrawal is Dorsey's successor, Twitter said. Agrawal has been with Twitter for more than a decade and has been its CTO since 2017.Dorsey will remain a member of the Board until 2022."I've decided to leave Twitter because I believe the company is ready to move on from its founders," Dorsey said in a press release. "My trust in Parag as Twitter's CEO is deep. His work over the past 10 years has been transformational. I'm deeply grateful for his skill, heart, and soul. It's his time to lead."CNBC first reported the news Monday, citing unnamed sources. Shares of the social network jumped as much as 10% in early trading following CNBC's report before retreating. Twitter's stock has largely underperformed benchmark indexes over the past year. Dorsey became CEO of Twitter in 2006 before being booted in 2008. He became CEO again in 2015 when he stood up his digital payments company, Square, which is now worth more than double Twitter. Investor Elliott Management sought to replace Dorsey in early 2020, citing his dual-CEO roles at Twitter and Square as a potential risk, but nothing ever materialized from the threat.Dorsey, alongside some of his Silicon Valley peers, has navigated the so-called techlash of the early 2000's and appeared before Congress multiple times to talk Section 230, an internet law that shields tech platforms from being liable for the content they post online, and address disproven theories of anti-conservative bias on the platform. Dorsey is known in the tech world for his eyebrow-raising eating habits, signature beard, and advocacy for bitcoin."I love Twitter," Dorsey tweeted in the early morning hours of Sunday. —jack⚡️ (@jack) November 28, 2021 Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderNov 29th, 2021

Jack Dorsey is expected to step down as Twitter CEO, reports say

Sources told CNBC, Bloomberg, and Reuters that Dorsey is expected to exit his role as chief executive of the social media company. MARCO BELLO/AFP via Getty Images Jack Dorsey is expected to step down from his role as CEO of Twitter, CNBC reports. Shares of the social media company jumped more than 10% in early trading following the news. Dorsey became Twitter CEO in 2006. Jack Dorsey is expected to step down as the CEO of Twitter, CNBC reported Monday, citing unnamed sources. Bloomberg News and Reuters also reported on his planned exit, citing sources familiar with the situation who said a successor had already been chosen by the company's board of directors. Twitter did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.Shares of the social network jumped as much as 10% in early trading following CNBC's report before retreating slightly. Twitter's stock has largely underperformed benchmark indexes over the past year. Dorsey became CEO of Twitter in 2006 before being booted in 2008. He became CEO again in 2015 when he stood up his digital payments company, Square, which is now worth more than double Twitter. Twitter investor Elliott Management sought to replace Dorsey in early 2020, citing his dual-CEO roles at Twitter and Square as a potential risk, but nothing ever materialized from the threat.Dorsey, alongside some of his Silicon Valley peers, has navigated the so-called techlash of the early 2000's and appeared before Congress multiple times to talk Section 230, an internet law that shields tech platforms from being liable for the content they post online, and address disproven theories of anti-conservative bias on the platform. Dorsey is known in the tech world for his eyebrow-raising eating habits, signature beard, and advocacy for bitcoin."I love Twitter," Dorsey tweeted in the early morning hours of Sunday. —jack⚡️ (@jack) November 28, 2021 Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderNov 29th, 2021

Look Out Below: Why A Rug-Pull Flash-Crash Makes Perfect Sense

Look Out Below: Why A Rug-Pull Flash-Crash Makes Perfect Sense Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog, It makes perfect financial sense to crash the market and no sense to reward the retail options marks by pushing it higher. An extraordinary opportunity to scoop up mega-millions in profits has arisen, and grabbing all this free money makes perfect financial sense. Now the question is: will those who have the means to grab the dough have the guts to do so? Here's the opportunity: retail punters have gone wild for call options, churning $2.6 trillion in mostly short-term calls--bets on gains now, not later. This expansion of retail options exposure is unprecedented not just in its volume but in its concentration in short-term bets (options that expire in a few days) and in mega-cap tech companies that are commanding rich premiums for options. Goldman Stunned By The Record $2.6 Trillion In Option Notional Traded Last Friday The options market is like every other market only more so. The price of an option--a bet that a stock, ETF or index will go up or down before the option expires--is sensitive to the volatility of the underlying equity, the demand of other punters for options and the premium being demanded for time: the farther out the expiration date, the higher the cost of the option. Recall that anyone with 100 shares of the underlying equity can write/originate an option. Each option controls 100 shares, so a call option that is listed at $1 costs the buyer of the call $100. This is very sweet leverage if the market goes your way. You get all the gains of the 100 shares for a cost considerably less than buying the 100 shares outright. No wonder retail punters are going crazy for this cheap leverage to maximize gains in "can't lose" trades. Options have one funny trait: they can expire worthless and the punter loses the entire bet. Each option has an expiration date and a strike price--the price of the underlying equity that's the pivot point for the bet: calls gain value if the equity's price moves above the strike price and puts gain value if the equity's price falls below the strike price. The entity that sold the option gets to keep the money if it expires without any value. If you have 100 shares of Engulf & Devour and you sell me a call for $500 at a strike price of $100, if Engulf & Devour closes below $100 at expiration, you keep the $500 as pure profit and I lose the entire bet. It would be extraordinarily profitable to sell a huge number of calls--bets on a move higher-- and then pull the rug out by crashing the market just as all those options expire. It would criminally foolish not to crash the market and scoop up all that free money. Here's what makes the opportunity so extraordinary: the options universe is extremely lopsided. Bearish bets have dried up as the market has melted higher month after month; short bets are at record lows and the put-call ratio reflects the same capitulation of Bears and Bulls' supreme confidence in near-term gains. This means a crash will cost very little in terms of puts gaining value because there are so few puts out there and reap enormous gains as the vast majority of call options will expire worthless, leaving those who wrote the calls immensely wealthier. In previous eras with lower retail option volume and a less lopsided options market, it wouldn't be worth the trouble to flash-crash the market to scoop up retail calls. But a trillion here and a trillion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money. Buyers of "can't lose" calls may be unaware that the tail can wag the dog. Mega-cap tech companies appear invulnerable to declines, but they are now the 800-pound gorillas in all the indices (Dow-30, S&P500, Nasdaq) and a boatload of ETFs. So triggering a mass sell-off in an index play such as SPY will trigger a sell-off in all the components of that index, including the invulnerable mega-cap tech names. The opportunity here is amplified by the dominance of computer trading algorithms. Once a crash begins, the algos will trend-follow and liquidate exposure to lower risk. This sets up a self-reinforcing chain of selling as every drop triggers more sell programs. Volumes are so low that it won't take that big of a leveraged sell order to start the rug-pull. Add up the extraordinary size of retail options bets, the lopsided Bullish bias in calls and the short-duration of the calls and you have an unprecedented opportunity to scoop mega-millions of dollars by doing a rug-pull of the market via selling leveraged indices instruments. Retail call buyers are basically begging the big players to take their money via a flash-crash, and the players would be insanely incompetent not to take the money laying on the table. It has all the moving parts of a perfect con: convince the retail punters that they can't lose by buying calls, jack up the premium they're paying to own that beautiful leverage for a few days or weeks, lead them on with little rallies, "proving" they can't lose and encouraging them to buy more high-priced calls, crush volatility to show the futility of buying puts and persuade the punters they have no need for any hedge, as the market can only loft higher because the Fed, etc. Then bang, pull the rug out and crash the market limit down for a few days. It's a gorgeous set-up, literally picture-perfect. It makes perfect financial sense to crash the market and no sense to reward the retail options marks by pushing it higher. Let's see who gets to be the Roadrunner and who ends up as Wile E. Coyote. *  *  * If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.My new book is available! A Hacker's Teleology: Sharing the Wealth of Our Shrinking Planet 20% and 15% discounts (Kindle $7, print $17, audiobook now available $17.46)Read excerpts of the book for free (PDF).The Story Behind the Book and the Introduction.Recent Videos/Podcasts:Keiser Report | The Tragedy of the Treadmill (25:30)My COVID-19 Pandemic PostsMy recent books:A Hacker's Teleology: Sharing the Wealth of Our Shrinking Planet (Kindle $8.95, print $20, audiobook $17.46) Read the first section for free (PDF).Will You Be Richer or Poorer?: Profit, Power, and AI in a Traumatized World (Kindle $5, print $10, audiobook) Read the first section for free (PDF).Pathfinding our Destiny: Preventing the Final Fall of Our Democratic Republic ($5 (Kindle), $10 (print), ( audiobook): Read the first section for free (PDF).The Adventures of the Consulting Philosopher: The Disappearance of Drake $1.29 (Kindle), $8.95 (print); read the first chapters for free (PDF)Money and Work Unchained $6.95 (Kindle), $15 (print) Read the first section for free (PDF).   Tyler Durden Sat, 11/13/2021 - 14:30.....»»

