This Zucks! by whozit

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

This Zucks!

POSTED BY: WHOZIT
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 14:53
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1150
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, May 22, 2012 12:42 PM

WHOZIT

All those poor Zuckers! The press treated this like the next Microsoft....zuckers.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/47523622

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2012 1:28 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Looks like Morgan Stanley might be in serious trouble over this.

And it makes an excellent case for more regulation of the banking and commodities markets.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2012 2:53 PM

DREAMTROVE

The whole thing is a scam. Underwriting is a way of minting cash based on pure speculation. It's like a small business loan gone out of control. the resulting currency create, stocks, bonds, derivatives, is worth what the people believe it to be worth. What's peculiar here is that they were undermining their own issue. It makes me think they were telling one story to the public and a different one to their friends. What this situation needs is not regulation but transparency. If you regulate it, then a handful of feds will determine who hears what, and as they are inherently corrupt, ie, human, they will arrange it so that they hear all the best information. They won't insider trade, they'll block opposing* issues, or release negative data on them selectively.

* opposing to their own friends' companies.

What we need is unregulated freedom of information so that anyone can post the story anonymously so we all get the same information.

But you also gotta see the non-story behind this story. Lots of people could have told you that the pricing of FB was ambitious. Zuck had ten billion in cash, but that only merits the price of $10B, or around $4. It's not cash that's turning a high revenue. Still, FB is probably worth more than $4/share, but it wasn't worth $38. I doubt anyone in the financial world was going to buy that it was.

What the regulators are really kicking themselves over is that they let it happen at all. Zuck just issued himself $100B in liquid currency, and of course, he owns his own currency, and has more internet users than red China. It's not actually a minor issue for the FEDs. Fortunately, they have yet to discover what a major issue it is. I get that zuckerberg is a complicated character and facebook is a less than ideal website, but he still basically batting for the right team, even if he's just batting for team zuck. I half think the only reason that the NWO let him in to their inner circle was (sorry, PN, not because he's jewish, or harvard) because the old illumiatni are actually struggling to feel relevant.

And, now that they have allied himself with them, and out currency regulators are in a tizzy, everyone knows there are going to be 100 ipos just like it around the bend, not that size, but size actually doesn't matter all that much here. How many online de facto nation states do you think TPTB want spawning in the middle of their empire?

The way this one is going to settle though is with some admission of wrongdoing, a little scapegoating, a fine, a pointless piece of bogus regulation laced with some sly provision by some fatcat to allow more crookedness. Everyone knows that if they really regulate this stuff, it's moving overseas tomorrow morning, and there are a dozen takers ready to take over our stock market.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE