I was taking about jail terms for Wall Street cheats, not Hillary.
Hillary only took $225,000 from Goldman Sachs to speak at Goldman Sachs "Builders and Innovators" conference, held at the Ritz Carlton Dove Mountain Resort in Marana, Arizona. She also received the same fee two other times from Goldman Sachs.
Three of the firms she spoke to — Goldman, JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America — ended up settling with the federal government for $5.1 billion, $13 billion and $16.6 billion, respectively, for their roles in the financial crisis which was aided by Bill Clinton's sign off on the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act. He even invited CITI's CEO Sandy Weill to the signing ceremony.
According to public records, Clinton gave 92 speeches between 2013 and 2015. Her standard fee is $225,000, and she collected $21.6 million dollars in just under two years. Clinton made 8 speeches to big banks, netting $1.8 million, according to a CNN analysis.
The joke is on us.
For many years I have railed long and hard on this issue.
No longer is Wall Street viewed as a partner with American industry, but the shares of companies are nothing but poker chips in the daily trading game. Companies create wealth and the traders syphon this wealth off for their firms and themselves by creating maximum contrived volatility (MCV). The most recent example of MCV is the current record highs after the world was ending two weeks ago because of BREXIT. What has really changed?
Wall Street is totally dysfunctional in many ways.
Problem #1 is the prevalence of high frequency HF trading.
HF trading is nothing but market manipulation that is promoted by the major investment houses and hedge funds. The exchanges love it because it generates trading volume. Thus any news, gossip, unfounded rumor, lie can quickly make bucks for a trader.
Problem #2 is investment research.
For years, investment bank Analysts have touted the stocks of their banking clients.
Most of the buyside no longer pays for good investment research or recommendations. Now sell side firms are paid on how many management teams they bring into the mutual fund offices, thereby turning many Analysts into nothing but cheerleaders. Example, STX went from $51 in July 2015 to $18 this May. How many Analysts went to sell? Just 3 out of 30. Today, some of the same STX cheerleaders who stayed bullish during the crash, will be out with reports pumping STX.
Problem #3 is the investment funds themselves.
Fund managers get fired if they under perform for a couple quarters, which causes them to be very conservative. Over the past year, the market was mixed, yet most funds loss money. So many investors are tired of this under performance and are pulling their money out of mutual funds and putting it into ETFs and index funds, further pressuring the funds.
One step in the right direction is to put major wrongdoers into jail and hitting them with major fines.
As has been increasingly the case, our beloved "free" press has decided to spin the BREXIT vote as being primarily driven by racism in the British working case while ignoring concerns about the loss of national sovereignty to faceless, internationalist bureaucrats located in Brussels. Another overlooked aspect has been the ongoing EU advocacy by international bankers who are hoping the healthy economies of Europe can bail them out from the bad loans they made to Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Spain.
The Oxford/Cambridge elitists and the British liberal bleeding hearts, who have been sternly lecturing the working class, must have missed the ECON101 lecture about how a massive influx of new workers lowers wages, especially at the lower end of the food chain. Even worst for an economy is to have to pay the newcomers welfare.
Is it racist to desire to have a job that pays decent wages?
The greatest challenge we face in the U.S. is the loss of control of our government to Wall Street, the Banks, and the 0.001% ruling class. Our problems are challenging and solvable, but vested interests prevent solutions that benefit the whole country, rather than just the top 0.001% and our investment industry. For instance, a 6% tax on mergers and acquisitions and HF computer trading profits, in conjunction with a 6% reduction in discretionary spending and a 2% to 3% increase in the income taxes of the top 5% of wage earners would go a long way to narrowing the current budget deficit, but Wall Street would raise holy hell about a M&A or HF trading tax.
By continuing to put their cronies in positions of power, we only validate Einstein's definition of insanity of constantly applying a failed methodology to a problem with hopes for a different outcome.
We have met the enemy and they are us!
Little to do directly with WDC, especially to justify such a sell off.
Probably the most rational issue is that the Street hates adversity and buyers are sitting on their hands. So traders being the opportunistic people they are are making hay as the sun shines, or in other words maximum contrived volatility is once again ruling the marketplace.
All the internationalists/ one worlders are packing the airwaves with dire prophesies to #$%$ the public which doesn't help either.
While their are certainly legitimate concerns over the SNDK acquisition: High price, ability of SNDK to ramp 3D NAND flash, WDC debt load and flash price stability, three points should be focused on:
1. Initial pro forma estimates for WDC/SNDK by three or four Analysts were in the $7.50 to $8.00 range or 40% above the consensus estimate for FY16. Put a P/E of 10 to 12 on these estimates and compare to current share price. Let's see how these estimates change after Thursday's call?
2. STX is struggling with its non-HDD recent acquisitions, no revenue growth since 1QFY15. Combine that with STX's greater exposure to enterprise HDDs, which are under attack by SSDs, and STX faces a more challenging situation than WDC as evidenced by missing three of its last four forecasts. Since FY14, STX earnings are down 65% versus a 33% drop for WDC.
3. No one has considered what the internal supply of flash means to WDC in terms of this competition with STX in the SSD market. With flash comprising 70% to 80% of the bill-of-materials of a SSD, WDC will have a significant cost advantage over STX in SSDs which should lead to a significant, long-term share advantage in this marketplace.
One thing most of the bean counters fail to take into account is the potential WDC share gain from STX in SSD market that WDC could obtain by having an internal supply of NAND flash.
NAND Flash gross margins are around low-to-mid 40%, NAND comprises 70-80% of the SSD bill of materials.
Assume WDC sells $1 B in SSDs, divide that by SSD ASP to estimate # of units and take number of units x average SSD capacity to get total capacity shipped. Divide total capacity shipped by average NAND flash chip capacity to get estimate for number of chips WDC will require from SNDK.
I believe a couple of Analysts previously had a long term pro forma estimate of $7.50-$8.00/share.
However, the interest rates on the loans came in much higher than expected, but WDC now sees greater cost savings.