Category: smallbizSource: nytNov 13th, 2021

Robinhood Plunges After Huge Revenue Miss, Terrible Guidance

Robinhood Plunges After Huge Revenue Miss, Terrible Guidance One quarter ago, we had a clear advance notice that Robinhood's payment for orderflow - the company's bread and butter and the bulk of its revenues courtesy of its main client Citadel - would suffer big in Q2 sequentially, because having spread the company's 606 filings previously, we showed a 34% drop in PFOF in Q2 compared to Q1, and an only modest increase Y/Y thanks to a 48% increase in option trading as revenue from orderflow from S&P and non S&P500 stocks was down 25% Y/Y. The company's Q2 results confirmed as much, showing a big sequential drop in total the top line with revenue from cryptos surpassing stocks and options combined. And unfortunately, the company this time has not been able to make it 606 filing in time, so all we knew heading into Q3 earnings was Robinhood's own warning that results would be ugly, to wit: "for the three months ended September 30, 2021, we expect seasonal headwinds and lower trading activity across the industry to result in lower revenues and considerably fewer new funded accounts than in the prior quarter." In retrospect, investors should have paid attention because moments ago Robinhood posted Q3 results and they were atrocious as total revenues collapsed from Q2, the core transaction business failed to grow (and is actually stuck at Q3 2020 levels), and the end of the Dogecoin frenzy meant an absolute collapse in crypto activity which not only saw crypto revenues collapse 78% to just $51MM in Q3 but led to a plunge in cumulative funded accounts. Net Revenue $364.9M, huge miss to estimates of $423.9M Net loss of $1.32 billion, or $2.06 a share. It just gets worse from there: Transaction-based revenue $266.8 million, down 41% q/q; of this Crypto revenue was $51 million, down a huge 78% from $233MM in Q2. So much for the dogecoin mania. Monthly active users 18.9 million, down -11% q/q Funded accounts 22.4 million, a slight decline from the end of the previous quarter. Net cumulative funded accounts 22.4 million, also down -0.4% q/q Assets under custody $95 billion, down 6.9% q/q Average rev. per user $65, down 42% q/q The company did beat on Adjusted Ebitda, which came in at $84 million, beating consensus estimates of $18.8 million, but nobody cares. The charts are in a word, horrific, starting with MAU which have now peaked... ... going to Assets under custody: ARPU was an unmitigated disaster, dropping to the lowest level in the past year. Fewer users and lower ARPU means just one thing: a collapse in revenue, which is now less than the price of a Ken Griffin apartment: Believe it or not, it actually gets even worse, with the company's transaction based revenue (i.e., what it actually does) down to $267 MM, or almost down 50% from Q2. But wait, because if one excludes $51MM in crypto revenue, one gets just $216MM in total transaction based revenues, flat since Q3 2020 and below the Q4 2020 total. And another way to visualize the stagnation in the company's core PFOF business: That said not everything was plunging: operating expenses more than tripled. Some commentary on what was the ugliest quarter in HOOD's post-IPO history: Crypto activity declined from record highs in the prior quarter, leading to considerably fewer new funded accounts, a slight decline in Net Cumulative Funded Accounts Tranche I note investors agreed not to sell 50% of the Conversion Shares until the 28th day after the Resale S-1 is declared effective, with the understanding that the other 50% is not subject to any lock- up No sales have ocurred under resale s-1 because we Robinhood issued a customary suspension notice to prevent its use pending the company's earnings announcement Robinhood launched crypto recurring investments, allowing customers to automatically buy crypto, commission-free, on a schedule of their choice. Guess what: they aren't doing jack shit. Robinhood is cancelling the Suspension Notice effective one full trading day after today's earnings release As a result, those same Conversion Shares that are currently unlocked will also be eligible for sale under the Resale S-1, starting with the opening of the Nasdaq market on October 28 The company said crypto activity declined from record highs in the prior quarter, leading to considerably fewer new funded accounts, a slight decline in Net Cumulative Funded Accounts, and lower revenue in the third quarter of 2021 compared with the second quarter of 2021 Regarding other IPO lock-ups, Robinhood says market-price conditions were not met, so those early lock-up releases will not occur; those holders' shares will remain subject to the lock-up agreements through the close of trading on Nov. 30 Of course, CEO Vlad Tenev tried to spice up the doomsday atmosphere but... he failed: "This quarter was about developing more products and services for our customers, including crypto wallets," said Vlad Tenev, CEO and Co-Founder of Robinhood Markets. "More than one million people have joined our crypto wallets waitlist to date. With 24/7 live phone support, we believe that Robinhood is becoming the most trusted and intuitive platform for retail and crypto investors. And looking ahead,  we're committed to delivering taxadvantaged retirement accounts to help everyone invest for the long term.” But wait, there's much more and yes, it's all ugly: in an echo from 3 months ago when HOOD warned Q3 would be ugly and nobody believed it, this time the company's terrible guidance will be taken much more seriously: Sees 4Q No Greater Than $325M, a huge miss to the est. $500.7M Sees Year Rev. Less Than $1.8B, far below the est. $2.03B Sees 4Q New Funded Accounts About 660,000 While hardly necessary, a hot take from Hugh Tallents, senior partner at consultancy CG42, confirmed that the situation is catastrohic and getting worse: The comparisons between Q3 2021 and Q3 2020 are convenient but misleading as the bulk of the growth they are recognizing here happened pre-IPO in the first half of the year when individual investing saw an unprecedented level of growth. The decline in crypto revenue is also a concern even as they launched their crypto wallet. Coinbase and others appear to be the place for crypto traders to go and this presents a material risk moving forward. The guidance moving forward touts a host of new services and education tools. These are a step in the right direction, but they are certainly inferior to what the more established brokerages offer and are unlikely to stem the flow of higher balance customers leaving. In light of all the catastrophic numbers above, it is a miracle that the stock is down only $3 or 8% after hours. In any case, it's down to the lowest level since the IPO and just shy of breaking the all time low of $34.82. ... which is hardly what Cathie Wood wanted to see. Tyler Durden Tue, 10/26/2021 - 16:44.....»»

Category: dealsSource: nytOct 26th, 2021

Trump"s "TRUTH Social" SPAC Is Now Up Over 400% On The Day

Trump's "TRUTH Social" SPAC Is Now Up Over 400% On The Day Update (1300ET): DWAC just topped $50, meaning it is up over 400% on the day... So far, DWAC has been halted 6 times... How long before Senator Warren demands this be removed from the exchange and that SPACs be immediately banned? Dear CNBC, it won't crush your ratings if you cover this at some point pic.twitter.com/l9IeVDlTaz — zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 21, 2021 *  *  * President Trump is taking advantage of the waning SPAC craze to finally launch the media company that he and members of his circle have been hinting about and teasing since his time in the Oval Office. But fortunately for Fox News, it's not a TV station: it's a social media platform called "TRUTH social". The platform will be owned by Trump Media & Technology Group, a new company which will soon hit the public markets via a merger with the special purpose acquisition company Digital World Acquisition Corp. (ticker: DWAC). The statement announcing the deal said the company could be worth up to $1.7 billion.  A firm that revived the EF Hutton brand, known for television commercials in the 1970s and ’80s touting its sage advice, is acting as the sole financial and capital-markets adviser to DWAC. EF Hutton gained renown with television commercials that featured the tag line, “When EF Hutton talks, people listen.” The firm was embroiled in a bogus-deposit scandal in the mid-’80s that precipitated its eventual sale. The SPAC is now trading up over 150%.. Over 236 million shares have traded hands as of 12:02 p.m. New York time, nearly 10x Digital World’s float, compared to an average full-day volume of 178,000 shares a day since the SPAC went public on Sep. 30 Speaking on his reasoning in launching the network, Trump - who remains banned from Facebook, Instagram and Twitter - said "I created TRUTH Social and TMTG to stand up to the tyranny of Big Tech." He added that presently, "we live in a world where the Taliban has a huge presence on Twitter, yet your favorite American president has been silenced. This is unacceptable." Trump added that the platform is being "founded with a mission to give a voice to all." TMTG is initially valued at $875MM, but according to the statement, but the business and its managers could earn an additional $825MM "earnout" depending on the company's performance. The new combined company will start off with the $293MM from DWAC’s cash in trust that was raised during its initial SPAC offering. Read the full statement below: President Trump sued FB Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey after their companies permanently banned President Trump from using them after the events of Jan. 6. Back in March, sources close to Trump said he would be returning to social media with his own platform. While Twitter and Facebook have so far stood by their prohibition on Trump, Twitter CEO Dorsey was recently forced to admit that Twitter "may have crossed a line by blocking a New York Post investigation last year that revealed the potentially corrupt business dealings of Hunter Biden, the son of presidential rival (and now President) Joe Biden. Twitter even went so far as to bar users from sharing the story in direct messages while the mainstream press simply believed the Biden camp's initial claims that a laptop supposedly belonging to Hunter with thousands of incriminating videos, texts and images - revealing everything from shady business deals with CCP-tied Chinese businessmen to smoking crack naked with women who may or may not be prostitutes. Unsurprisingly, Twitter's Dorsey has already tried to delegitimize Trump's new platform by mocking some of the promotional materials on his own platform (where Trump isn't even allowed to speak). i guess @jack is taken pic.twitter.com/Ktz4ODsdpX — jack⚡️ (@jack) October 21, 2021 To be sure, TRUTH Social is not Trump's first foray into independent social media. Back in May, Trump launched a platform sort of resembling Twitter called ‘From the Desk of Donald Trump’. Although RT described it as "effectively just a personal blog which was supposed to allow users to re-post Trump’s musings onto other mainstream platforms." Former Trump spokesman Jason Miller also recently launched "GETTR", a twitter-like social network meant to be the latest in a long line of conservative competitors to Twitter, including Gab and others. But he told Business Insider last night, in a statement that followed the initial launch of Trump's new project, that he and Trump were "unable to agree" on GETTR. But, despite being "for free speech", as Jonathan Turley notes, deep in the Terms of Service is some interesting restrictions: The “Terms of Service” also include a prohibition on the “excessive use of capital letters.” That rule seems a tad odd given the name of the site, which is fifty percent caps: “TRUTH Social.”  Then there is President Trump’s own signature use of all caps writing. However, the loss of all caps communications is hardly a major blow against free speech. What is far more concerning is this specific term for service: PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES You may not access or use the Site for any purpose other than that for which we make the Site available. The Site may not be used in connection with any commercial endeavors except those that are specifically endorsed or approved by us. As a user of the Site, you agree not to: ....disparage, tarnish, or otherwise harm, in our opinion, us and/or the Site. While companies like Twitter have embraced biased and extensive censorship platforms, they do not (directly) censor criticism of their sites. Per the statement, TRUTH Social will launch in beta form later this month with the first users being allowed access off a wait list. The company intends to expand the platform to all users early next year. Tyler Durden Thu, 10/21/2021 - 13:36.....»»

Category: blogSource: zerohedgeOct 21st, 2021

Trump"s "TRUTH Social" SPAC Is Now Up Almost 300% On The Day

Trump's "TRUTH Social" SPAC Is Now Up Almost 300% On The Day Update (1300ET): DWAC just topped $37, meaning it is up almost 300% on the day... So far, DWAC has been halted 5 times... How long before Senator Warren demands this be removed from the exchange and that SPACs be immediately banned? *  *  * President Trump is taking advantage of the waning SPAC craze to finally launch the media company that he and members of his circle have been hinting about and teasing since his time in the Oval Office. But fortunately for Fox News, it's not a TV station: it's a social media platform called "TRUTH social". The platform will be owned by Trump Media & Technology Group, a new company which will soon hit the public markets via a merger with the special purpose acquisition company Digital World Acquisition Corp. (ticker: DWAC). The statement announcing the deal said the company could be worth up to $1.7 billion.  A firm that revived the EF Hutton brand, known for television commercials in the 1970s and ’80s touting its sage advice, is acting as the sole financial and capital-markets adviser to DWAC. EF Hutton gained renown with television commercials that featured the tag line, “When EF Hutton talks, people listen.” The firm was embroiled in a bogus-deposit scandal in the mid-’80s that precipitated its eventual sale. The SPAC is now trading up over 150%.. Over 236 million shares have traded hands as of 12:02 p.m. New York time, nearly 10x Digital World’s float, compared to an average full-day volume of 178,000 shares a day since the SPAC went public on Sep. 30 Speaking on his reasoning in launching the network, Trump - who remains banned from Facebook, Instagram and Twitter - said "I created TRUTH Social and TMTG to stand up to the tyranny of Big Tech." He added that presently, "we live in a world where the Taliban has a huge presence on Twitter, yet your favorite American president has been silenced. This is unacceptable." Trump added that the platform is being "founded with a mission to give a voice to all." TMTG is initially valued at $875MM, but according to the statement, but the business and its managers could earn an additional $825MM "earnout" depending on the company's performance. The new combined company will start off with the $293MM from DWAC’s cash in trust that was raised during its initial SPAC offering. Read the full statement below: President Trump sued FB Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey after their companies permanently banned President Trump from using them after the events of Jan. 6. Back in March, sources close to Trump said he would be returning to social media with his own platform. While Twitter and Facebook have so far stood by their prohibition on Trump, Twitter CEO Dorsey was recently forced to admit that Twitter "may have crossed a line by blocking a New York Post investigation last year that revealed the potentially corrupt business dealings of Hunter Biden, the son of presidential rival (and now President) Joe Biden. Twitter even went so far as to bar users from sharing the story in direct messages while the mainstream press simply believed the Biden camp's initial claims that a laptop supposedly belonging to Hunter with thousands of incriminating videos, texts and images - revealing everything from shady business deals with CCP-tied Chinese businessmen to smoking crack naked with women who may or may not be prostitutes. Unsurprisingly, Twitter's Dorsey has already tried to delegitimize Trump's new platform by mocking some of the promotional materials on his own platform (where Trump isn't even allowed to speak). i guess @jack is taken pic.twitter.com/Ktz4ODsdpX — jack⚡️ (@jack) October 21, 2021 To be sure, TRUTH Social is not Trump's first foray into independent social media. Back in May, Trump launched a platform sort of resembling Twitter called ‘From the Desk of Donald Trump’. Although RT described it as "effectively just a personal blog which was supposed to allow users to re-post Trump’s musings onto other mainstream platforms." Former Trump spokesman Jason Miller also recently launched "GETTR", a twitter-like social network meant to be the latest in a long line of conservative competitors to Twitter, including Gab and others. But he told Business Insider last night, in a statement that followed the initial launch of Trump's new project, that he and Trump were "unable to agree" on GETTR. But, despite being "for free speech", as Jonathan Turley notes, deep in the Terms of Service is some interesting restrictions: The “Terms of Service” also include a prohibition on the “excessive use of capital letters.” That rule seems a tad odd given the name of the site, which is fifty percent caps: “TRUTH Social.”  Then there is President Trump’s own signature use of all caps writing. However, the loss of all caps communications is hardly a major blow against free speech. What is far more concerning is this specific term for service: PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES You may not access or use the Site for any purpose other than that for which we make the Site available. The Site may not be used in connection with any commercial endeavors except those that are specifically endorsed or approved by us. As a user of the Site, you agree not to: ....disparage, tarnish, or otherwise harm, in our opinion, us and/or the Site. While companies like Twitter have embraced biased and extensive censorship platforms, they do not (directly) censor criticism of their sites. Per the statement, TRUTH Social will launch in beta form later this month with the first users being allowed access off a wait list. The company intends to expand the platform to all users early next year. Tyler Durden Thu, 10/21/2021 - 13:06.....»»

Category: blogSource: zerohedgeOct 21st, 2021

Trump"s "TRUTH Social" SPAC Doubles Shortly After Start Of Trading

Trump's "TRUTH Social" SPAC Doubles Shortly After Start Of Trading President Trump is taking advantage of the waning SPAC craze to finally launch the media company that he and members of his circle have been hinting about and teasing since his time in the Oval Office. But fortunately for Fox News, it's not a TV station: it's a social media platform called "TRUTH social". The platform will be owned by Trump Media & Technology Group, a new company which will soon hit the public markets via a merger with the special purpose acquisition company Digital World Acquisition Corp. (ticker: DWAC). The statement announcing the deal said the company could be worth up to $1.7 billion.  The SPAC is now trading up around 100%.. Speaking on his reasoning in launching the network, Trump - who remains banned from Facebook, Instagram and Twitter - said "I created TRUTH Social and TMTG to stand up to the tyranny of Big Tech." He added that presently, "we live in a world where the Taliban has a huge presence on Twitter, yet your favorite American president has been silenced. This is unacceptable." Trump added that the platform is being "founded with a mission to give a voice to all." TMTG is initially valued at $875MM, but according to the statement, but the business and its managers could earn an additional $825MM "earnout" depending on the company's performance. The new combined company will start off with the $293MM from DWAC’s cash in trust that was raised during its initial SPAC offering. Read the full statement below: President Trump sued FB Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey after their companies permanently banned President Trump from using them after the events of Jan. 6. Back in March, sources close to Trump said he would be returning to social media with his own platform. While Twitter and Facebook have so far stood by their prohibition on Trump, Twitter CEO Dorsey was recently forced to admit that Twitter "may have crossed a line by blocking a New York Post investigation last year that revealed the potentially corrupt business dealings of Hunter Biden, the son of presidential rival (and now President) Joe Biden. Twitter even went so far as to bar users from sharing the story in direct messages while the mainstream press simply believed the Biden camp's initial claims that a laptop supposedly belonging to Hunter with thousands of incriminating videos, texts and images - revealing everything from shady business deals with CCP-tied Chinese businessmen to smoking crack naked with women who may or may not be prostitutes. Unsurprisingly, Twitter's Dorsey has already tried to delegitimize Trump's new platform by mocking some of the promotional materials on his own platform (where Trump isn't even allowed to speak). i guess @jack is taken pic.twitter.com/Ktz4ODsdpX — jack⚡️ (@jack) October 21, 2021 To be sure, TRUTH Social is not Trump's first foray into independent social media. Back in May, Trump launched a platform sort of resembling Twitter called ‘From the Desk of Donald Trump’. Although RT described it as "effectively just a personal blog which was supposed to allow users to re-post Trump’s musings onto other mainstream platforms." Former Trump spokesman Jason Miller also recently launched "GETTR", a twitter-like social network meant to be the latest in a long line of conservative competitors to Twitter, including Gab and others. But he told Business Insider last night, in a statement that followed the initial launch of Trump's new project, that he and Trump were "unable to agree" on GETTR. But, despite being "for free speech", as Jonathan Turley notes, deep in the Terms of Service is some interesting restrictions: The “Terms of Service” also include a prohibition on the “excessive use of capital letters.” That rule seems a tad odd given the name of the site, which is fifty percent caps: “TRUTH Social.”  Then there is President Trump’s own signature use of all caps writing. However, the loss of all caps communications is hardly a major blow against free speech. What is far more concerning is this specific term for service: PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES You may not access or use the Site for any purpose other than that for which we make the Site available. The Site may not be used in connection with any commercial endeavors except those that are specifically endorsed or approved by us. As a user of the Site, you agree not to: ....disparage, tarnish, or otherwise harm, in our opinion, us and/or the Site. While companies like Twitter have embraced biased and extensive censorship platforms, they do not (directly) censor criticism of their sites. Per the statement, TRUTH Social will launch in beta form later this month with the first users being allowed access off a wait list. The company intends to expand the platform to all users early next year. Tyler Durden Thu, 10/21/2021 - 10:52.....»»

Category: blogSource: zerohedgeOct 21st, 2021

Bitcoin Nears $63k As ProShares Signals ETF Launch Imminent, Dorsey Plans Mining System

