聪明人的10大特征，你具备了么？ 1. They don't talk as much as you, because they know they got smart by listening. 他们不会说太多，因为他们知道多听才能变聪明。 2. They know lots of things other than what they're specialised in. Theirs is the gift of a broad mind, constantly fed with the stimulant of being interested in what everyone else is doing. 除去专业知识之外，他们知道的很多。他们的天赋就是思维活跃，总是对其他人在做的事情充满好奇和兴趣。 3. They juggle home, work and personal interests with dexterity and never fall back on the tired old refrain about "work life balance". And when they're juggling, they somehow manage to seem 100% engaged with what they're doing, on all fronts simultaneously, even though you know they're taking appropriate steps behind the scenes to make sure their lives are perfectly, serenely balanced. 他们把家庭、工作和个人兴趣完美平衡，从来不会为“平衡工作和生活”这样的事情伤脑筋。当他们玩的时候，似乎会全身心的投入在这件事上面，他们面面俱到，虽然你很清楚，其实背后他们努力的走好每一步来让生活更加完美、更加平衡。 4. They probably do social media. Not always, but probably. It is not only another chance to listen, but one they use to ensure they can feed their brains with things they otherwise wouldn't have come across. 也许他们会涉足社交媒体。不是一贯如此，只是有可能而已。这也是另外一个倾听的机会，但他们往往关注的是那些从没有经历过的事情。 5. Even when things go very badly wrong, they'll be smiling. Smart people never get ruffled because their smart brains present them with alternatives faster than the bad stuff can happen. 即使事情发展很糟糕，他们也会面带微笑。聪明的人永远不会被打倒，他们的大脑永远都会在坏事发生之前，火速想好其他的解决方案。 6. They know they are usually the smartest person in the room, but they don't spend their time dwelling on that. Instead, they take it as a personal challenge to see if they can make everyone else the smartest person in the room too. 他们知道自己是屋子里最聪明的人，但不会花时间去沾沾自喜。相反，他们会把这当做对自己的挑战：看他们是不是能把屋子里的其他人也变得一样的聪明。 7. If they are managers, they will make every effort to get people smarter, more connected and more popular than them in their teams. They're not threatened because they know that smartness is synergistic. They also make sure that their smart people get to look smarter than them for the same reason. 如果他们是经理级别的人物，他们会努力让别人在整个团队中看上去比他们还要聪明、亲密和受欢迎。他们不会感到威胁，因为聪明有相互促进的作用。同理，他们也会确保这些聪明人看起来更聪明。 8. They have hidden skills that never get rolled out until they're needed. They don't have any need to show their full capabilities for reasons of proving they're better than others. 不到万不得已，他们不会展现出自己的所有技能，无需仅仅为了证明自己比别人厉害而去秀自己的能力。 9. They may or may not have expensive educations. You'd never know, just by being with them unless you had their CV in front of you. 他们也许没有受到非常高端的教育，除非看到他们的简历，否则你永远都无从得知。 10. They never, ever, under any circumstances, make you look stupid, even though it would be easy to do so. They've learnt through bitter experience that the only thing that happens when you make someone look bad is you look bad yourself. 在任何情况下，他们绝对绝对不会让你看起来很愚笨，哪怕这是件轻而易举的事情。因为从过去的教训中他们学到的是，让别人出丑的唯一结果就是自己也出丑。 Now you should know who the smart people are. If you want to be the smart one, let me give you this extra advice from Steve Jobs "Stay hungry. Stay foolish." 现在你应该知道谁才是聪明人了吧。如果你想变得聪明，再送你一句话，就是乔帮主那句经典的名言：“求知若饥，虚心若愚”。
Why Bankers Don't Like Reggie: How Many "One Time" Items Do We Need To Make An Item No Longer "One Time"? Featured font size decrease font size increase font size Print E-mail Comments (1) Tweet me! 20131009 162741 271 x Before I get started, I just want everyone to know that I always declared that There's Something Fishy at the House of Morgan (Wednesday, 27 April 2011) . Here are a few historical graphics to bring you up to speed to what should now be painfully obvious, re: JPM! I have warned of this event. JP Morgan (as well as Bank of America) is literally a litigation sinkhole. See JP Morgan Purposely Downplayed Litigation Risk That Spiked 5,000% Last Year Is Still Severely Under Reserved By Over $4 Billion!!! Shareholder Lawyers Should Be Scrambling Now Wednesday, March 2nd, 2011. Traditional banking revenues: manifest destiny as forwarned - Weakening Revenue Streams in US Banks Will Make Them More Susceptible To Contingent Risks Okay, now back to today's news... JP Morgan reported this morning and we got more of the same, simply that much harder to ignore. On Thursday, 06 January 2011 I posted " As JP Morgan