Nothing of value was lost.
1 Like
It’s a rumor started by a Substack blogger who claims to have spoken to “multiple senior sources familiar with the discussions,” those discussions being internal to Amazon. Neither Amazon nor AMC have commented. Here’s his article:
What the fuck does Tupperware actually own now tho? Surely “plastic box” is a pretty easy to enter market?
They throw the best parties.
LOL I’m picturing some suburban housewife going on Shark Tank with some plastic food box that is 2% better than the existing and getting reamed out by Kevin O’Leary. “Do you have any idea how competitive the plastic food container space is!!!???”
5 Likes
Since we like to laugh at FIRE bullshit in here, heres a fun headline.
5 Likes
You can buy basically the same stuff at the supermarket for like half the price. It still works as advertised, it’s just not an exciting brand and that’s literally the only thing they make so I’m not sure how they weren’t swallowed by someone like 3M long ago.
2 Likes
Seriously. I’m shocked that Tupperware isn’t a subsidiary of some bigger company.
I’m even more shocked that (according to their Wikipedia page) they apparently have 10,000 employees?
2 Likes
5 Likes
Well, I assume they’re counting their “Tupperware party organizers” in that 10,000 number. Tupperware is run similar to other MLM companies.
2 Likes
Two lawmakers reported trades in bank stocks last month as they worked on government efforts to address fallout from two of the largest bank failures in American history.
The disclosures, by a New York Republican and an Oregon Democrat, mark the latest instance of congressional stock trading intersecting with official business.
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R., N.Y.) bought stock in a regional bank before a subsidiary agreed to take over Signature Bank’s deposits following its closure. Days before she bought the stock, she said she met with financial regulators to discuss the bank’s closure.
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D., Ore.) reported three trades in bank stocks as he co-sponsored legislation seeking to strengthen restrictions on financial firms in the wake of the bank failures
3 Likes
Add John Curtis to the list
Like many of his colleagues, Curtis was critical of proposals to ban lawmakers from trading stocks.
“For 40 years I’ve been building up a retirement, mostly in stocks. It’s not as easy as ‘don’t do stocks,’” he told the Journal in January 2022.
3 Likes
No money in insider trading, everyone’s solid
6 Likes
Matt Levines column today is a banger.
So if you buy a swap today, ordinarily it starts tomorrow, to avoid any information asymmetries.
About those information asymmetries. Goldman’s trick was to trade T+0 swaps, that is, swaps that were struck based on that day’s index level. This doesn’t matter that much, if you trade US stock indexes in the US: If you trade an S&P 500 swap at 2 p.m., and it strikes based on that day’s S&P 500 closing level, you don’t know what that level will be. But Goldman traded T+0 swaps, in New York, on non-US indexes that closed before New York did:
Almost all the “same-day” equity index swaps at issue in this matter were swaps tied to the MSCI Europe Australasia and Far East (“EAFE”) Index (“EAFE Index Swaps”). The MSCI EAFE Index tracks a basket of stocks from Japan, Europe, Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, and Australia, among others. The MSCI EAFE Index level (or, index price) is published once per day, in the early evening, New York time (“Index Settlement Value”). It is calculated by MSCI, using a formula based on the closing prices of the index’s component stocks. The foreign exchanges on which the component stocks trade, however, close hours before New York exchanges do—some before the New York trading day even begins. In other words, most of the component prices used to calculate the Index Settlement Value are stale—at least several hours old—by the time the Index Settlement Value gets published in New York.
If you trade a T+0 swap on the MSCI EAFE Index at 2 p.m. in New York, (1) the index price is not published yet, but (2) you already pretty much know what it will be, because all the stocks have closed already.
Also, though, you have a head start on knowing what tomorrow’s index price will be:
Though most of the component stocks in the EAFE Index trade on exchanges that close well before the New York markets do, there are other “proxy” instruments that generally track the market value of the components of the EAFE index and trade throughout the New York trading day. For example, there is an exchange traded fund (“ETF”) that tracks the MSCI EAFE Index. It trades on the NYSE throughout the New York trading day and reflects the market’s view of the real-time value of the basket of stocks in the corresponding index—despite the fact that the markets in which the underlying stocks trade may be closed.
So at 2 p.m. on Tuesday in New York, you can calculate that the MSCI EAFE index settlement price for Tuesday will be, say, 2,000 — a price that will be published Tuesday evening, but that reflects the index level as of Tuesday morning. But the ETF on that index trades all day in New York, and you can look at the trading price of the ETF at 2 p.m. , and it might be above or below 2,000. If the broad market is rallying and people expect European and Asian stocks to trade up, then the ETF might trade at, say, 2,050. The CFTC says:
The result is twofold: (1) since most of the markets in which the underlying equities traded closed hours before the Index Settlement Value was published, sophisticated parties with the wherewithal and resources to access relevant market data could know—or have a very good approximation of—what the daily Index Settlement Value would be hours before that publication; and (2) during the New York trading day, the real-time market value of the components of the index, as reflected in proxy instruments like the EAFE ETF, can—and did— diverge from the projected Index Settlement Value. For example, during the New York trading day, the ETF and other proxies could be trading above (at a “premium” to) the projected Index Settlement Value. Or, the ETF and other proxies could be trading below (at a “discount” to) the projected Index Settlement Value.
There is a simple arbitrage: Sell the ETF at 2,050, buy the swap at 2,000, and collect the 50 points of difference. Trade the same index in two different ways at two different prices.
And that’s what Goldman did. It went out to swaps customers and said “hey we’ll pay you Libor plus 55 basis points for a regular-way T+1 swap, or , if you want, we can pay you Libor plus 90 basis points for a T+0 swap, that’s a good deal huh?” And some customers said yes.
And the best part
Yes yes yes. If you are a DERIVATIVES SALESPERSON AT GOLDMAN SACHS, and you have a customer who APPEARS TO BELIEVE THAT HE IS RECEIVING AN ADVANTAGEOUS INTEREST RATE, FROM GOLDMAN SACHS, WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED , you sure will repeatedly return to that customer to execute trades. That’s a real good customer! The customer who thinks that Goldman Sachs are charitable idiots who are giving him a good deal for no reason is going to be getting a lot of calls from Goldman Sachs. “Hey bud, got another great deal for you,” his Goldman salesperson will giggle to him, a dozen times a day.
5 Likes
I don’t know if this has been talked about in the TV thread, but is there anyone in charge at WB Discovery with a fully-functioning brain?
Our HBO product was so well-known and had such a good reputation that we’re concerned people might be intimidated by it, so we’re dropping the HBO part and adding Dr. Pimple Popper to the library? This is bananas. Maybe David Zaslav is doing a Brewster’s Millions thing?
At least there are a bunch of good tweets.
https://twitter.com/DrakeGatsby/status/1646545088900657154
https://twitter.com/TrungTPhan/status/1646207587690618880
https://twitter.com/strangeharbors/status/1646240548725063680
https://twitter.com/donwinslow/status/1646342843877969920
https://twitter.com/michaelcollado/status/1646524520906506241
https://twitter.com/Lancewiththepan/status/1646323359087489026
2 Likes
This might draw in people who were afraid of HBO’s high price point by… checks notes offering two of three tiers at higher or equal price of HBO Max
1 Like
Zaslav is one of the highest paid executives in the world and he’s an absolute dipshit, it’s incredible
1 Like
Hahaha, Levine is the best - he quoted this in today’s newsletter.
1 Like
Now that’s an impressive citation.
1 Like