Elbow From The Sky On JPMorgan – Trading Loss Surges

j_p_ morgan lost two billion dollars and
we found out about it then the last week and uh… impolite different reactions
to it given up till now mit romney saying i would not rush to past new
legislation or new regulations saying all around the white the banks have this under control i
don’t know why he cuts apocalypse regulating blood banks upbeat gracie by way of top five px introducing a
commie stampin are all banks weird how that works now on the other hand i remember a
gentleman who sat on monday’s program that uh… this situation might be a
little bit larger than people expected unique that you may know that was the
let’s check out the video fine not a casino y’all golf courses nineteen eighty exit we just found out at j_p_ morgan has lost at least two billion now jamie dot
missing a close to the three billion as summer speculating perhaps four billion dollars in credit derivatives loss well here’s a jammin and said if there’s
anything really instability uh… but over the next couple of
quarters meaning six months and what you get to the point where he
could be perhaps three billion now we find out trading losses suffered by j p morgan
chase have surged in recent days according the
new york times surpassing the banks initial two billion
dollar estimate by at least one billion dollars greater then three billion dollars now i remember somebody else who was it
was the same guy and send them another prediction all right let’s go if this is only have three billion dollar loss j_p_ morgan should be ecstatic because once this thing started unravel three million dollars is that tabla ice
for jamie diamond said dead at it light over the next six months detail point
where they might lose another million dollars it took four days four days so for them to lose another
billion dollars that here’s a devastating part uh… that is going to be a sense of why
that prediction about how this plated device berg has a tax which has to be all right new york times quote he estimated that initial loss of over
just two billion dollars was caused by a movable quarter percentage point or twenty five basis points a portfolio the notional value of a
hundred billion fifty billion to two hundred billion dollars art and fifty two hundred billion is not all the money that j_p_ morgan has a
state it’s uh… value of the trade dick
morris theoretically has less to match that now having said that your honor several
been part of that they lost two billion because it moved apc warmer of one percent you know what this is it’s called an
elbow and it’s in the sky and it’s about the calm down so hard on
jamie down the side would like to add to a job monday you think she’d be done has been a panic
over two billion dollars in the last quarter and just the last
three months they made four billion dollars based solely a profitable in the last
quarter for which is a two billion dollar loss he’d brush saddam is always something
he’ll stop whining about it right word to you praised me for what a great brembeck
right no no no no no the losses in a lot larger all everybody’s moving hints that you haven’t seen this people on the other side of these facts so the other banks or smelling blood on the water and they know what his position is in
there the position that they eventually took
the guy who did it bruno is still was called the london whale because the position was sold on their
march and he can get out of it it’s not liquid so he’s having trouble selling the
position while he’s fired a ready so thick it’s no longer with them i should
say thirty-eight so it’s not have is that what we me or if there is money
went home right so it anymore you can get out of it and
their pon chinaman plan chinaman chop it up away at them it already four
days there it was another billion what do you have in the next four days and i think if they lost two-percent acute all i can use in their
position in their bet they lose two percent you know what what that would
mean any billion dollar loss and we’re just getting warm so you see why kept stressing that they’re taking too much
risk with too much money that there was no limit some leverage and there are no limits on the stand
working derivatives so the if because if you take rest with
that much money even a quarter percent turned against you is devastating every local percentage point on on out there in a world of trouble world trouble and but nonetheless after
all of this the new york times concludes no one has blame mister diamond for the
trade which was under the oversight of the head of the chief investment officer
manager what carrier that is battling on you know who is blamed david over the
trade i think what i like it you know i tend to report to you though only person sure board detail while guest jamin diamond naes past lined up other risk formulas for
the rest of the bank was using this special risk formula in her
division which meant gamble all your life the only person she had a reporter was
responsible to was jamie dot he’s the one that signed off on why ’cause they were all making crazy
money when things were cut when they’re winning the best now that they’re losing the bats all the
sudden body nobel but nobody would blame jamie dot i meant because in new york in in washington our
job is supporting me died r_r_ james’s cell lampley great david
democrats aakar fresno muscle talk about how he’s such a brilliant bank well the like maybe none of you in new
york in washington precisely redone but i’ve been criticizing tripp david
are not just for this but all throughout as he made all those cokie statements
about how it’s just a few bad apples and you can’t blame banking overall you
certainly can’t blame jpmorgan chase and jamie dot and how
cricket brilliant they work and i told you there were brilliant i told you are they working the same
kind of racism or tls and that was gonna blow open their pics and you know what right again bob i think that uh… president first i’ve
ever barbara something right

100 thoughts on “Elbow From The Sky On JPMorgan – Trading Loss Surges

  1. I can already see Obama and Congress claiming that JP Morgan did nothing illegal. In their minds there is no problem until all banks make stupid bets.