Other Banks Legal Costs Spike, Many Should Ask If It Was Not Obvious Years Ago That This Industry May Become The "New" Tobacco Companies ". Today Bloomberg reported JPMorgan’s Dimon Posts First Loss on $7.2 Billion Legal Cost to mounting litigation and regulatory probes. No surprises here. We saw it coming two years ago and warned accordingly. As excerpted: The third-quarter loss was $380 million, or 17 cents a share, compared with a profit of $5.71 billion, or $1.40, a year earlier, the New York-based company said today in a statement. Shares of the company rose 2.6 percent at 7:50 a.m. after profit adjusted for one-time items beat analysts’ estimates. ... The pretax legal charge was $9.2 billion, compared with $684 million a year earlier. Litigation reserves at the end of September were $23 billion, the bank said, adding that “reasonably possible” losses in excess of those reserves were $5.7 billion. And the (now perennial) kicker... JPMorgan rose to $53.90 in New York trading from $52.52 at the close yesterday. Earnings adjusted for one-time items were $1.42 a share, exceeding the $1.30 average estimate of 20 analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. Pray thee tell me, how many times do "one time" items have to occur before they're no longer considered "one time" items???!!! JP Morgan "found" earnings in the form of reserve releases (again), from the press release: $1.60 billion pretax benefit; $992 million after-tax ($0.26 per share after-tax increase in earnings) from reduced reserves in Consumer Community Banking Now, we've seen this movie before haven't we? The following is an excerpte from a post I made TWO YEARS AGO!: As Earnings Season is Here, I Reiterate My Warning That Big Banks Will Pay for Optimism Driven Reduction of Reserves . Time will tell if I am correct, but the trends are still moving in my favor. From Bloomberg: JPMorgan Chase Co. and the biggest U.S. banks face billions of dollars in legal costs related to their role in the financial crisis, threatening their profits and the stock price gains they made in 2010, analysts said. JPMorgan, the second biggest bank by assets, reported $5.2 billion of legal costs in the first nine months of 2009, compared with a gain of $10 million in the same period a year earlier. The costs would rise if the bank reserves for multibillion-dollar lawsuits by Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc . and the trustee liquidating Bernard L. Madoff’s firm. ... JPMorgan’s third-quarter net profit of $4.4 billion, up 23 percent from the year earlier, would have been larger if it hadn’t set aside $1.3 billion of pretax income for lawsuits and $1 billion for mortgage repurchases. Banks haven’t yet reported their results for the fourth quarter. Of course, there are a few tidbits missing from this statement that can add to its accuracy. Let's see... Where did those profits come from? Again, you will find divergence between how BoomBustBlog reports and that of mainstream financial reporting. See JP Morgan’s 3rd Quarter Earnigns Analysis and a Chronological Reminder of Just How Wrong Brand Name Banks, Analysts, CEOs Pundits Can Be When They Say XYZ Bank Can Never Go Out of Business!!! Sunday, October 17th, 2010 In a Nutshell, JPM’s quarterly results were downright horrible – as we expected and warned of in our previous quarterly analyses (see notes at bottom of page)… JP Morgan’s Q3 net revenue declined 11% y/y (-5% q/q) to $24.8bn as investment banking revenue declined 18% y/y (-9% q/q) to $12.6bn from $13.9bn in the previous year and net interest income declined 2% y/y (-2% q/q, off of a combination of ZIRP victimization and a rapidly shrinking asset base and loan book) to $12.5bn versus $12.7bn in the previous year. Non-interest expense increased 7% y/y (-2% q/q) to $14.4bn as compensation expenses to net revenues remained broadly flat (28% vs 27.5%) while non-compensation expenses to net revenues jumped to 33% vs 23% in the corresponding period last year. As a result of “Fraudclosure” we expect this number to skyrocket next quarter. Overall, the efficiency ratio (total expenses-to-net