Bitcoin Nears $63k As ProShares Signals ETF Launch Imminent, Dorsey Plans Mining System Update (1650ET): Confirming the earlier headlines that set the stage for a Bitcoin (futures) ETF to start trading next week, Bloomberg's James Seyffart tweeted that Proshares' 8A just hit which registers the ETF's shares with the SEC for trading on an exchange. If anyone needs more evidence that this is happening on Tuesday. Proshares' 8A just hit which registers the ETF's shares with the SEC for trading on an exchange. pic.twitter.com/Idp6cm4qet — James Seyffart (@JSeyff) October 15, 2021 Additionally, ETFStore President Nate Geraci told CoinDesk that the form is “a step forward” for digital assets and bridging them with the more traditional financial sector. He confirmed that the filing of a post-effective amendment is confirmation of the SEC’s tacit approval. “It’s an encouraging sign for the future of crypto to see SEC Chairman Gensler get comfortable in helping mainstream investors more easily access bitcoin exposure,” he said in an email. “The availability of a bitcoin ETF will now bring more investors under the crypto tent and facilitate greater education across the space.” As UBS warned in its latest Crypto Compasss, so as not to tempt fate, one veteran investor offered the tongue-in-cheek observation that anticipated SEC approval for a futures-based ETF may mark a local top in prices, much like the Coinbase IPO, per the old adage: "buy the rumour, sell the fact." The same thing occurred on the exact day that BTC futures debuted on the CME on December 17, 2017. We wouldn't bank on it but also wouldn't be surprised to see such a milestone marking the point where some long-term dip buyers begin to lighten up. They have been accumulating steadily for the past seven months. But, options markets are signaling a lot of upside still for BTC (and positive gamma)... However, UBS notes that stablecoin intervention is a more potent threat, with authorities actively throwing sand in the wheels of further development.  *  *  * Update (1635ET): Square (and Twitter) CEO Jack Dorsey has been a long-time advocate for cryptocurrencies and this evening he tweeted about his latest plans to create a Bitcoin mining system: Square is considering building a Bitcoin mining system based on custom silicon and open source for individuals and businesses worldwide. If we do this, we’d follow our hardware wallet model: build in the open in collaboration with the community. First some thoughts and questions. — jack⚡️ (@jack) October 15, 2021 As he detailed in a brief thread: 1/ Mining needs to be more distributed. The core job of a miner is to securely settle transactions without the need for trusted 3rd parties. This is critical well after the last bitcoin is mined. The more decentralized this is, the more resilient the Bitcoin network becomes. True?  2/ Mining needs to be more efficient. Driving towards clean and efficient energy use is great for Bitcoin’s economics, impact, and scalability. Energy is a system-level problem that requires innovation in silicon, software, and integration. What are the largest opportunities here?  3/ Silicon design is too concentrated into a few companies. This means supply is likely overly constrained. Silicon development is very expensive, requires long term investment, and is best coupled tightly with software and system design. Why aren’t more companies doing this work?  4/ There isn’t enough focus on vertical integration. Considering hardware, software, productization, and distribution requires accountability for delivering to an end customer vs improving a single technology in the chain. Does seeing this as a single system improve accessibility?  5/ Mining isn’t accessible to everyone. Bitcoin mining should be as easy as plugging a rig into a power source. There isn’t enough incentive today for individuals to overcome the complexity of running a miner for themselves. What are the biggest barriers for people running miners?  Our team led by @JesseDorogusker will start the deep technical investigation required to take on this project. We’d love your thoughts, ideas, concerns, and collaboration. Should we do this? Why or why not? We’ll update this thread as we make our decisions. And now over to Jesse.  That headline was enough to push Bitcoin even higher on the day, nearing $63k at its peak... *  *  * Cryptos are all rallying this morning but Bitcoin is making headlines as it broke back above the $60,000 level for the first since April... Source: Bloomberg This has extended a recent run from around $40,000 which has been driven by increasingly optimistic signs of a Bitcoin ETF being imminent... Source: Bloomberg This has pushed Bitcoin back up to be the world's 8th largest asset (just below that of Silver), and well above $1 trillion market cap... Source Citing “people familiar with the matter,” Bloomberg has reported that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission is poised to approve the first Bitcoin futures ETFs in the country. The anonymous sources said: “The regulator isn’t likely to block the products from starting to trade next week.” Bloomberg's Eric Balchunas recently laid out his odds for which of the numerous ETF proposals will be accepted first... And for those in the "digital gold" camp, this analog from the '70s is interesting. CoinTelegraph reports that Austrian investor and analyst Niko Jilch this week referenced famed investor Paul Tudor Jones while explaining the “excitement” over the Bitcoin ETF. Tudor Jones had previously highlighted Bitcoin’s cycles being similar to gold in the 1970s — just when it had become a futures product itself and enjoyed a 10-year bull run followed by a 50% correction. Gold’s 1970s rip, TechDev additionally noted, fits extremely neatly over Bitcoin’s performance since October 2020. Finally, not to be forgotten, Ethereum is holding above $3800... Tyler Durden Fri, 10/15/2021 - 16:42.....»»

Category: smallbizSource: nytOct 15th, 2021

Ken Griffin Says Chicago Violence Like "Afghanistan On A Good Day", Claims Crypto Is "Jihadist" Attack On The Dollar

Ken Griffin Says Chicago Violence Like "Afghanistan On A Good Day", Claims Crypto Is "Jihadist" Attack On The Dollar Move over Jamie Dimon. There's another American billionaire financier who appears to be quietly launching a post-business political career. Or at the very least, one could be forgiven for believing Citadel founder and CEO Ken Griffin's appearance Monday at the Chicago Club of Economics was one long stump speech. Griffin's hour-plus dialogue, which received extensive coverage from the financial press, comes at an interesting time. On the Internet, "conspiracy theorists" (according to Citadel) have continued to raise questions about possible collusion (or other wrongdoings) between Citadel and Robinhood (and one Robinhood exec in particular) before RH pulled the plug on January's meme stonk mania. Meanwhile, over at the SEC, Gary Gensler has said he's looking into regulating - or possibly eliminating or greatly restricting - the practice of 'Payment for Order Flow", whereby electronic retail brokerages like Robinhood sell their customers' orders to Citadel and other market makers (but primarily Citadel). Griffin spoke with Bloomberg's Erik Schatzker about a seemingly endless list of topics, offering imminently quotable lines and thoughtful takes on everything from crypto, to political corruption in Illinois and Chicago's slow decline into anarchy, President Biden's policies, the prospect of another Trump presidency, PFOF, crypto, and of course COVID. The dialogue started with a question on vaccination rates and meandered on from there. Here's a breakdown of what Griffin said by topic. COVID When it comes to containing COVID, Griffin believes that the US's battle against the virus was lost right at the beginning. "The country lost this battle in the first attack, when we weren’t willing to do what it took to shut down America, to truly contain Covid-19. And then to get back out of the seat, and we’ve all just paid a catastrophic price as a result." When it comes to vaccination rates, Griffin believes they have plateaued at an "unacceptably low level". The Fed According to Griffing "the Fed's in a really tough box." The Fed is in "no man's land", Griffin says, and as far as being its chairman, "it is a job I would not be so grateful to have". He also noted that inflationary pressures in the US are "really unsettling." What to do? "If i were Chairman Powell, i stay the course that I'm on as unnerving as that is. to see inflation running this hot is really unsettling." It was at this point that Griffin said something really interesting about the Fed and it's credibility. It's not often that you hear the people who actually run our financial system speak frankly about how it really works. But Griffin essentially said 'the quiet part out loud' when the discussion turned to the Fed's credibility, which we have argued time and again is already in tatters - especially in the aftermath of the pandemic. "And let's be clear right now we don't have price stability. Inflation is at 5% is the highest number people here have seen in their lifetimes," Griffin said. He added that the Fed's position that these pressures are "transitory" is really just "a big bet". But regardless of the course of inflation in the future, Griffin said that the more pressing issue is protecting the Fed from being tainted by the same ugly politics that afflict Capitol Hill. The whole point of a central bank is it's supposed to be independent from politics. Whether this is actually true or not, it's the appearance of neutrality that's necessary to maintain global confidence in the dollar. "We need to maintain the belief in the separation of the Fed from the halls of Washington for the sake of a strong dollar. If you're part of the financial community...you need to push back on that". Fiscal Stimulus Griffin slammed the post-COVID stimulus for being to expansive, and claimed all those benefits are still "disincentivizing lower-wage workers". China The first question Griffin was asked about China was whether he still opposes a "decoupling" between China and the US. According to Griffin, this "decoupling" is already happening. "I think in important ways we have already decoupled." But on a day where Biden's Trade Rep Katherine Tai essentially plagiarized President Trump's tough-on-China economic policies during a major speech, Griffin insisted that there will be drawbacks to what the US is doing - including limiting access to semiconductors and software, which has further motivated Beijing to develop their own. "By restricting Chinese access to semiconductors and American software we have pushed them into a national campaign to eliminate their dependence on the west...imagine a world where there are two totally independent software stacks." When it comes to the technology arms race, Griffin warned, the US is bound to lose. "They graduate about twice as many graduates as we do half of them have stem degrees. They're producing about 5x more talented engineers per annum. The belief that we will be technologically dominant...is naive." Once China surpasses American tech, "not only will they use it in the biggest market in the world which is their own market...but they'll push it to all their trading partners, the Brazils of the world..." Ultimately, "I can imagine a world where we have been divided...and I don't like thinking about that outcome. I can picture a world in 30 to 40 years where, in some sense we have divided the world up between east to west technologically,” Griffin said. TSMC Could Beijing's lust for better semis technology accelerate their takeover of Taiwan? The tiny rogue territory has somehow emerged as a global leader in chip technology and production thanks to TSMC. "They don't have the entire solution, they still buy equipment from around the world, but talk about a powerhouse...and going back to my point earlier, China views Taiwan as part of China, there's no way they will be technologically important against American in the next 20 years. They will get there eventually." The Rust Belt That's not to say there haven't been drawbacks to the US engagement with Beijing, and according to Griffin is the fact that China's advances in manufacturing and the state support allowing their companies to be more competitive helped contribute to the hollowing out of thousands of American factory towns. In retrospect, this was a necessary sacrifice to entice the Chinese to embrace first capitalism, and then democracy. But increasingly it looks like the CCP has no intention to ever loosen its monopoly on power, meaning all those sacrifices were for nothing. "To have the most populous country in the world becoming increasingly capitalistic our belief was that them becoming capitalist would inevitably lead to them becoming a democracy. when we wrote the rules of rht road for them, we did it with the objective of making that happen." "The challenge that we underestimated is how devastating this was going to be for small towns that had its only factory shut down. It wasn't how it was going to impact NYC, Chicago or LA but how it was going to impact a small town in upstate New York. That was a terrible policy miscalculation not done in bad faith...but we didn't have the trainin or relocation strategies to help people get back on their feet." Competition Griffin believes America is facing an identity crisis, and needs to get back to its "core values." And a big part of that is embracing "competition". Enough of this 'everybody gets a trophy' bs. "We need to get back to our core values if we're going to win. What does that mean? Children need to be taught the virtue of earned success. It can't be that every time a race is won, there's two gold medal winners. and earned success is so important to the psychological success of our country. When people know they've done a job well..." there's a sense of pride. The reason why 1 in 10 Americans is severely depressed is that "when life revolves around your instagram and facebook account not how well you do on the sports field, how well you do in class...you've lost your way in life." "We need to teach our children math and science and how to write and how to compete and how to enjoy success....because we need these children to lead this country in 20 years." Griffin also complained that the scientists who developed the COVID jabs weren't properly venereated. "Why haven't we brought the scientists from Pfizer and Moderna to the White House to recognize them for the accomplishment of developing a vaccine in a year. These people are the heroes of our lifetime..." "There are no people who are children are looking up to to say 'I wanna be like her'" Griffin said. Teachers Unions One of the biggest causes of the decay in the quality of public education, according to Griffin, are the teachers unions. He relayed how former Chicago mayor Rahm Emmanuel went to bat for the schools against the unions...and lost. That's why Chicago has one of the shortest school years, and shortest school days, in the country. "Our mayor went to bat to change that and got batted over the head by the teacher's union," he said. Biden Agenda Moving on to the subject of Biden's economic agenda, which is presently the subject of a Democratic civil war in Washington, Griffin said there was plenty in the bill he liked, but also plenty he opposed, starting with the price tag. "Let's just say thank God for Sen. Manchin," Griffin said. Debt Ceiling Griffin believes the responsibility for raising the debt ceiling lies with the Dems...whether or not that means falling back on reconciliation to bypass a GOP filibuster, or not. "We've played this game of chicken before...I hope somebody blinks before they go over the cliff. I do believe the Democrats have a responsibility....to push this forward." Payment for Order Flow Finally, the big one. Are hidden costs imposed by Citadel and other market makers via payment for order flow (PFOF) helping to line Griffin's pockets at the expense of retail traders? Of course not, he insisted. In fact, if you took away PFOF, Citadel would be just fine..."from the 100,000 feet view" at least, Griffin said. Even though the practice has been a major driver of profits at his firm, Griffin tried to frame PFOF as a nuisance cost, suggesting he would rather not have to "pay" for order flow at all. "Let us hope that we maintain the status quo. brokerage firms have a duty to secure the best price for their customers. That's the premise on which we compete that's the premise on which we win." Ultimately, losing PFoF would be "a huge loss" for traders who enjoy the lowest commissions in history right now (nothing), Griffin claimed, while adding that "let us hope that in Washington, they maintain the status quo." Ken Griffin discusses PFOF (1/2)#BanPFOF #KenGriffinLied pic.twitter.com/nprGSAzT1M — Antonio Martinez (@AntonioTheMexi) October 4, 2021 Ken Griffin discusses PFOF (2/2)#BanPFOF #KenGriffinLied pic.twitter.com/PwnVVNuex5 — Antonio Martinez (@AntonioTheMexi) October 4, 2021 Whatever the SEC decides regarding PFoF, "all i want to know are the rules of the road...If i have to drive on the left I'll drive on the left...just tell me to drive." Crypto While Griffin is certainly amused by crypto, he wishes all this energy could be channeled toward something that doesn't also inadvertently undermine the American financial system. Instead, Griffin sees crypto-mania as a "jihadist call"... Griffin Sees Crypto-Mania as ‘Jihadist Call’ Against the Dollar A mania which your Robinhood subsidiary is eagerly fanning... — zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 4, 2021 ...to attack and undermine the dollar. "I wish all this passion directed at crypto was redirected at making American stronger," adding that backing bitcoin over the dollar was a "Jihadist call". He also made a crack about how terribly energy inefficient bitcoin is, repeating a longstanding criticism. While he certainly has ethical objections to crypto, Griffin says he would absolutely let Citadel to get involved in the market if it's ever regulated. "If it were regulated, I would trade it because..it would be good to have a Tier 1 firm making prices." Chicago Griffin saved most of his anger for Gov. Pritzker and other Illinois elected officials. He started with a story of a conversation between him and Pritzker where Griffin claimed the governor refused to send in the National Guard to quell violence in the city because of the political optics. Since the last time Griffin spoke at the Economic Club in 2013, the City has gotten even worse. "Since the last time I spoke in 2013, 25,000 of my fellow Chicagoans have been shot. It is a disgrace that our governor will not insert himself into the challenge of addressing crime in our city. It won't look good to have men and women on corners on Michigan Avenue with assault weapons...well, if it would save the life of one child, I don't care. We need to try and start to take the state back inch by inch from people who put their politics first and the people second." On the subject of police, Griffin said: "We need our police officers to know that they are respected and welcomed as Americans." In fact, Griffin says Citadel has already started to dial back its presence in Chicago because of the safety issue before sharing an amusing crack about Chicago being more dangerous than Afghanistan. "We aren't as much in Chicago. It's becoming ever more difficult to have this as our global headquarters, a city that has so much violence. I mean Chicago is like Afghanistan on a good day. They tried to car jack the security detail that sits outside my apartment. It just shows you how deep crime runs in this city. There is nowhere you can feel safe walking home at 2130 at night. And it's really hard to recruit people to Chicago. When they read the headlines, theey know the facts. 20 years ago, this was a great place to raise a family...I could say that and be genuine...I can't give that speech today." As for New York City, Griffin warned that many of the same things he has seen in Chicago are starting to take place in New York City. Griffin added that Citadel's next big expansion will be office space in Miami, and that the company's time of remaining headquarter in Chicago will be measured in "years not decades". The Sun Belt Moving on from the Chicago discussion, Griffin believes that across the US, coastal blue states with high taxes will start to lose their economic edge to the Sun Belt, which has more business-friendly regulations. "Conditions are Better across the sun belt states, less regulation less taxes a workforce that's generally of the ethos of 'I'm here to earn it'. Northern cities still have a considerable advantage...those schools anchor our great northern cities. the south doesn't have that yet writ large. But as universities in the south continue to get better, you're going to see the balance of power shift from the north to the south as the ease of doing business in the south trumps the ease of hiring top employees in the north." Trump Finally, the big one. When it comes to President Trump, Griffin admits his economic policies were "pretty damn good." However, when asked about the prospect of another campaign in 2020, he said that "it's time for America to move on. The 4 years under president trump were so divisive it was not constructive for the country." He also said he was "appalled" by Trump's willingness to play identity politics. * * * Griffin's speech before the Chicago Club  the first major public appearance by Griffin since the "GameStopped" hearings back in Feb. Tyler Durden Mon, 10/04/2021 - 17:20.....»»

Category: blogSource: zerohedgeOct 4th, 2021

Transcript: Jack Schwager

     The transcript from this week’s, MiB: Jack Schwager on Trading Wizards, is below. You can stream and download our full conversation, including the podcast extras on iTunes, Spotify, Google, Bloomberg, and Acast. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here. ~~~ RITHOLTZ: This week on the… Read More The post Transcript: Jack Schwager appeared first on The Big Picture.      The transcript from this week’s, MiB: Jack Schwager on Trading Wizards, is below. You can stream and download our full conversation, including the podcast extras on iTunes, Spotify, Google, Bloomberg, and Acast. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here. ~~~ RITHOLTZ: This week on the podcast I get to welcome back the person who was really part of the inspiration for Masters in Business in the first place. Jack Schwager is the author of a new book, “Unknown Market Wizards: The best traders you’ve never heard of,” but this is the fifth or maybe — even if I include the little book — the sixth book of Market Wizards he’s put out. And when I was a — a young stud on a trading desk back in the 1890’s (sic), Schwager’s book, “Market Wizards,” was — was one of the first books I picked up to learn a little bit about the idea of — of markets. And I found the book to be tremendously formative to me not so much because it said, “buy this, sell that,” but it was very revealing about discipline, and risk management, and mental models, and containing your emotions. And that book really was one of the early books that sent me scampering off to learn more about behavioral economics and — and behavioral finance, not so much because he was channeling Tversky and — and Kahneman or Thaler or any of those folks, but it was pretty clear from the successful traders he was interviewing that consensus was problematic, that examining your motivations was really important, that being aware of — of not only your own emotions, but your own biases, and some of your own cognitive deficits in blind spots was really, really important to individual traders. And, you know, I wouldn’t call “Market Wizards” a behavioral finance book, but it certainly touches on so many of the same issues. I find these books to be absolutely fascinating as he’s put them out over the years. The — the first book really was just a pure interview book, and — and it’s evolved over all these decades. I think the first book was ’86 or ’89, and the most recent book was 2020. He not only gives you a summation at the end of each chapter, each trading wizard of — of their rules and — and what guidelines you can pick up from them, but at the end, he summarizes it with something like 46 trading rules that you can learn from these people. And really, he’s made it easier and easier to consume the information I know what he’s trying to do, he wants to educate people. For me, as a young guy on a trading desk, I found it really helpful to sort of — that journey of — of learning what I was doing wrong and why in order to get better was — was really helpful. But I don’t think people have the patience for that these days. I found the book to be really intriguing, and I think you will also. And if you haven’t read the first one or the second or third or fourth, but go back and read that first trading wizards book. It’s really quite astonishing and has held up over time. You could read it today and it looks like it came out last month. So, with no further ado, my conversation with Jack Schwager. VOICE-OVER: This is Masters in Business with Barry Ritholtz on Bloomberg Radio. RITHOLTZ: My special guest this week is Jack Schwager. He has written five books on Market Wizards. And, in fact, I found his first book — I think it was the 1989 “Market Wizards” book to be enormously useful in my first job as a trader on Wall Street. He is also the founder of FundSeeder, a platform designed to matched undiscovered trading talent with capital worldwide. His most recent book is “Unknown Market Wizards: The best traders you’ve never heard of.” Jack Schwager, welcome back to Bloomberg. SCHWAGER: Hey, good to speak with you again, Barry. RITHOLTZ: Same, same. It’s — it’s been too long. Let’s — let’s start out talking about your first “Market Wizards” book, which I’ve told you before not only was it enormously influential to me when I was a trader, but it was part of the motivation for this Masters in Business format of talking to people who achieved a level of accomplishment and excellence, which leads me just to my first question, what — what made you decide to write that first “Market Wizards” book? SCHWAGER: Yeah, so I had the idea actually for several years. At the time, I was a future — Director of Futures Research Department, which is kind of a full-time job on its own. To do a book, you really have to do like commit to nights, weekends. I had — I had done a — a book before the, you know, “A Complete Guide to the Futures Market,” which was like a 750-page tome. And I didn’t want to do that — anything that — like that again. But I want you to have this idea that, gee, wouldn’t it be fun to go — and I knew some great traders. I said, “Wouldn’t it be fun to just kind of do that as the theme of the book?” But it was just a matter of time, and then I got invited by a — to a lunch by some other publisher who had — who (inaudible) the — get that analytical book I wrote, “Hey, you want to do a bunch of analytical books?” And I said, “No, no interest.” But, you know, I’ve been thinking of this and I said, “OK, why don’t you that?” And so, that was the catalyst. And I — I guess I just need a little push to — to get going because I thought it was a good idea. RITHOLTZ: So — so this is now over three decades that you’ve been sitting down with traders, talking to them about their process, their methodology, and where they’ve gone wrong, and where they’ve achieved success. I can’t help, but notice that the world of the 2020’s, at least the trading world, is so very different than the trading world of the 1980’s. How does that impact the — the sort of conversations you have? And how does that affect the methodologies of these different types of traders? SCHWAGER: Yeah. So, you know, that’s a good point. You’re absolutely right. I mean, there’s been — yeah, enormous, you know, really enormous changes. As — as you well know, you’ve been in the business a while as well. But, you know, from the time I did the ritual “Market Wizards” book, which was the late 80’s and talking to people at that point about their careers really going back to late 60’s, 70’s and into the 80’s, but that — you know, their — you know, their — their trading history, you know, is pre –, you know, pre-PCs. You know, of course, we had the futures and we’re basically dealing with bits now, electronic trading. But the — the big changes is this computerization element. And we went from a world where there — where we didn’t have PCs to where not only everybody has a P.C., which is quite powerful and — and has tremendous amounts of data, but you’re also dealing now — well, actually for decades where you have firms, you have taken quantification to the extreme, might have 100 PhDs in math and physics and so forth, you know, trying to — to work in the markets, you know, from — from — from that angle. So — so the — that’s been, I think, the — the really big change plus the electronic trading — the switch from — from bits to electronic trading. So, you know, how does that change? You know, are they enough? For instance, I end up interviewing mostly discretionary traders. We could talk why that’s true. He has a separate engine if you want, but that tends to be the reality. I mean, they are sub-systematic, but they’re mostly discretionary. It turns out that, for the most part, a lot of the approaches really do fall into the — to the same categories, and there’s still a place for the individual discretionary trader. And I — I would say the biggest surprise I had to do this — this last book on “Market Wizards” was I didn’t expect to find people with track records who like those in the first book, somebody, you know, people like the Kovners and the Jones and so forth. And to my amazement, I — I found people — you know, because — and — and I say that because of this great quantification and all this competition, you know, that now exists. And to my surprise, I — I found people whose records were every bit as good, if not maybe as good as any other they found. So that was my surprise, and it basically speaks as evidence that somehow, despite these enormous changes, it’s still possible for the individual creator to — to — who has talent and has a specific methodology to do his works to do enormously well. RITHOLTZ: Yeah, we’re going to talk about some of the specific traders and some of the eye-popping track records that they’ve amassed later. But you — you mentioned Jones — Paul Tudor Jones. Of all the people I recall from the first book or — or one of the early books, he seems to be the lone standout who continues to be active, who continues to trade, and continues to make money. I mean, he was very early to bitcoin and — and I believe he’s still a holder, you know, 20,000 percent later. What makes Jones standout and be so different from his peers? He’s — he’s much more open-minded than — I don’t know, you — you can — you can compare him to Druckenmiller or Dalio or — he seems to be a 30-something, not a 60-something. SCHWAGER: Well, the thing that that struck me about Jones that was different, I guess, is, you know — and I want to say — yeah, I was about to say less cerebral, but that’s not really fair. I mean, I’m sure he’s quite (inaudible), but he is — he was much more sort of active and — yeah, somebody like a — like a Druckenmiller, I didn’t see him trade. I spent a day with him, but, you know, I kind of picture him, you know, more thoughtfully going through in designing and trades of what he traded. But — but, you know, Paul, I remember sitting in his office that he, you know, screamed, you know, while we’re doing the interview, he’s screaming orders left and right. This is a day where there were, you know, phones down for the bits and, you know, so he’s — he’s — he’s doing these orders. He’s going through the screens. He — he was just very — almost manic in the way he trades. So, I had that — that almost physical image of him, you know, trading more so than anybody I — I guess, that I ever interviewed. There’s one difference. And there are certain things I still remember at that interview. He’s — he’s kind of insistence that, you know, every day he’s — he — he stalks for blank slate. So just because he has the position doesn’t mean that that position is still something to be held. So, you know, he talked about wanting to evaluate every position while I have this. Would I — would I still want — do I still want it today? You know, that type of thing, so this — this — this constant renewing of his analysis and assessment of the market. And I think particularly very much attuned, I think, to — to market action — and I’ve been very aggressive all the way. So, I guess those are some of the ways I — at least from my memory of that interview that I — that he struck me as being a bit different. RITHOLTZ: So — so let’s stick with that first book. I mean, the — the list of people you got to sit down with you for a day is pretty impressive. You mentioned Bruce Kovner. We’re talking to Paul Tudor Jones, Richard Dennis, Ed Seykota, Marty Schwartz, Tom Baldwin, Michael Steinhardt, Druckenmiller, I mean, that’s some … SCHWAGER: Yeah. RITHOLTZ: … murderous row of — of fund managers and traders. SCHWAGER: Yeah, and I — it was. And I was lucky to — I guess I didn’t realize how lucky I was because just about everybody I asked agreed. Now, I had some edge there because I knew some traders personally like Michael — well, Michael Marcus who’s — who’s actually in Chapter 1 in that book is not somebody who would have been known weren’t not for the book, but he — he is one of the greats. And he — you know, so I know him personally. You know, we were friends. I actually took his — my first job on Wall Street was vacated by Michael. He was cleaning out his desk when I came in my first day. We talked a little bit. He was going, in quotes, “off to become a trader and, yeah, leaving his analyst job. And I took his analyst job, but he was in New York for two years before you went out to — to Malibu and, you know — and, you know, well, moved permanently there. But while he was in New York, we used to get together for (inaudible) just every couple of weeks, so we had a relationship. So, he — he agreed to do it. We have — not easily, he’s a shy guy, so it took a bit of convincing, and I had a mutual friend who kind of pushed a little bit. But, you know, then he felt satisfied with — with our interview after I spent a day or two there at this — that was the one — that I did actually while he’s out — out in California. And said, “You know, you should” then he — you know, he said, “You should interview Seykota, and I never heard Seykota, but (inaudible) Seykota was his mentor and somebody who he considered the best trader and he knew. And so, he set that up, and then I flew out to — to Seykota. Kovner I knew because Michael had hired Kovner and so I met him through Michael, and I had actually worked because of Michael. He hired me to be an analyst from — you know, remotely why (inaudible) or commodities are going making all that money. And — and so, you know, I — so there were these — I had a bit of a jump because I do some and trade some. And then some of them recommend other traders, yeah. RITHOLTZ: Interesting, really interesting. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) So — so last question — on — on the early book, some — some of these guys have been trading for decades, and the risks that you run into relates to what one of my colleagues described as the — the paradox of experts. People who are experts have their expertise in the way the world used to be in an earlier version of the world that doesn’t exist. When you look around at — at these traders who’ve been at it for a long time, do they have a difficulty in adapting to the new world? I noticed most of the guys you interviewed for the newest book are fairly young. SCHWAGER: Yeah. So — well, of course, you know, if you go back to the original book, you know, a lot — well, most of them, you know, one of these ones I know continued — continued on for — for decades, you know, like the Kovners and — and the Druckenmillers, and so forth, and did — you know, did quite well, and Joe (inaudible). In the case — you know, but I can’t think of an exception, somebody like — like Richard Dennis who was — who had won in the most incredible stories ever, you know, turning literally a sub $1,000 stake. When he was trading in the MidAm Exchange, he’s (inaudible) contract and, at some point, amassing a couple hundred million dollars that got to be one of the great multiplication pitch (ph) of all time. But — but in — subsequently, years after our interview, had — had — had some — some — had problems and — and never continue — besides not continuing, I think had — had losses probably. So not everybody — you know, not everybody necessarily continued forever, but — but I think the majority, you know, continued — continued to adapt the markets. And — and in Dennis’ case, I think it may be an issue of — of the markets, I think, did change. Trend following back, you know, in Dennis’ hay day, which I would say late 60’s through late 80’s, those were kind of glory days for — for trend following. You — you had — had a couple of things working together first because it was before technical analysis became so popular. RITHOLTZ: Right. SCHWAGER: It was before — most of that period was before a lot of the computerization. So, people who were early on — on trend following kind of didn’t have a lot of competition. And also, you have the inflationary 70’s, the U.S. on the giant trends and futures, currencies, and so forth. So, you know, times were very good. When the times became more difficult or — and many more people, yeah, it was just (inaudible) amount of — (inaudible) increase in the number of people using these — those type of approaches, the approach naturally degraded. So, I think it — that was the issue there and — and could explain why somebody like Dennis didn’t continue the way he did, while some of these more discretionary traders like Kovner and Jones did. RITHOLTZ: My big takeaway from the — the early Dennis chapter was all about training traders the way they raised turtles on farms in Singapore. That — that concept that, hey, you could teach anybody how to trade if they’re disciplined and we’ll follow these sets of rules. I was — I was really impressed with that, and that was — I don’t know 25 years ago. Do you think someone like a — a modern version of Richard Dennis could still train traders the way he did? SCHWAGER: I — I have some skepticism there, and — and that’s developed over the years. I kind of — trouble is you — you train somebody — the person you’re training has to be kind of adoptable and amenable, and be a good fit for whatever the methodology you’re training. And, well, my perspective is that to be successful, the method you use is not (inaudible) being trained by somebody, you have to — has to be a method that’s compatible with who you are and how you’re thinking, what’s comfortable? So, if you are — you know, you’re somebody who, let’s say, doesn’t feel comfortable delegating decisions to a systematic approach, somebody can teach you a system, but it’s going to be very difficult for you to follow because you’re always going to want to be second guessing it or — or jumping the gun or not taking signal. So, it has to be compatible with — with — with what’s — what works for you. And — and I think that’s the problem. I don’t think you necessarily can train everybody. Now, at that time that Dennis did it, you have trend following being a — a very effective methodology. So, if people follow the rules, they could be successful, but I think that’s more the exception than the rule. So, you can’t — you surely can learn from a mentor if the mentor is compatible with — with the methodology that fits who you are. RITHOLTZ: Makes a lot of sense. Jack, I was kind of struck by this book, and I’m curious how did you go about it. Was it — was it different versus your prior wizard books? Did — did your methodology change or did you interview process change? Or was it — you know, you have a — a process and you stuck to it? SCHWAGER: Yeah. No, I’ve had — I’ve had the same methodology from the — from the first “Market Wizards” books, so — and it works, so there’s no — if something works, you know, nobody is going to change it. So, my process — but first of all, the actual — as far as the actual, you know, interviews and — and turning into text, when I do the interview — and this is kind of important — is any — I’m sure you could relate to this very well, Barry. I — I try — I — I do what you do really, which I — which I sense you do is have a conversation. So, I don’t go in with a list of questions. And, you know, I’ve been interviewed by people, and that you can tell they have a list of questions. And no matter what you answer (inaudible), you know, there’s no follow-through and it goes … RITHOLTZ: Right. SCHWAGER: … to the next question, right? And it sells very stiff in board, and it is. So, what I try to do in these things is really just literally have a conversation. And there are times there have been interviews where I literally — it could be two hours before I get the first thing that’s of any value. You don’t have that luxury, but I do. There’s a book, not a live interview. RITHOLTZ: Right. SCHWAGER: But — but that’s — that’s — so that’s very important. And — and I — I do have like a list of questions that I know I want to make sure I hit those topics. And after I spend any number of hours, which could be — which could be as little as a few hours in — in a short interview to — to as much as a day or more, then I’ll just check the list and see if I missed anything. But — so that’s one important thing. And the other part of the process that doesn’t change is just the way the interviews are transformed into text. And there — you know, obviously, I’m doing so much so many hours. You know, you couldn’t — any — a lot of these interviews could be a book-long by themselves. But besides that, if I used everything, it would be deadly boring. So, you — you really — what I’m really trying to do is basically extract out everything that it has — is one of two things. One, as something meaningful to say about trading or two, it’s interesting. You know, so it’s one of those things. So — and that’s the material that — that forms the chapter. And then — and then you do a fixing up of, you know, people. The way people speak doesn’t translate well into … RITHOLTZ: Right. SCHWAGER: … into written text as you — as you well know, I’m sure. And you may talk about the same topic in eight different places, and that’s fine if you’re talking, but it’s not fine if you’re eating. RITHOLTZ: Right. SCHWAGER: So, you know, that’s — that’s the basic process. The difference in this book though was the focus. And in prior books, I guess, they’ve been more — more heavy in well-known professional traders, although not necessarily all the time. There’s always been individual traders as well. And the — the most recent wizard book before this one back in, I guess 2012 or so, was “Hedge Fund Market Wizards,” which you can tell by the name is, you know, obviously not individual traders, right? They’re — they’re traders and organizations. So, this — this one was the exact — was — tended to be the exact opposite. It was literally to try to find those people who are trading in a home office, doing extraordinarily well and nobody knows they exist, nobody knows who they are. And — and so that was a difference in this book. RITHOLTZ: So, one of the differences I suspected when I went into reading this book is all of the subjects of your prior books, all the various traders, you know, you could do a search on them. You could — you could read about them. There’s newspaper articles in the days before Google and certainly since search engine has been around, you can find a ton of stuff on each of the people that you interview. I got the sense from each of the chapters in this book that you had a bunch of — of arrows in your quiver, but you didn’t know, which ones you’re going to use because you’re kind of going in a little — a little in the dark. Is that a fair assessment or am I — am I projecting too much? SCHWAGER: You’re projecting too much because, especially since I was doing these individual traders and, you know, it sounds like there’s a public fund out there or something like that … RITHOLTZ: Right. SCHWAGER: … so I — I had to really, really be careful this time about, well, I (inaudible). But I — I had to get the track records. And — and so I knew — you know, I knew what their track records were before I went in. RITHOLTZ: Right. SCHWAGER: And, you know, I — like I’ll give you one example. One of these traders, I got an email. This is about a year before I did the book, you know, saying something like, you know, “Hey, I’m — you know, this is my name and so — you know, and I turned a few thousand dollars into $50 million, whatever,” you know. So yeah, your initial reaction would be, “Sure,” right? But I’m always — I — I think that — you know, people made claims, they now they even — even don’t have to prove it. So anyway, so look, I’m not planning another book at the time I wasn’t planning to do this book. And I said, “But your story sounds very interesting. And if you can confirm it, you know — you know, it would be sounds like it would be a really good fit. And if I do another book, I’ll get back in touch.” It turns out that nine months later, I do decide to do — to do another book and I get back to them. And — and so, you know, a guy, he started trading back, I think, around 2006 and literally got every monthly stakes (ph) improving 2006 forward. So — so I knew — while the story sounds unbelievable, I knew it was — and I — and I — actually, they were — in this particular case, there were — there are Ameritrade accounts, and I have an Ameritrade account. I — even though with the — with the account, you know, (inaudible) look like. So, there was no — there was no surprise there. I — I kind of knew what I — I knew what his track was. I didn’t know what it’d be like or what he’d have to say or anything like that. That’s always the case, but I knew the track record is real. RITHOLTZ: So — so let’s jump into some of the details of — of various traders starting with the first chapter and pretty much the only person you interviewed who has a — has been trading for — for decades, and that would be someone I follow on Twitter who I’ve always been intrigued by named Peter Brandt. What — what drew you to him as a trader? And what makes him so unique? SCHWAGER: Yeah. So, as you said, Peter has a long career. He actually has — his career is broken into two segments. He — and each one is — I — I forget the exact number is, but that’s … RITHOLTZ: Eleven years apart … SCHWAGER: … (inaudible). Yeah, 11 years apart, but each one — each of the segments is, let’s say, 16, 17 years. So, he’s got over 30 years of trading experience. He went co (ph). He stopped trading totally for 11 years in between because, at the end of the first period (inaudible) and gone out of it, and he just — he just decided didn’t want to do it anymore. And then out of the blue, 11 years later, he decided to do and had a — had a second phase rated very well. So — so again it’s over three decades of, you know, of experience and — and so forth. OK. That’s — that’s part, that’s — that’s beginning. The thing that Peter — and — and I should — I should — I should say that — that Peter actually is a friend. Well, I — I knew him personally. One thing that always struck me about Peter was he just had a lot of what I thought valuable things to say about the markets and trading. And I remember him being on — on a — on another podcast and listening to it. And the questions will be asked and I would mentally answer him, and it was striking how similar his answers were. But it’s not just bad, you know, it’s just — I just really relate it to the way he — he looked at — at markets and risk, and had so many — so much good advice and just — just wisdom that — that — that I felt I wanted to capture. Now, Peter is — you know, in his early 70’s. And I — I literally — and he was kind of a catalyst to do the book. At the time, he was in Colorado as I am, and I (inaudible) thought, well, I’ll say to myself, you know, I knew — I knew if I didn’t have a “Market Wizards” book, I wanted that Peter in it. So, he was going — he was going to be moving. I think, well, I might have say to myself (inaudible). I might as well do his chapter. Now, it turns out (inaudible) that around to — to doing it. He had moved and then I — so I end up flying out, you know, to Arizona anyway. But the — the thing about Peter just — just to capture, I wanted to capture his — his market wisdom, the posterity. It’s probably the most straightforward way I can put it. RITHOLTZ: And it’s notable that several other wizards in the new book reference Brandt’s approach to risk management. Forget stock selection, they are just completely impressed with how disciplined he is and how he manages risk, first and foremost. “The — the stocks — the trades that are working out, we’ll take care of themselves,” he says. It’s ones that don’t work out that — that require all your attention. Somebody else said something that really intrigued me. The — the chapter on Jason Shapiro, the contrarian, I love this quote. “There aren’t good traders you can make money on by doing what they’re doing, but there are terrible traders you can make money on by doing the exact opposite of what they do.” Tell us a little about Jason Shapiro. SCHWAGER: Yeah. So yeah, Jason is the — the contrarian in the book, and that’s his nature. I mean, he — if you beat him, he’s just — he has to be, I would say, he has to be argumentative, but he always has to be on the upside. And he admits freely like he — he goes to a party and — and it’s mostly liberal, so he’ll argue the conservative side. It was mostly conservatives, he’ll argue the liberal side. He’s fine doing that. And his — his premise is that because just no absolute black and white, there’s truth on — on some truth on both sides, and — and people who insist everything is, you know, one side of the other (inaudible) is arguing with. But that his nature is always to be arguing and to be counter, so it’d be natural that he evolves into trading methodology that — that — that’s contrarian. And that’s what .....»»

Category: blogSource: TheBigPictureOct 4th, 2021

Wealth Without Work

Wealth Without Work Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via DailyReckoning.com, Allow me to summarize the dominant zeitgeist in America at this juncture of history: Grab yourself a big gooey hunk of happiness by turning a few thousand bucks into millions — anyone can do it as long as they visualize abundance and join the crowd minting millions. Beneath the bravado and euphoric confidence in our God-given right to mint millions out of chump change, a secret plea lurks unspoken: Please don’t pop our precious bubble! The big gooey hunk of happiness available to all depends on one special form of magic spell: If we don’t call the bubble a bubble, it won’t pop. And so Wall Street shills spew endless “research” (heh) proclaiming that the forward price-earnings ratio of 21.1 will only slightly exceed past norms, and so on — in summary: If we don’t call the bubble a bubble, it won’t pop. Everyone’s All in on the Everything Bubble What differentiates this bubble from the 1720 South Sea Bubble, the 2000 dot-com bubble or the 2007–08 housing bubble is: This bubble includes every asset class and has sucked the entire populace and economy into its magic maw. The bubble has swept up housing, stocks, junk bonds, commodities, cryptocurrencies, NFTs and numerous collectibles — the bulk of America’s household assets are now firmly lodged in the maw of the Everything Bubble. Here is a sampling of recent headlines in America: I Turned $10,000 Into $6 Million in 6 Months My Cat Turned $6,000 in My Robinhood Account Into $6 Million by Walking on My Keyboard I Turned $100 My Aunt Gave Me for My Birthday Into $6 Million in One Trade, Buying Way Out-of-the-Money Calls on a Meme Stock I Turned $23 Into $6 Million So Easily I’m Going to Sleep My Way to $60 Million OK, so these are slight exaggerations, but the zeitgeist is very real. The Great Illusion Of all the mass delusions running rampant in the culture, none is more spectacularly delusional than the conviction that we can all get fabulously rich from speculation while producing nothing. The key characteristic of speculation is that it produces nothing: It doesn’t generate any new goods or services, boost productivity or increase the functionality of real-world essentials. Like all mass delusions, the greater the disconnect from reality, the greater the appeal. Mass delusions gain their escape velocity by leaving any ties to real-world limitations behind and by igniting the most powerful booster to human euphoric confidence known, greed. Lost in the mania of easy wealth from speculative trading is the absence of any value creation in the rotation churn of moving bets from one table to the latest hot game: In flipping houses sight unseen, no functionality was added to the house. In transferring bets on one cryptocurrency to another or from one meme stock to another, no value to the economy or society was created. In the mass delusion that near-infinite wealth can be generated without producing anything, creating value has no value: The delusion is that I can get rich producing nothing but speculative gains, and then I can buy all the stuff somebody else is making. Work Is for Suckers The fantasy powering the speculative frenzy is once I get rich, I’ll stop working and live off my wealth. It’s interesting, isn’t it, how everyone can get rich via unproductive speculation, quit their jobs and then live off the productive work of somebody else who failed to get rich off speculation? The Great Illusion. Maybe that’s why all the containerships are lined up at Long Beach, waiting to unload the goodies made in China for American speculators to buy. This is what happens when the incentive structure of the economy decays so that being productive has little upside (i.e., working is for chumps) while speculating is all upside (get rich quickly and easily). Everyone knows great empires became great by transferring their critical supply chains to competing nations, living it up on borrowed/printed money, exploiting the highest bidder wins regulatory/governance system and incentivizing speculation while pushing wage earners into debt-and-tax servitude. Bone up on your history, Bucko; all great nations got there by quitting boring, tiresome productive work to speculate on illusions of value with borrowed money. A System That Optimizes Corruption This is the result of monopolies and cartels becoming the financial and political power centers of the nation. They end up treating employees as chattel to lower costs, offshoring critical supply chains to squeeze out a few more dollars of profits, engineering products to break down (planned obsolescence), buying regulatory barriers and “free passes” and tax breaks galore with all the billions showered on financiers and other fraudsters by the Federal Reserve. In a word, a system that optimizes corruption. This is how you hollow out a nation and guarantee collapse. The most rewarding “skill sets” are a sociopathological obsession with maximizing profits by any means available and speculating with Fed free money for financiers. The millions of “retail” speculators are simply picking up the cues being given by the billionaires who gained their wealth by issuing debt to fund stock buybacks and other financial manipulations. Working for monopolies and cartels is for chumps because monopolies and cartels have zero incentive to share profits with mere employees. Their profits are made not by taking care of their workforce but by regulatory capture, artificial scarcities and financialized destruction of competition: First, borrow billions thanks to the Fed and Wall Street, destroy the competition (for example, the taxi industry) and then, once the competition has been wiped out, jack up prices because now consumers have no choice other than another member of the cartel. Phantom Wealth Speculative “wealth” is phantom wealth, a flickering illusion of prosperity. All speculative bubbles pop, and all speculative bubbles inflated by borrowed money and central bank manipulation pop even more ferociously than bubbles funded by actual savings. By incentivizing speculation and corruption, reducing the rewards for productive work and sucking wages dry with inflation, America has greased the skids to collapse. As with all mass delusions, the incentives to continue believing are immense, and the incentives to reconnect with reality are few. So in conclusion: The speculative gains to be made in the collapse of the mass delusion will be spectacular. There’s nothing like the collapse of a hollowed-out, completely corrupt economy to generate outsized profits for nimble speculators. Just keep your speculative winnings on Number 22 on the roulette wheel. (A Casablanca movie reference….) Tyler Durden Fri, 09/24/2021 - 13:23.....»»

Category: blogSource: zerohedgeSep 24th, 2021

Food Delivery and Ride Hailing Apps Will Have to Shell Out Billions Under an E.U. Plan

As many as 4.1 million people working for the apps could be reclassified as employees, costing the sector billions more a year As many as 4.1 million people working through food delivery and ride-hailing apps could be reclassified as employees under a forthcoming European Union plan meant to improve gig workers’ labor rights. The draft proposal, seen by Bloomberg News, could cost the sector up to 4.5 billion euros ($5.1 billion) more a year, the EU estimates. It would likely give millions more workers for companies like Uber Technologies Inc., Deliveroo PLC and Bolt Technology OU access to minimum-wage and legal protections. Another 3.8 million workers would receive confirmation they are self-employed. Shares in Deliveroo fell as much as 5.6% in early trading on Friday, while Delivery Hero SE fell 2.7%. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] Digital platforms are pushing against the commission’s proposal, which they claim would lead to massive job losses. Earlier this year, Spain classified food delivery workers as couriers, prompting Deliveroo to pull out of the country and other food delivery apps to reduce their operations. In a risk assessment, the European Commission wrote that it wasn’t possible to calculate potential job losses and that the rule changes may “negatively affect” workers’ flexibility. The rules are also likely to increase the cost of delivery and rider apps, as the EU executive noted that “consumers may be faced” with part of the platforms’ increased costs. The bloc’s executive arm said the proposals were assessed to be the most effective way to improve conditions for workers and help them access social protections. Member states could see some 4 billion euros in increased tax and social security contributions annually. Under the proposed rules, which are expected to be made public next week, any worker whose job is controlled by a digital platform can presume that they are an employee regardless of what they are called in their contract. Digital platforms would have the legal obligation to prove that the worker isn’t an employee. The rules would affect operations that meet two of five criteria: determining pay for workers, setting appearance and conduct standards, supervising the quality of work, restricting the ability to accept or refuse tasks, or limiting the ability to build a client base. The commission will present its proposal next week and will still need to garner support from EU countries and the European Parliament before becoming law......»»

Category: topSource: time3 hr. 8 min. ago

A Look Into Campbell Soup"s Price Over Earnings

  Looking into the current session, Campbell Soup Inc. (NYSE:CPB) shares are trading at $41.07, after a 1.36% gain. Moreover, over the past month, the stock went up by 0.83%, but in the past year, fell by 14.99%. Shareholders might be interested in knowing whether the stock is undervalued, even if the company is performing up to par in the current session. The stock is currently above its 52 week low by 3.29%. Assuming that all other factors are held constant, this could present itself as an opportunity for ...Full story available on Benzinga.com.....»»

Category: earningsSource: benzinga3 hr. 9 min. ago

A Look Into Vera Bradley"s Price Over Earnings

  Looking into the current session, Vera Bradley Inc. (NASDAQ:VRA) is trading at $9.35, after a 3.11% decrease. Over the past month, the stock fell by 11.79%, but over the past year, it actually went up by 13.75%. With questionable short-term performance like this, and great long-term performance, long-term shareholders might want to start looking into the company's price-to-earnings ratio. Assuming that all other factors are held constant, this could present itself as an opportunity for shareholders trying to capitalize on the higher ...Full story available on Benzinga.com.....»»

Category: earningsSource: benzinga3 hr. 9 min. ago

Price Over Earnings Overview: Sportsman"s Warehouse

  Looking into the current session, Sportsman's Warehouse Inc. (NASDAQ:SPWH) is trading at $13.56, after a 19.96% decrease. Over the past month, the stock fell by 21.62%, but over the past year, it actually spiked by 4.47%. With questionable short-term performance like this, and great long-term performance, long-term shareholders might want to start looking into the company's price-to-earnings ratio. Assuming that all other factors are held constant, this could present itself as an opportunity for shareholders trying to capitalize on the higher share price. The stock is currently under from its 52 week high by ...Full story available on Benzinga.com.....»»

Category: earningsSource: benzinga3 hr. 9 min. ago

Price To Earnings Ratio Insights For AstroNova

    Looking into the current session, AstroNova Inc. (NASDAQ:ALOT) is trading at $14.99, after a 10.24% decrease. Over the past month, the stock fell by 14.83%, but over the past year, it actually went up by 29.02%. With questionable short-term performance like this, and great long-term performance, long-term shareholders might want to start looking into the company's price-to-earnings ratio. Assuming that all other factors are held constant, this could present itself as an opportunity for shareholders trying to capitalize on the higher share price. The ...Full story available on Benzinga.com.....»»

Category: earningsSource: benzinga3 hr. 9 min. ago

Price To Earnings Ratio Insights For Korn Ferry

    Looking into the current session, Korn Ferry Inc. (NYSE:KFY) is trading at $71.37, after a 2.07% decrease. Over the past month, the stock fell by 14.25%, but over the past year, it actually spiked by 69.93%. With questionable short-term performance like this, and great long-term performance, long-term shareholders might want to start looking into the company's price-to-earnings ratio. Assuming that all other factors are held constant, this could present itself as an opportunity for shareholders trying to capitalize on the higher share price. The stock is currently below from its 52 week ...Full story available on Benzinga.com.....»»

Category: earningsSource: benzinga3 hr. 9 min. ago

Price Over Earnings Overview: Lovesac

    Looking into the current session, Lovesac Inc. (NASDAQ:LOVE) is trading at $60.90, after a 3.54% decrease. Over the past month, the stock fell by 25.19%, but over the past year, it actually went up by 85.66%. With questionable short-term performance like this, and great long-term performance, long-term shareholders might want to start looking into the company's price-to-earnings ratio. Assuming that all other factors are held constant, this could present itself as an opportunity for shareholders trying to capitalize on the higher share price. The stock is currently under from its 52 week high ...Full story available on Benzinga.com.....»»

Category: earningsSource: benzinga3 hr. 9 min. ago

Mid-Afternoon Market Update: DocuSign Drops Following Weak Revenue Forecast; Longeveron Shares Climb

Toward the end of trading Friday, the Dow traded down 0.37% to 34,512.05 while the NASDAQ fell 2.28% to 15,029.99. The S&P also fell, dropping 1.13% to 4,525.40. The U.S. has the highest number of coronavirus cases and deaths in the world, reporting a total of 49,716,820 cases with around 806,390 deaths. India confirmed a total of at least 34,615,750 cases and 470,110 deaths, while Brazil reported over 22,118,780 COVID-19 cases with 615,220 deaths. In total, there were at least 264,609,610 cases of COVID-19 worldwide with more than 5,253,110 deaths, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. Leading and Lagging Sectors Consumer staples shares climbed 0.8% on Friday. Meanwhile, top gainers in the sector included Central Garden & Pet Company (NASDAQ: CENTA), up 3% and Sendas Distribuidora S.A. (NYSE: ASAI) up 7%. In trading on Friday, consumer discretionary shares fell 2%. Top Headline Big Lots, Inc. (NYSE: BIG) reported better-than-expected earnings for its third quarter, but issued weak earnings guidance for FY21. Big Lots reported a quarterly loss of $0.14 per share, beating analysts’ estimates of a loss of $0.16 per share. The company’s quarterly sales came in at $1.34 billion, versus expectations of $1.32 billion. Big Lots said it sees Q4 EPS of $2.05-$2.20 per share, versus analysts’ estimates of $2.39 per share. ...Full story available on Benzinga.com.....»»

Category: earningsSource: benzinga3 hr. 9 min. ago