  2. Yo dawg, I heard you like TYT videos, so I put a TYT video in your TYT video so you can get informed while you get informed, dawg!

  3. Yeah, let's see Mittens change the topic to economics after his position on this… Guess who just lost the election.

  4. Reminds me of the Gulf Oil spill. They always down play the losses in the beginning. Its pure politics.

  5. if he says that the trading position might get worse in the next 2 quarters, it means they haven't cut it… which could be for a number of reasons, lack of liquidity being the most probable…and/ or they haven't marked the trade right in their books yet and they want to stretch it in a few quarters so that the real total loss of the trade gets diluted…

  6. That's because derivative trading isn't illegal. Oh sure, it certainly should be. But good luck getting that law to pass without another massive economic crash, and resulting mass public outcry. If Obama keeps on this position, he's going to be on the receiving end of a bad political beating. He needs to turn on the banks, and break them up.

  7. I'm shocked that Romney's campaign is being funded by the big banks. I guess that means Romney will serve working people — 🙂

  8. LET THEM FAIL. In a true free market companies that fail to manage their funds should fall so that companies that can properly manage their funds can prosper.

  9. This is how supervision by "state" authorities don´t make any sense. It serves to hide real responsibility and playing idiot works in the US.
    So the evil state is somehow responsible for morons making foolish decisions.
    GO US&A!

  10. :)) the world would change, once and for all, sun go up west, one gallon of gas would be 10c.

  11. Blah blah blah, this is not even about what JPMorgan supposedly lost by now, it's the fact that they are STILL HOLDING THEIR POSITIONS. They didn't LIQUIDATE anything.

    That's why they are NON-SPECIFIC on what they lost and the people have to find out in a roundabout way.

    But once you do find out, you can use this information to pile on JPMorgan and make money and cost JPMorgan MUCH MORE than 2 billion

    This can EASILY be 50 billion loss, never mind the stock price. JPMorgan will get a bailout

  12. investments are never guaruteeed….can you buy stock insurance where you buy crop insurance? noo no noo its not INsurance, its ASSurance to protect your falibility. bankers are gonna fet mobbed up with the politicians. id rather be a broke philosopher than a rich banker. one cant be both.

  13. ive squandered at least 100k in my twenty five years, and ill squander 100k more, but ill have books music and movies to show for it

  14. Nationalizing there assets means that workers keep their jobs while executives lose theirs. It is a much better option.

  15. Let em' fail. Another company will replace them and they'll make sure they don't make the same mistakes. Otherwise, this way, it doesn't matter if they fail, they'll get the tax payer to pay the bills!

  16. Oh, "Dimon" is it? I thought it was Diamond, I've only been listening to these stories and not read anything, huh.

  17. The only thing this video is missing, is Cenk dancing on top of the desk, and repeating "I told you so!" to some sort of rhythm.

  18. That's nothing. Mr.Liberal, Jon Corzine, Democrat, lately of MF Global, lost $1.2 Billion. I mean, not in investments or the such, he just lost it. Can't find it. Gone. $1.2 Billion. Indeed, bad days for Obama's big bank buddies.

  19. Hell yeah!!…multiple Elbows From the Sky. Cenk?..you need a super hero outfit!!…uh…you know what?…forget it. It involves tights. lol!!! Wasikta, right on Dimon fucking dome!!

  20. Problem with letting them fail, is that they are holding millions of people accountable..
    which means letting them fail means letting millions of americans get fired..

    it is annoying thing.. they are the so called "Too big to fail"

  21. Jamie Dimon was on MSNBC did an interview complaining about Obama´s regulations !!

    and that was just a few days before the 2 billion loss

  22. Not only is JP Morgan losing money, their fellow bankers and traders are speculating that they'll lose more, which is part of what's causing their loss of several billion dollars.


  23. So how much will Chase lose? Are they still a safe place to put money? Should people take their money out of Chase?

  24. What mortal, imperfect being should ever have that much power? The fate of the global economy, and by extension, events that pretty much affect the entire human race, are in the hands of just a few dozen people. It's not a comforting thought.

  25. If they have no respect or fear of their investors, nor of the law, nor any care or concern for what might happen to untold numbers of people because of this, for the sake of us all, they need to fear something that will cause them to think twice about this stuff. Any ideas?

  26. If you want to scare them or make then afraid then you hit their wallets. These greedy people only care about money and so if you threaten their money you threaten them. Problem is that nobody is brave enough to do this via regulations or tax increases.

  27. How far can FDIC be strained? Was it ever designed for a bank as big as JP Morgan? Could it handle a cascade of bank failures? Has funding for FDIC increased to keep pace with growing populations? Where did the money for the big bailout come from in the first place? Has Congress raided FDIC and filled it with worthless IOUs like they did with Social Security?