revenues) increased to 60% vs 51% and we expect this ratio to spike next quarter as well as the banking business becomes even more expensive. Click to enlarge… However, despite a decline in net revenue and increase in non-interest expenses (both of which appear to be part of an obvious trend), profit before taxes was up 22% y/y as provisions for credit losses were slashed by 60%. JPM decreased its provision for credit losses despite no evidence of a substantial, sustainable improvement in credit metrics (please reference As Earnings Season is Here, I Reiterate My Warning That Big Banks Will Pay for Optimism Driven Reduction of Reserves ). Provisions have lagged charge-offs for two consecutive quarters in a row. As a result, banks allowances for loan losses have decreased to 4.9% in Q3 from 5.1% in Q2 and 4.7% in previous year. Although under provisioning has helped the bank to mask its dearth in profits it has also materially undermined its ability to absorb losses if economic conditions worsen. The Eyles test, a measure of banks ability to absorb losses, has consequently worsened to 1.9% in Q3 from 3.7% in Q2 and 5.9% in Q3 09. Wait a minute! If Reggie Middleton complained about reserve pulling and legal expenses 1,2 and 3 years ago and was proven right, how are the occurence of these items in 2013 to be considered "One Time" items???? Exactly! ZeroHedge puts it succinctly: In short: of the firm's $1.42 in pro forma EPS, a whopping $1.59 was purely from the addback of these two items.
Gold Shorts Cover At Fastest Pace In 13 Years Submitted by Tyler Durden on 08/12/2013 08:36 -0400 Gold shorts covered an enormous 23,518 futures contracts last week - the equivalent of 2,351,800 ounces of gold. With JPMorgan appearing to be calling everyone ( here and here ) to get their hands on gold to deliver, it seems our concerns over a short-squeeze are starting to solidify . The last time shorts collapsed at this fast a rate was in the 1999/2000 period which saw a considerable 33% squeeze ramp in gold prices over the space of 3 weeks in the fall of 1999 . Notably, the gold short position still remains huge compared to historical values - having fallen back only to the previous all-time record high levels (i.e. plenty of room for moar squeeze). In addition to this surge in covering, Gold ETFs saw their first inflows in 2 months . as Gold ETFs saw their first inflows in 2 months... and the last time we saw shorts cover this size, prices surged... Charts: Bloomberg Average: 4.82353 Your rating: None Average: 4.8 ( 17 votes)
Presenting: The Housing Bubble 2.0 Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/29/2013 22:25 -0400 Ben Bernanke Bond Housing Bubble Housing Market Real estate It was just seven short years ago that the prices at the epicenter of the housing bubble, Los Angeles, CA rose by 50% every six months as the nation experienced its first parabolic move higher in home prices courtesy of Alan Greenspan's disastrous policies: a time when everyone knew intuitively the housing market was in an epic bubble, yet which nobody wanted to pop because there was just too much fun to be had chasing the bouncing ball, not to mention money. Well, courtesy of the real-time real estate pricing trackers at Altos Research , we now know that the very worst of the housing bubble is not only back, but it is at levels not seen since the days when a house in the Inland Empire was only a faint glimmer of the prototype for BitCoin. Exhibit A: The red line is the 7 day rolling average of median LA house prices per Altos ( more data here ). It is up 50% since the beginning of the year. One can only stand back and stare. Still not convinced? After all those West Coast folks are known for being a little trigger happy when it comes to "flipping that house." Which is why, from the heartland of the East Coast, we present... Exhibit B : The Gretschbuilding, an old guitar factory turned condo building in Williamsburg, just had a crazy week: Crain’s reports that three units sold in all-cash transactions, each one setting new highs on a per-square-foot basis. The units in questions were two