A trader speaks... very fankly indeed!

A trader speaks... very fankly indeed!

Author
Discussion

BliarOut

72,857 posts

240 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
Dr Jekyll said:
nelly1 said:
So, he prays for a recession because him and a few others may make an absolute killing, but all the associated pain / joblessness / hardship that may occur doesn't worry him at all?

It's just numbers on a screen to him.

These are peoples livelihoods he's playing with.

I'd say that makes him more than a twunt!
He doesn't actually cause the recession though does he?
To a degree, yes. The media have a lot to answer for yes We could be far closer to recovery if things were reported differently.

turbobloke

104,067 posts

261 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
handbraketurn said:
Don't pay too much mind to this tosser, he'll get bum raped by his bosses in the morning.
Does it not look as though he's self-employed?

Either way, entertaining in a bizarre way, due to being a beeb interview.

Chris Type R

8,041 posts

250 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
Does it not look as though he's self-employed?

Either way, entertaining in a bizarre way, due to being a beeb interview.
From the earlier link:

"In the interview Mr Rastani described himself as an independent trader. Elsewhere he claims he's an "investment speaker". Instead of operating from a plush office in Canary Wharf Mr Rastani works and lives with his partner Anita Eader in a £200,000 semi in Bexleyheath, south London. The house, complete with a mortgage from Royal Bank of Scotland, belongs to her not him.

He is a business owner, a 99pc shareholder in public speaking venture Santoro Projects. Its most recent accounts show cash in the bank of £985. After four years trading net assets are £10,048 - in the red."

Baba Booey

7,573 posts

181 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
Reminds me of this mix up at the BBC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4D8w2v7IB8


HarryW

15,154 posts

270 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
The man is a gimp and of no consequence.
However that link to the Rolling Stone article about GS was interesting, even if 10K% of it was remotely true it is scandalous.

handbraketurn

1,371 posts

167 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
http://www.leadingtrader.com/


The guy is an independent trader.

Yes, he is the dell boy of the stock market. It would be like you or I, deciding to be an indepedant car trader and declaring the car market is toast.

Shame on BBC for giving him the opportunity to spot some 'controversial' clap trap, cause a sensation and get a massive amount of traffic to his website which has now fallen over with the demand.

Do something now, like, what, invest in stock market through you Mr. Guru.

Massive cock, if I ever meet him, I'll challenge him to a dual at dawn.


Chris Type R

8,041 posts

250 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
handbraketurn said:
Massive cock, if I ever meet him, I'll challenge him to a dual at dawn.
On the duel carriageway ?

HarryW

15,154 posts

270 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
Chris Type R said:
handbraketurn said:
Massive cock, if I ever meet him, I'll challenge him to a dual at dawn.
On the duel carriageway ?
dubbly so.........

Police State

4,068 posts

221 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
hornet said:
So, without going all tinfoil hat, exactly how deep in this whole deal are the likes of Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and co? I know there are all sorts of "shape shifting lizard people" stories about them, but for a simpleton such as myself, are they massively corrupt, in bed with the powers that be, too big to control or what? If they're that out of control they can bring down the global economy, why aren't we regulating them to death? I accept that's hopelessly naive, but you get the point. If they need stopping, how do we do it without the whole system imploding?
Have you ever known a time in history when the money men were not closer than the doorbell to the political power brokers?
Have you ever known a time in human history when the money men have not traded to gain in order that someone else loses?
Have you ever known a time in human history when the money men have never chased the money when it has deserted one nation only to fulfil another’s treasury?

Off course they're bent, it's the nature of the world; it's their world. You just work in it.




Otispunkmeyer

12,618 posts

156 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
Tonsko said:
Goldman Sachs can't and doesn't lose. Everyone should really read that Rolling Stone article. I knew it was bent, but this is fully 360 degree spirals.
I dont know what to make of rolling stone, they are afterall something you might read if you like rock music and their political pieces have a very angry man feel to them. Angry men are often blinded by the facts that make them angry and dont consider the other side.

Still they have a lot of fascinating articles on there that make for good entertaining reading. Like Robbing Main Street for example. If any of that article is true, and it might be, then...well.... fk me.

Otispunkmeyer

12,618 posts

156 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
hornet said:
Tonsko said:
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the important message is that GS own the market; forget what influence he has.
So, without going all tinfoil hat, exactly how deep in this whole deal are the likes of Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and co? I know there are all sorts of "shape shifting lizard people" stories about them, but for a simpleton such as myself, are they massively corrupt, in bed with the powers that be, too big to control or what? If they're that out of control they can bring down the global economy, why aren't we regulating them to death? I accept that's hopelessly naive, but you get the point. If they need stopping, how do we do it without the whole system imploding?
Bit of an example, I think with ex CEO Henry "Hank" Paulson as the man in the treasury no less.

Goldman, JP Morgan et al were granted a status that essentially enabled them to masquerade as a commercial bank literally over night. Normally this kind of thing takes a while and is carefully considered. Over night. Why? Access to a lot more bail out funds thats why.

handbraketurn

1,371 posts

167 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all



Tonsko

Original Poster:

6,299 posts

216 months

Tuesday 27th September 2011
quotequote all
hornet said:
So, without going all tinfoil hat, exactly how deep in this whole deal are the likes of Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and co? I know there are all sorts of "shape shifting lizard people" stories about them, but for a simpleton such as myself, are they massively corrupt, in bed with the powers that be, too big to control or what? If they're that out of control they can bring down the global economy, why aren't we regulating them to death? I accept that's hopelessly naive, but you get the point. If they need stopping, how do we do it without the whole system imploding?
They're not being regulated because it seems the guys that used to work for GS are now the ones enforcing (or repealing usually) the legislation.

BMWBen

4,899 posts

202 months

Wednesday 28th September 2011
quotequote all
Tonsko said:
hornet said:
So, without going all tinfoil hat, exactly how deep in this whole deal are the likes of Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and co? I know there are all sorts of "shape shifting lizard people" stories about them, but for a simpleton such as myself, are they massively corrupt, in bed with the powers that be, too big to control or what? If they're that out of control they can bring down the global economy, why aren't we regulating them to death? I accept that's hopelessly naive, but you get the point. If they need stopping, how do we do it without the whole system imploding?
They're not being regulated because it seems the guys that used to work for GS are now the ones enforcing (or repealing usually) the legislation.
That rolling stone article is so full of contradiction and fud that I don't know where to start... It's true tinfoil hat stuff.

The fact is that GS are not the masters of the universe. They're not in control. They just happen to have some of the finest minds in finance so they play the game better than other people.

It can't be surprising that people in power stay in power. Once you've made it to the board of a major bank you're a massively influential figure in world economics, and you have the knowledge required for things like... Running the fed. Is there a case of helping out your mates? Of course there is, but not any more so than in any other walk of life.

The idiot who buys the overpriced tulip bulb with someone else's money is just as culpable, if not more so than the person who sells it to them,.



Digga

40,373 posts

284 months

Wednesday 28th September 2011
quotequote all
russ_a said:
Buy low and sell high.
Or equally sell high (and highly leveraged) and buy low to cover the position. Hopefully.

Dr Digga is not regulated by the FSA. Your home is at risk if you leave the gas on etc. etc.

DJRC

23,563 posts

237 months

Wednesday 28th September 2011
quotequote all
handbraketurn said:
Scare mongering in the extreme.

"the stock market is toast" Reallly? What a f*cking tool.

All he said there that was relevant was the Euro is on the way out, which I suspect is right and thank the good lord we did not get involved.

So much bullsh*t comes out of his mouth.

I mean, for a start. Traders want safe assets, and then he says, like the dollar. THE DOLLAR? If you think Europe is in debt, check out America.

http://usdebt.kleptocracy.us/

The US dollar is as unviable as the Euro on the basis of debt.

Don't pay too much mind to this tosser, he'll get bum raped by his bosses in the morning.
In the last month the $ has gained 8Cents on the £ and 10 against the €. Thats a very profitable move. An awful lot of people who were into the Chuff moved into the $ instead, so actually he has been quite correct if he has been doing that.

Dave_ST220

10,296 posts

206 months

Wednesday 28th September 2011
quotequote all
Chris Type R said:
Its most recent accounts show cash in the bank of £985. After four years trading net assets are £10,048 - in the red."
Not too dissimilar to some posters on these very forums who talk utter bullst judging by the state of the accounts filed for the companies they link to in their profiles.

Tinod

574 posts

186 months

Wednesday 28th September 2011
quotequote all
So just an attention seeker; to be honest he spoke with conviction though you could tell by his tie he wasn't the proper city type! ;-)

Digga

40,373 posts

284 months

Wednesday 28th September 2011
quotequote all
Dave_ST220 said:
Chris Type R said:
Its most recent accounts show cash in the bank of £985. After four years trading net assets are £10,048 - in the red."
Not too dissimilar to some posters on these very forums who talk utter bullst judging by the state of the accounts filed for the companies they link to in their profiles.
I'm alwys dubious of filed accounts - 'good' or 'bad' - because even if they are audited, they can be manipulated for various means; upside to fluff things nicely for a sale, downside to mitigate tax liabilities etc. etc..

ETA that filed accounts can be very 'creative', such as those of a company we once had dealings with, which showed and initial capitalisation of £1m. A few years of losses had seriously eroded this, but there was still a few hundred grand in there. But a little note, tucked away in the back of the accounts showed the owner had taken a £250k loan...

Edited by Digga on Wednesday 28th September 08:56

Dave_ST220

10,296 posts

206 months

Wednesday 28th September 2011
quotequote all
Digga said:
Dave_ST220 said:
Chris Type R said:
Its most recent accounts show cash in the bank of £985. After four years trading net assets are £10,048 - in the red."
Not too dissimilar to some posters on these very forums who talk utter bullst judging by the state of the accounts filed for the companies they link to in their profiles.
I'm alwys dubious of filed accounts - 'good' or 'bad' - because even if they are audited, they can be manipulated for various means; upside to fluff things nicely for a sale, downside to mitigate tax liabilities etc. etc..
Yes, without doubt. However with more digging(pardon the pun!) it can give a pretty good picture wink