whatok

15 ms·

91.
by whatok 6y ago
Under normal circumstances, no one wants to be the first mover on something major like this because it's extremely disruptive to the way most people work without a clear example of the benefits. You're mentioning all of the upside
92.
by whatok 6y ago
It's definitely a good way to branch out on their current user base and probably makes a lot more sense for people starting out to buy Logic than base Ableton. Ableton Suite just doesn't seem like a great value vs Logic unless you
93.
by whatok 6y ago
It really is incredible how badly Apple screwed up video.
94.
by whatok 6y ago
I wouldn't really compare the two. They target much different markets.
95.
by whatok 6y ago
As another reply took issue with, strictly was probably a bit overstated. Software support was a secondary issue vs hardware support. You simply did not have Windows drivers for many of the top audio interfaces or you had major stability is
96.
by whatok 6y ago
Avid is not exactly known for their strategic vision. And talk about wringing customers for every possible penny too.
97.
by whatok 6y ago
Have fun taking your chances on that.
98.
by whatok 6y ago
Sure, probably a bit earlier but the vast majority of [i]real professionals[/i] were stuck with Macs. Pro Tools M-Powered for example had to have been a minuscule portion of overall Pro Tools market and people still used that on Macs.
99.
by whatok 6y ago
Insider meaning someone who knew about this deal. If you are an insider shorting things before deals are announced, you absolutely can face criminal charges which can include a prison sentence.
100.
by whatok 6y ago
It's almost certainly going to be all-stock and any takeover will prevent anyone receiving shares from buying puts or shorting stock of the acquirer for the duration of the lockup. If you are an insider buying puts now you could also p
101.
by whatok 6y ago
It doesn't really make much sense from a $ perspective and really only serves as a lesser (and rapidly diminishing) halo effect for the rest of the brand. Logic is one of those programs that keeps people on Macs. I'm sure I don&#x
102.
by whatok 6y ago
This is likely to be all-stock and I see headlines coming in now saying that as well.
103.
Grubhub stock halted after report Uber is eyeing a takeover(cnbc.com)
7 points by whatok 6y ago|2 comments
104.
by whatok 6y ago
> And the ETF will typically deal with things like rolling the futures position ahead of expiry. This listed as making commodity ETFs more suitable for "casual investors" is the exact reason why they always lose money on ETFs.
105.
by whatok 6y ago
Sure, but a majority of trading was done on CME futures. In either case, you still ran into the issue of negative prices. USO only recently started explicitly stating that they would also potentially invest in ICE futures alongside CME futu
106.
by whatok 6y ago
If anyone is trading futures and did not know they were trading on margin or trading highly levered instruments then they either are trading on a platform that has zero compliance or they misrepresented themselves as an investor.
107.
by whatok 6y ago
If you only had farmers and individuals purchasing their goods allowed to trade futures, there is direct incentive for either party to manipulate the physical market through their actions, in ways that they only could, that wouldn't ne
108.
by whatok 6y ago
No.
109.
by whatok 6y ago
From the story: > Customers will be made whole, Peterffy said. “We will rebate from our own funds to our customers who were locked in with a long position during the time the price was negative any losses they suffered below zero.” I&#x2
110.
by whatok 6y ago
> This depends on which stock index you're looking at. If it's the S&P 500, it's a cap-weighted index. 50% - not a typo - is made up of 5 companies: Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Alphabet and Facebook. I think you need to
111.
by whatok 6y ago
10% would have been high over that timeframe but imagine what shape that business was in.
112.
by whatok 6y ago
You valued and knew to value a suit for your purposes in 1995. Most people now or in 1995 did not drive three hours to buy a suit. The number of jobs that require a suit for everyday use is definitely down vs 1995 and you can rent a suit (n
113.
by whatok 6y ago
I think it's more because the examples people are familiar with are cherrypicked "heads I win, tails you lose" examples that have recently been recognizable American brands. Someone linked a list of LBOs elsewhere in here and
114.
by whatok 6y ago
> This was helpful to me. How does the PE company fare in the bankruptcy scenario? Have they put up collateral or are somehow on the hook to the lenders? All deals are different. You're probably not going to have any collateral put
115.
by whatok 6y ago
All I've taken away from this is Valentino is more expensive in 2020 than it should be. By nature of you even being physically close enough to a Neiman Marcus in 1995, chances are you were of higher income than the rest of the country.
116.
by whatok 6y ago
No, it's not from thin air. Bridge financing is from cash on a bank's balance sheet (or as mentioned above, sometimes non-bank entities). Banks usually participate in bridge financing (some fees, loan on balance sheet typically on
117.
by whatok 6y ago
Neiman Marcus has no public market cap; it's a private company. You're probably referring to their debt.
118.
by whatok 6y ago
None of those entities mentioned in there are creditors except Lloyds. Private equity deals sometimes have complex capital structures with absurd entity names but creating a "shell company" as described earlier doesn't allow
119.
by whatok 6y ago
If this question is in reference to the hung loans I mentioned in my previous post, there won't be a need to; at least on those. This is small portion of overall bank business and banks are in much better shape than over a decade ago.
120.
by whatok 6y ago
That's very different than the Enron-esque transaction described above. You are describing two separate companies. They're saying that some "shell company" takes a loss while the parent company makes all the profit.

More ›