adjacent two-bedrooms on the ninth floor, selling for $1.4 million and $1.5 million, and a larger two-bedroom on the 10th floor selling at $2.5 million — all at an average of $1,150 per square foot. “ It needs to be cash, it needs to be over ask, and (the listing) will never see the light of day,” the broker had told all the buyers.According to Crain’s, Williamsburg condos are currently averaging $794 per square foot, with high-end condos like Northside Piers bringing in closer to $1,050 per foot. The broker who handled the Gretschsales at 60 Broadway can’t seem to believe it herself: “ It’s unbelievable what’s going on out there ,” she told Crain’s. Our question is, can the high sales we’ve been seeing lately be a bubble based on low mortgage rates if the buyers are paying record-setting prices with all cash? 3 Condos Sold in Williamsburg at Record Prices Great job Bernanke Co. You have succeeded at rolling up the housing, credit, bond, tech and equity bubbles all into one. Watching the glorious unwind of all this unprecedented academic-created stupidity will be worth the hyperinflated price of admission alone. h/t @Gloeschi Average:
Your Taxes At Work: All You Need To Know About Who Pays What Taxes In The US Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/18/2012 18:56 -0400 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/your-taxes-work-all-you-need-know-about-who-pays-what-taxes-us
Why Chinese Inflation Risk Is Over Three Times Greater Than In America Submitted by Tyler Durden on 08/21/2012 12:55 -0400 As everyone awaits (or doubts) the next coordinated central planning bank action - whether Fed QE (Lockhart stymied?), ECB 'bottomless pockets' (Merkel's back), or China RRR (reverse repos?) - the prices of things we need (as opposed to want) continue to rise. Nowhere is this more important than in China with its extremely high levels (and volatility) of deposit flows increasingly levered to re-inflationary actions by the PBoC. The critical aspect of the following analysis is that in the US, the stock market acts as an 'inflation buffer' for the rich's excess disposable income ; in China, this is not the case and given the greater than 3.4x leverage compared to the US, PBoC actions flow much more rapidly through the populace to the things they need - and right now more inflation is not what they need or want - which perhaps explains the reverse-repo 'gradual' tightening. 1) Chinese deposit volatility is massively high and extremely prone to 'inverse' window-dressing (as Bloomberg's chart of the day pointed out yesterday) which makes the PBoC's role as credit-monitor very hard . The chart below shows the outrageously obvious pump up in deposits (lower pane) as banks offer incentives to attract deposits and meet PBoC regulatory needs - only to let them flow back out and tighten their offers after... 2) This exaggerates any mistake or action they make but more critically the fact that in the US Depo-to-GDP is 0.55: 1 (USD8.8tn Deposits against USD15.8tn GDP) but in China it is 1.9:1 (USD13.8tn Deposits against USD7.3tn GDP - USD equivalent) - a 3.45x ratio that greatly exacerbates any easing impact of a RRR as deposits flow more dramatically ; which leads to a critical and most important point; 3) Why do Chinese people not like their stock market? In the US those 'deposits' flow straight into an inflation buffer - the US equity market (or AAPL) . The lack of flows into Chinese stocks given the size of their deposits suggests legacy savings attitudes remain solid or fear of fraud are prevalent. The point being that if the US had the same amount of cash in deposits as China (on a relative basis), the US would have an epic inflation problem right now but since the rich, who have all the disposable income, simply redirect cash into the stock casino market, stocks serve as an inflation offset. Without a wholesale shift in Chinese attitudes towards risk, given their clear 'trust' issues, inflationary impacts of PBoC action will remain far more important than the Fed's (for now).
标签: Everyone经管大学堂：名校名师名课
京公网安备 11010802022788号
论坛法律顾问：王进律师
知识产权保护声明
免责及隐私声明