  28. $200 Billion? Yeah, I think they would probably pay it in instalments, as opposed to one lump sum. But yes, I do think they could print-up another $200 billion without too much trouble…

  29. Cenk, you're missing a relevant factor here: TYT is not relevant, and nobody really knows about you.

  30. i think the subject matter of the reporting is far more important than the hosts supposed "i told you so" attitude. He doesn't lie or report biased news for personal benefit.
    I can't stand people who blow the small things out of proportion and distract the conversation from the actual issues 🙂

  31. how is he being hypocritical? hes making the same comment you made to other host.

    i agree that gloating on such an unimportant issue is annoying but he is making a good point about how the banks spin the truth. i personally think his prediction was obvious so its not even worth bragging about.

  32. how will this translate? Meaning that the biggest thing these fat ass banks have been pushing for is lower taxes. because they need that security net for there own company screw ups so that they won't become a burden on the mass public! lower taxes on 1% shit. sorry drunk!

  33. So in other words they are still betting against the economy that feeds them, and now the economy is beating them. LMAO Winning

  34. You don't understand the scale involved. Those banks are too big to fail. You have no understanding of what their failure would entail.

  35. Omg is it just me that I really can't understand the bank & stock stuff. I mean I try, I really do but I do wish some of it is explained better.

  36. Facts are facts Cenk. The big banks, including all the prior bankers in the Administration, are up Obamas ass.

  37. It's you I have contempt for, not people in their twenties. "You act very defiant considering no one solicited for your retarded opinion.", that's rather a poorly constructed sentence but it makes the point. Now run along you little scamp and do work on that shitty attitude of yours.

  38. Should've had Carrie Underwood's song 'I Told You So' playing in the background, Cenk! That was some first class bragging my good sir.

  39. There'll be a devil of a time doing it too, because they've bought the officials that provide those services with the money they're screwing everyone out of.

  40. Oh, but a lot of other $200 billion problems could happen between now and then… natural disasters, wars, etc… at some point, the world financial markets are going call foul on Monopoly Money. I like that phrase, "Monopoly Money" btw, because not only does it imply worthless fiat currency, it was unregulated monopolies that got us here in the first place.

  41. lol, to be honest, new US regulations wouldn't do a damn thing in this situation as the losses were actually made on trades that took place in London, which isn't in the US the last time I checked. We need better regulations but this situation wouldn't have been avoided.

  42. It's simple, they just gamble other people's money by predicting things go up or down, with TONS of money. Now JPMorgan got it wrong and the tax payers probably will have to bail out the gambling addicts(bankers).

  43. Cenk has got it wrong before and has admitted to doing so. You should watch his commentary on his Breitbart interview. He does however usually get it right and has every right to flaunt that as almost no other media sources are reporting the unbiased truth.

  44. Well they have Quantitative Analysts and actuarial people so I don't think its 100% a gamble, but to a degree, it is kind of a risk.

  45. If you try to predict things go up or down, big or small then it is gambling, however many quants they use.

  46. Just read in the paper that loss is now seven billion dollars, Cenk nails it again 🙂 HEY JAMIE DIMON, U MAD BRO??

  47. bankers? brilliant? no. worship true brilliant minds. the scientists, engineers, and pioneers that have furthered our society, technology and overall quality of life.

  48. No. Gambling is complete luck. For you to actually think that high frequency trading is luck is insane, considering that multiple HFT firms have reported over a year of profits EVERY SINGLE DAY.
    If you were gambling, could you produce the same results? Let alone be in profit most of the time? Obviously not.

  49. — Let me explain it to you dear.

    In the world of banks, its not enough to have $100 million dollars and only use $100 million dollars in the 'financial market'. Now, a smart man invented tools many years ago called 'Derivatives'. What it means is, you can now play with $1 billion dollars if you only have $100 million dollars provided that the financial product you are buying does not have a huge price movement.

    — This is all good until you start using $100 mil to play with $10 bil. Get it?

  50. But that's the point. Because if people don't understand what's going on, it's more likely that those involved in all of this can get away with all kinds of stuff. So the purpose is to make it sound as complicated and head-spinning as possible, so that most people will go, "Whatever, I haven't got a clue what is going on, I'll leave it to the experts …"

  51. LMFAO! Looking up over six of my comments from months ago in an attempt to try to convince yourself that you're right? Get a life.
    And possibly a brain while you're at it.

  52. If everyone fully understood the banking and stock exchange systems in the US and Europe, they would not exist. This is partly the reason they are made difficult to fully understand for the average person. Keep studying how they work, there are a lot of very good videos on here (youtube) that explain how they work using very good anecdotes 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *