  HangmnDon't Fight It...It's InevitablePremium
join:2000-04-08
Philadelphia, PA | HUH? Shouldn't ANYONE from the JP Morgan camp just Shut the F^%K Up and enjoy their TARP funds? Haven't these idiots caused enough harm? This would be like AIG emailing me about MY Fiscal responsibilities
--
»davescustompc.com | |
|
 |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: HUH? said by Hangmn:Shouldn't ANYONE from the JP Morgan camp just Shut the F^%K Up and enjoy their OUR TARP funds? Haven't these idiots caused enough harm? This would be like AIG emailing me about MY Fiscal responsibilities Fixed it for you.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012! | |
|
| |  N3OGHCertified GLG-20Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: HUH? Yeah, no shit.
But hey, everyone relax, every thing's going to be OK. The UAW now owns 55% of Chrysler, and the former owner owns nothing.
Talk about fishy.
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
|
| | |  NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | Re: HUH? The former owner Cerebus a hedge fund tried to extort money from the government. The government told them to go pound sand.
Fiat will own 20% up to 35% and cannot take a majority stake until Chrysler pays back the government. Nowhere does it say the UAW owns that portion of the company. I think the Treasury dept does. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | N3OGHCertified GLG-20Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Yeah, call me in 2 years and we'll see if you still have that Obama avatar.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. All the politicians are out to stick it to guys like me & you. Once you, and the great "unwashed" masses learn that then maybe our country can move forward.
Until then, we're sitting in neutral revving the engine.....
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
|
| | | | | | By extort do you mean trying to get the best deal for their shareholders? For a man who claims to be for the people, how do you take a private company and turn it into a government company? Welcome to the new America. Don't work hard, the government will provide for you. | |
|
|  GlobalMindDomino Dude, POWER Systems GuyPremium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL | Well nevermind that JPMC has tried to pay the funds back (since they didn't need them to begin with) and were told "we'll get back with you."
Of any of them JPMC is actually a well run company.
But I understand the sentiment.
Otherwise....analysts crack me up with commentary like this. They claim to all be experts on an industry then act like they're victims in it all. Truthfully they've got not much more clue than the rest of us, even with evaluating "fundamentals."
Long term they'll both be fine, but that doesn't suit traders who look to day on day profit. Long term REAL investors will likely be fine. | |
|
| | RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Re: HUH? That's just it. These pundits and "experts" have nothing to sell if there isn't turbulence in the market, so they work full-time to create it. | |
|
| |  morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
 ·Charter
2 edits | said by GlobalMind:Well nevermind that JPMC has tried to pay the funds back (since they didn't need them to begin with) and were told "we'll get back with you." Of any of them JPMC is actually a well run company. 1. if they didn't need tax payer money to begin with, they wouldn't have taken any.
2. THE only alternative is that they thought it was free handout time and said ME TOO.
so either JP Morgan Chase is in deep shit and borderline insolvent or they tried to steal tax payer money because everyone else was doing it.
Both options mean I won't do business with them in the future. | |
|
| | | | | Re: HUH? said by morbo:said by GlobalMind:Well nevermind that JPMC has tried to pay the funds back (since they didn't need them to begin with) and were told "we'll get back with you." Of any of them JPMC is actually a well run company. 1. if they didn't need tax payer money to begin with, they wouldn't have taken any. 2. THE only alternative is that they thought it was free handout time and said ME TOO. so either JP Morgan Chase is in deep shit and borderline insolvent or they tried to steal tax payer money because everyone else was doing it. Both options mean I won't do business with them in the future. No, JPMC was forced to take the money by the administration, so was Wells Fargo and possibly Bank of America | |
|
| | | | ricep5Premium
join:2000-08-07
Jacksonville, FL | Re: HUH? While this stretching off the topic....
TARP was designed to bring liquidity to the markets that banks use to lend each other. When Lehman folded, all the banks constrained overnights to preserve their own capital. Everyone was worried about each bank making calls on each others accounts.
While JPMC got blamed for starting the collapse for refusing to let Lehman draw down off its collateral accounts, which let to its bankruptcy....Treasury ordered each of those banks to accept the TARP funds to maintain overnight liquidity.
While few banks and investment houses really actually needed the funds, by providing to all the majors it essentially removed any opportunity of any liquidity squeeze by anyone.
JPMC is a really well run bank, but don't confuse the words of one analyst in a separate division from what you can get from them in the retail (Chase) space.
Back on topic...I too don't like the short term disease some of these analysts have. Too much focus on "growth" and quarterly profits at the expense of R&D and long term viability. But then isn't that the problem with our culture? Give me what I want now, I don't care what impact it has? | |
|
| | | | morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 Reviews:
·Charter
| said by danball1976:No, JPMC was forced to take the money by the administration, so was Wells Fargo and possibly Bank of America that's incorrect although a popular rumor going around mostly to assuage the public and world fears about the true state of the banking system. right now, the big banks are playing "who can survive longest" and come out on top. but don't think they aren't in serious trouble: »online.wsj.com/article/SB1241823···297.html
| |
|
 VarlikWithout Honor You Will Never Be FreePremium
join:2002-01-06
Anderson, SC
1 edit | It's FIOS all over again. Yeah I'm going to follow the advice of JP Morgan’s analyst's. It's bad enough that my 401K is comprised mainly of JP Morgan mutual funds which were all pretty much dogs’ way before the market collapsed. But to have to listen to an idiot like this who works for that company spew his flawed opinions because he is blind to yet another market paradigm shift.
Does anyone else see the similarities in this and the gloom and doom finical disaster that analysts said would be the result of Version’s FIOS upgrade? I for one happen to somewhat agree with Verizon Wireless CTO Tony Melone the costs need to come down. Now if they would just lower the ridiculous $1.99 per MB as well as their various unlimited Data plans.
--
"Sir SIR! We don't use DHCP servers. We only use IBM & Microsoft servers." From there my call to tech support went steadily downhill.
--Don't bother telling us that we're too loud. Cause there ain't no way that we'll ever turn down. | |
|
|
| | | Re: I'm not seeing a Wireless problem on stock market With the latest research showing more and more people migrating to cellular service over POTS lines, then I see the wireless companies doing o.k.
The issue will be brand loyalty, churn and devices since the iPhone does well for Apple (and somewhat for ATT.) Now Verizon, which initially rejected the iPhone, wants the device to help them gain more customers. They lost a lot of people to ATT because of the iPhone. | |
|
| | | | Re: I'm not seeing a Wireless problem on stock market "With the latest research showing more and more people migrating to cellular service over POTS lines, then I see the wireless companies doing o.k."
Verizon and AT&T are the two big POTS companies. I think the latest numbers show their wireless increases are roughly comparable to their wireline losses. | |
|
| | | | | Re: I'm not seeing a Wireless problem on stock market said by PastTense5:"With the latest research showing more and more people migrating to cellular service over POTS lines, then I see the wireless companies doing o.k." Verizon and AT&T are the two big POTS companies. I think the latest numbers show their wireless increases are roughly comparable to their wireline losses. And I know Verizon (not sure about ATT) treats their wireless division as a separate entity for the most part. Are Verizon Wireless people unionized? | |
|
| | | rmdir
join:2003-03-13
Chicago, IL | Too late for Verizon with the iPhone. I'm switching carriers to TMo at the end of this billing cycle as I wanted a smart phone, and not a closed system. So, the Android G1 was the only choice. I'm sure Verizon's designers are hard at work uglyfying the iPhone interface as they do with every single phone they sell. That,and crippling functionality.
I don't care about the ETF either-I'm glad to be rid of mediocre phones, which is all V offers. If AT&T bans a tethering app, your SOL. If Tmobile bans it, you download it from somewhere else. | |
|
| | | |  MrMasterjetsetterPremium
join:2000-12-16
St Thomas, VI
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Virgin Mobile Br..
| Re: I'm not seeing a Wireless problem on stock market said by rmdir:Too late for Verizon with the iPhone. I'm switching carriers to TMo at the end of this billing cycle as I wanted a smart phone, and not a closed system. So, the Android G1 was the only choice. I'm sure Verizon's designers are hard at work uglyfying the iPhone interface as they do with every single phone they sell. That,and crippling functionality. I don't care about the ETF either-I'm glad to be rid of mediocre phones, which is all V offers. If AT&T bans a tethering app, your SOL. If Tmobile bans it, you download it from somewhere else. If you are so informed, then why don't you know that VZW doesn't change the the blackberry interface or for that matter, any of the new touch screen phones.
Now, I'm not defending Verizon for their GPS crippling or lack of Wifi on certain phones but the grass isn't always greener on the other side. | |
|
| | | | |  atuarreHere come the drumsPremium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX | Re: I'm not seeing a Wireless problem on stock market Actually, going the route of a Blackberry or a G1 is a better choice. He does not want an iPhone because Apple has to be in total control of everything. Verizon cannot mess with the Blackberry because RIM develops the Blackberry software and releases it for each carrier. | |
|
| | | | | |  joakoPremium
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null
kudos:5
·Comcast
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: I'm not seeing a Wireless problem on stock market said by atuarre:Actually, going the route of a Blackberry or a G1 is a better choice. He does not want an iPhone because Apple has to be in total control of everything. Verizon cannot mess with the Blackberry because RIM develops the Blackberry software and releases it for each carrier. Apple God Jobs NEEDS to be in charge. THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
--
PRescott7-2097 | |
|
| | | | | | | atuarreHere come the drumsPremium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX | Re: I'm not seeing a Wireless problem on stock market Well he will not be an Apple god for much longer. His health, from what the rumors are, is not well. When he resigns, I imagine Apple's stock will take a very big hit. | |
|
| | What's wrong with "competing on price"? I thought that the main advantage of a free market is that everyone can compete on price and quality of service?
(Not that we have much of a free market in reality) | |
|
|  SrsBsns
join:2001-08-30
Oklahoma City, OK | Re: What's wrong with "competing on price"? I think what they are saying is Verizon and AT&T have historically not competed on price at all and they now might have to do so. It means lower revenue for them. The carrier's have been enjoying that luxury of no price competition for a long time. They tend to think their networks are the advantage and people should pay out of their noses for the privilege of using it. AT&T and Verizon actually raise prices in unison on a lot of things.
GASP! Dare I say say the two companies may have to actually act like they are in a free economy???  | |
|
| | Chaldo
join:2008-03-18
West Bloomfield, MI | Re: What's wrong with "competing on price"? That is what I want for Verizon and AT&T to have to look at there prices and think about them now insted of just raising because they had no other competition that was a big threat. I would so love for AT&T wireless prices to go down, they are too high in my opinion, also the "Other charges" thats a killer on the bill, At least my bill it makes it go up another 13-15 dollars a month. | |
|
| | greedy thugs Please these idiots who only look at what money they can make today are ruining us all. Afraid of price competition!!?? WTF are these idiots thinking. They would be the first to spout on about open markets and competition. All of a sudden now they are useless puddles of pity because two wireless providers might not make as much money for them due to PRICE competition.
G& T& H&**!! A$$#*((#$!!!! | |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| high prices and greed aren't in vogue Consumer 1
Wireless Industry & Wall St. manipulators: 999,999,999,999,999
They still can be taken down a few million more pegs. Keep up the good work for not getting suck(ered) into the 2+ year black hole of a contract, no matter how nice that iphone or black(crack?!)berry looks. | |
|
|
|
